Seconded, I use restic with a remote blob storage and works nicely
Using borg backup, just because there are some nice frontends for the gnome ecosystem (when I am using gnome, I love to use gnome apps), and it has a nice cmd for scripting when using something else (using it on servers)
And there is a nice graphical frontend for it too: Vorta
Personally more of Pika Backup user ;)
Kopia has served me great. I back up to my local Ceph S3 storage and then keep a second clone of that on a raid.
Kopiahas good performance and miltiple hosts can back up tp it concurrently while preserving deduplication -- unlike borgbackup.
I've been using Kopia on my desktop computer for a few years now to do cloud backups. It's generally working well and I haven't found anything else with the same combination of features yet.
That said, kopia-ui is still a bit finicky and I've managed to bork a repo beyond repair a few times (e.g. once because my cloud provider account ran out of space, leading to some kind of inconsistent state) and there are some oddities, like the regular "periodic maintenance" (it's a bit weird that it's needed in the first place) randomly failing or taking forever.
Kopia has been working great for me as well. It's simple, versatile and reliable. I previously used Duplicati but kept running into jobs failing for no reason, backup configurations missing randomly and simple restores taking hours. It was a hot mess and I'm happy I switched.
I want to love kopia but the command line syntax feels unnatural to me. I don't know why either. For the whole month I test drove it, I had to look up every single time how to do something. Contrast this with restic which is less featureful in some ways but a few days in it felt like I was just using git.
I never used the command line with Kopia besides starting it up in server mode and used the web based GUI to configure, it was pretty simple to get everything setup that way. You may want to give it another try using Kopia in that mode.
My use case is for headless machines which makes it a no go in that regard unfortunately.
You can use the web ui remotely.
Personally I use it from command line, though, and my only complaint is that it's too easy to start a backup you didn't intend to.. Buut if you're careful about usong the kopia snapshot command then it's fine.
Oh I thought the webui was only for server mode.
I just quickly glanced through the manuals of both restic and kopia. I think my trouble with kopia is that its style feels kind of weird. I'm just not able to wrap my head around it well.
kopia snapshot create /dir is shorter but more confusing than restic -r repo backup /dir
There is no such thing as the objectively best solution. Each tool has advantages and disadvantages. And every user has different preferences and requirements.
Personally, I am using Borg for years. And I have had to restore data several times, which has worked every time.
In addition to Borg, you can also look at Borgmatic. This wrapper extends the functionality and makes some things easier.
And if you want to use a graphical user interface, you can have a look at Vorta or Pika.
Agree. Should say 'best for you'. Cool thanks. I know of Vorta which I intended of using. Gonna read up on the other ones.
Oh I love borg backups and the ability to script it.
I'm making encrypted backups of a lot of servers this way, including a Lemmy instance.
I just use rsync to backup my home folder to my NAS.
I don't have backups. :/
And I will regret it some day.
I use github for code so that's backed up though.
There are two kinds of people.
Those who make backups and those who will.
automated/networked backups like people are talking about here are great, but even just an external SSD and the nautilus copy function will give you at least some insurance.
You very much will. It's easier than you'd think.
I use NixOS so all my system configuration is already saved in my NixOS configs, which I save on GitHub. For dotfiles that aren't managed by NixOS I use syncthing to sync them between my devices, but no real backup cause I can just remake them if I need to, and things like my Neovim and VSCode configs are managed by my NixOS configs so they're backed up as well.
Using that method you isolate all important state on the system for backup with zfs send.
Yeah I have a full impermanence setup using tmpfs, which is really nice. I did it like on the NixOS wiki and it's been helpful for organizing my dotfiles and keeping track of all the random stuff that programs put everywhere.
I actually have all my stuff in a separate /stuff folder kinda by accident so my /home only has dotfiles and things like that.
I started using Timeshift when it was included with a distro I was using and haven't had reason to shift away from it. Have already used it once to do a full restore.
Just a reminder. Consider and test your restore process as well. Backups without restore testing are kind of questionable. Also think how the restore will go. Do you want to do a bare metal restore, or will you just reinstall, and restore certain things for example. Lot of these backup methods will not get a true bare metal restore set, nor can file system backups be "perfect" if they are done on a running system. Databases and things like cryptfs mounts for example can be problematic for example. Nor do all tools necessarily backup the full structure of the file system.
Not saying these are always issues, just be aware of them.
I've been using restic. It has built-in dedup & encryption and supports both local and remote storage. I'm using it to back up to a local restic-server (pointing to a USB drive) and Backblaze B2.
Restores for single or small sets of files is easy: restic -r $REPO mount /mnt
Then browse through the filesystem view of your snapshots and copy just like any other filesystem.
What problem are you trying to solve? Please think about that, and about your backup strategy, before you decide on any specific tools.
For example, here are several scenarios that I guard against in my backup strategy:
Accidentally delete a file, I want to recover it quickly (snapshots);
Entire drive goes kablooie, I want my system to continue running without downtime (RAID)
User data drive goes kablooie, I want to recover (many many options)
Root drive goes kablooie, I want to recover (baremetal recovery tools)
House burns down or computer is damaged/stolen (offsite backups)
ZFS snapshots and Borg(matic).
I just use a script on an systemd timer. Well two scripts on two timers really - one running daily, one weekly for different data. It's just a bunch of rsync commands copying folders to an hdd in my system and I reroute the output into a simple log file, mainly to verify if it ran at all. I am a bit paranoid about that. I can also run it manually whenever I want.
Oh and some of the data I also rsync again to a smb cloud drive from Hetzner.
I do not keep multiple versions and I delete remote files that have been deleted locally. It's just a 1:1 copy.
Rsync is great but if you want snapshots and file history rsnapshot works pretty well. It's based on rsync but for every sync it creates shortcuts for existing files and only copies changes and new files. It saves space and remains transparent for the user. FreeFileSync is also amazing
I use my own scripts with rsync etc, I don't back up my OS itself since I have installing it automated with scripts as well. I just back up specific things I need with my scripts.
automated with scripts
would you like to share those or do you have references for creating such scripts?
this is on my to do list since years but I always struggle where to begin with.
Learning bash has been great for me, it's helped a ton being able to automate so many different things even just like installing and configuring specific applications to work the way I want, etc
I think a script to manually run for manual backups plus a different script to run for automatic backups scheduled via cronjob is a great way to go.
There's of course more advanced things like zfs snapshots which I won't get into, but I think my explanation as a general concept should be fairly useful.
btrfs is a great filesystem and btrbk complements it easily. Switching between snapshots is also really easy if something goes wrong and you need to restore.
Of course you'd still want a remote location to backup to. You can use an encrypted volume with cloud storage. So google drive, etc all work.
Oh interesting! I might take a look at btrbk
Thanks. Heard a lot about it. Will check it.
This is the way !
I only have backups of my important files, encrypted and synced through rclone.
I'm currently working on a disaster recovery plan using fsarchiver. I have very limited experience with it so far, but it had the features and social proof I was looking for.
I have so far used it to create offline filesystem backups of two volumes, one was LUKS encrypted (has to be manually "opened" with cryptsetup).
It's early days for my experience with this, but I'm sure others have used it and might chime in.
Just one warning. If doing live, think about state and test your restores. Just mention because things like databases and ecryptfs will not properly archive live. There are various ways around, but consider if you have concerns regarding getting really good complete backups taken at one point in time and on live systems.
For my Ubuntu desktop, I use the builtin backup tool to take backups on my NAS. For my homelab, I have everything running on Proxmox and my Proxmox backup server takes care of the homelab backups.
Btrfs for local system backups based on snapshots
Photoprism for photos
Syncthing for other media
You will reconsider calling strategy a backup should the filesystem get corrupted for whatever reason.
I've tested my full system backup restore once with btrfs. Worked out fine.
Maybe Photoprism isn't a backup strategy, but Syncthing for sure is, because you can have multiple backup units in it.
I'm additionally use software RAID on one of devices, that receives Syncthing backups.
I work with VMs mostly, so I go for Veeam B&R. The free tier allows you to backup 10 VMs or machines.
I've used borg for a while and like it a lot. I would say your best option for pure linux is borg+borgmatic/vorta just because borg is battle-tested.
If you run any other OSs and don't mind a relative newcomer, I've found kopia to be easy to recommend to my windows friends. At this point kopia has been around long enough (~4 years of actual beta) that I think it's safe to trust its integrity with personal data. It has all the important features from borg in a cross-platform solution, so it's also a viable alternative for borg on linux if you don't like borg's frontends for whatever reason.
I'm currently using TimeShift to backup my desktop onto an external hard drive (the why is because of how simple it is to use) and I'll be making a copy of anything I upload to my jellyfin server onto the external hard drive as well. I hope to eventually have a dedicated backup server and have a duplicate of it at a friend's house for offside backup too
I am old school. I just use GNU Tar with the Pax format and multiple external detachable encypted hard drives. Reason is it is simple and a well known tool that is very common with a standard archive format.
I'm curious - how much data are you backing up with that method and how frequently are you doing your backups? Doesn't sound like it would scale well, but I'm also wondering if maybe this is perfect and I've justbeenoverthinking it.
There is not a size limit. Lot of these other methods actually use GNU Tar behind the scenes anyway. More then that GNU tar has been used for decades for this purpose. Pull out any Unix book from 2 decades ago and you will see "tar", "cpio", and "dump/restore" as the way. The new tool out there is Pax and in fact GNU Tar supports the new "pax" format. Moreover GNU Tar with Pax format can backup almost full disk structure including hard links, ACLs, and extended attributes which a lot of tools do not do. It is still useful to archive some things at a lower level like your partition table, and boot blocks of course. You also have to decide what run-level (such as rescue) you want to archive in, and/or what services you should stop, or provide separate to file system dumps for depending on your system. Databases, and things like ecryptfs take some special thought (thought it does for any tool). It is also good to do test restores to verify your disaster plan.
I use tar on many systems. My workstation is about 1TB of data. Backup is about 11 hours though I think it could be faster if I disabled compression (I currently use the standard gzip compression which is not optimal). I think the process is CPU bound by the compression at the moment. Going to uncompressed or using parallel gzip at level 2 is probably the fastest you can do and should really speed things up by 4X or more. I have played with this some for my wife and her raw backup is a lot faster now. My wife uses USB 3 external drives specifically plugged into USB 3 ports (the one with the SS symbol and the blue interior), and with a USB 3 related cable. I use 6TB naked SATA drives I insert into a hot mount enclosure and store in storage boxes. My backup system can theoretically do incrementals too, but it has some issues since I have moved to BTRFS so I do not use that at the moment. Did always use before. I have an idea how to fix, but need to debug and test incrementals now.
How often: I backup monthly. When my incrementals were working I use to do it weekly or whenever I got nervous. Other option for the BTRFS file systems would be to use their native backup tools. Not sure though, I like to use generic stuff. Lot to be said for generic.
Big downside of tar is the mind numbing man page. Getting the options correct takes some real thought. You also have to be comfortable with the shell and Bash scripting. Big upside you can customize exactly what you want.
tar dates all the way back to the 70s.
Yes, I actually did not know how far back, thanks. Wikipedia seems to say 1979. I know my system admin book dated 1992 talks about it and it was common then. I think my brother use to use it in the early 1980s for his job and maybe I did too a few times. Wikipedia says GNU Tar is newer and traces back to 1987. The formats have changed some and there are several. The PAX format is much newer which I think was standardized in 2001 but GNU Tar would have taken time to implement it. I do not know that date.
People seem to forget that tar worked well back then and still does.
I had the chance to play with late 70s Unix for a bit a few years ago. (Hardware on loan from a museum.) VERY minimal, but still recognizable. (Well, my Unix reflexes are old - I started in the mid 80s.)
Interesting. About then I was using a VAX. Somehow I spend most of my time on other stuff until I switched to Linux around 2000.
My first Unix was 4.3BSD on a VAX-11/750. (There was another 11/750 running VMS, but I didn't like that nearly as much.)
Yes VMS. That was what I was using. Unix. I did use it for something a few times. The university had one of those mini-supper computers that were a thing for awhile.
Oooh - what mini super? Something weird, or just a small vector machine? That was an interesting niche...
Not really sure what it was. Maybe a small vector machine, or maybe a small cluster of them. I frankly do not remember much about it. Kind of forgotten about VMS until you reminded me. It was a time of much change in the 80s. I started on an IBM 370, then a departmental VAX, a Xerox Star System (a Word Processor on which the Mac was based), then we moved to Macs and Workstations. I had a Micro VAX I used, and Macs. All very expensive stuff. Personally I had a video terminal at at home at the start of the 80's, then a Commodore 64, then late 80's I bought a Mac at a huge price which I used until about 1997. There were some other systems kicking around during that time too that are hard to remember. One was something from Honeywell at a company I worked for during summers.
Actually fun reminiscing a little. Have not thought about this stuff in decades. One thing I always though was kind of fun. When I started collage terminals were just coming in for students and there was not enough of them. Huge lines. Me I would go over to the row of empty card punches and punch up a deck for my assignment, walk over the the window and give it to the operator and have it read. Then I would get in line for a terminal which by then was often shorter, login, do any editing and debugging, and run and print my assignment in like 30 minutes. Not sure why others did not do this. Just seemed like the way to go.
Multiple.
Locally I have Timeshift doing btrfs snapshots every so often. This is mostly to roll back to a snapshot if something breaks. I've never had to use it (and probably should).
I use Pika backup every once in a while for a local backup to an external drive. Mostly because it's easy to restore quickly.
I have duplicacy doing backups to a cloud provider. I used to use duplicati for this, and it was fine - although I didn't like that it seems to be forever in beta. I like that duplicacy can do deduplication between backups of different machines which most other solutions I've seen cannot. I like its selection of cloud providers vs Borg/Vorta and some others.
I use FreeFileSync. It's the only GUI tool I found that let's me sync folders while omitting file deletions. It lets you create batch files from the GUI that I execute with crontab multiple times per day.
I use restic. For local backups, Timeshift.
Seconded, I use restic with a remote blob storage and works nicely
Using borg backup, just because there are some nice frontends for the gnome ecosystem (when I am using gnome, I love to use gnome apps), and it has a nice cmd for scripting when using something else (using it on servers)
And there is a nice graphical frontend for it too: Vorta
Personally more of Pika Backup user ;)
Kopia has served me great. I back up to my local Ceph S3 storage and then keep a second clone of that on a raid.
Kopiahas good performance and miltiple hosts can back up tp it concurrently while preserving deduplication -- unlike borgbackup.
I've been using Kopia on my desktop computer for a few years now to do cloud backups. It's generally working well and I haven't found anything else with the same combination of features yet.
That said, kopia-ui is still a bit finicky and I've managed to bork a repo beyond repair a few times (e.g. once because my cloud provider account ran out of space, leading to some kind of inconsistent state) and there are some oddities, like the regular "periodic maintenance" (it's a bit weird that it's needed in the first place) randomly failing or taking forever.
Kopia has been working great for me as well. It's simple, versatile and reliable. I previously used Duplicati but kept running into jobs failing for no reason, backup configurations missing randomly and simple restores taking hours. It was a hot mess and I'm happy I switched.
I want to love kopia but the command line syntax feels unnatural to me. I don't know why either. For the whole month I test drove it, I had to look up every single time how to do something. Contrast this with restic which is less featureful in some ways but a few days in it felt like I was just using git.
I never used the command line with Kopia besides starting it up in server mode and used the web based GUI to configure, it was pretty simple to get everything setup that way. You may want to give it another try using Kopia in that mode.
My use case is for headless machines which makes it a no go in that regard unfortunately.
You can use the web ui remotely.
Personally I use it from command line, though, and my only complaint is that it's too easy to start a backup you didn't intend to.. Buut if you're careful about usong the
kopia snapshotcommand then it's fine.Oh I thought the webui was only for server mode.
I just quickly glanced through the manuals of both restic and kopia. I think my trouble with kopia is that its style feels kind of weird. I'm just not able to wrap my head around it well.
kopia snapshot create /diris shorter but more confusing thanrestic -r repo backup /dirThere is no such thing as the objectively best solution. Each tool has advantages and disadvantages. And every user has different preferences and requirements.
Personally, I am using Borg for years. And I have had to restore data several times, which has worked every time.
In addition to Borg, you can also look at Borgmatic. This wrapper extends the functionality and makes some things easier.
And if you want to use a graphical user interface, you can have a look at Vorta or Pika.
Agree. Should say 'best for you'. Cool thanks. I know of Vorta which I intended of using. Gonna read up on the other ones.
Oh I love borg backups and the ability to script it.
I'm making encrypted backups of a lot of servers this way, including a Lemmy instance.
I just use
rsyncto backup my home folder to my NAS.I don't have backups. :/
And I will regret it some day.
I use github for code so that's backed up though.
There are two kinds of people.
Those who make backups and those who will.
automated/networked backups like people are talking about here are great, but even just an external SSD and the nautilus copy function will give you at least some insurance.
You very much will. It's easier than you'd think.
I use NixOS so all my system configuration is already saved in my NixOS configs, which I save on GitHub. For dotfiles that aren't managed by NixOS I use syncthing to sync them between my devices, but no real backup cause I can just remake them if I need to, and things like my Neovim and VSCode configs are managed by my NixOS configs so they're backed up as well.
You can take this to the extreme too by erasing your root partition each boot: https://grahamc.com/blog/erase-your-darlings/
Using that method you isolate all important state on the system for backup with zfs send.
Yeah I have a full impermanence setup using tmpfs, which is really nice. I did it like on the NixOS wiki and it's been helpful for organizing my dotfiles and keeping track of all the random stuff that programs put everywhere.
I actually have all my stuff in a separate /stuff folder kinda by accident so my /home only has dotfiles and things like that.
I started using Timeshift when it was included with a distro I was using and haven't had reason to shift away from it. Have already used it once to do a full restore.
Just a reminder. Consider and test your restore process as well. Backups without restore testing are kind of questionable. Also think how the restore will go. Do you want to do a bare metal restore, or will you just reinstall, and restore certain things for example. Lot of these backup methods will not get a true bare metal restore set, nor can file system backups be "perfect" if they are done on a running system. Databases and things like cryptfs mounts for example can be problematic for example. Nor do all tools necessarily backup the full structure of the file system.
Not saying these are always issues, just be aware of them.
I've been using restic. It has built-in dedup & encryption and supports both local and remote storage. I'm using it to back up to a local restic-server (pointing to a USB drive) and Backblaze B2.
Restores for single or small sets of files is easy: restic -r $REPO mount /mnt Then browse through the filesystem view of your snapshots and copy just like any other filesystem.
What problem are you trying to solve? Please think about that, and about your backup strategy, before you decide on any specific tools.
For example, here are several scenarios that I guard against in my backup strategy:
ZFS snapshots and Borg(matic).
I just use a script on an systemd timer. Well two scripts on two timers really - one running daily, one weekly for different data. It's just a bunch of rsync commands copying folders to an hdd in my system and I reroute the output into a simple log file, mainly to verify if it ran at all. I am a bit paranoid about that. I can also run it manually whenever I want. Oh and some of the data I also rsync again to a smb cloud drive from Hetzner. I do not keep multiple versions and I delete remote files that have been deleted locally. It's just a 1:1 copy.
Rsync is great but if you want snapshots and file history rsnapshot works pretty well. It's based on rsync but for every sync it creates shortcuts for existing files and only copies changes and new files. It saves space and remains transparent for the user. FreeFileSync is also amazing
I use my own scripts with
rsyncetc, I don't back up my OS itself since I have installing it automated with scripts as well. I just back up specific things I need with my scripts.would you like to share those or do you have references for creating such scripts? this is on my to do list since years but I always struggle where to begin with.
They're very personalized to my setup, so they're not particularly useful in a general sense - I'd recommend something more like using this guide which seems to be pretty good: https://jumpcloud.com/blog/how-to-use-rsync-remote-backup-linux-system
Learning bash has been great for me, it's helped a ton being able to automate so many different things even just like installing and configuring specific applications to work the way I want, etc
I think a script to manually run for manual backups plus a different script to run for automatic backups scheduled via cronjob is a great way to go.
There's of course more advanced things like zfs snapshots which I won't get into, but I think my explanation as a general concept should be fairly useful.
I use btrfs snapshots and btrbk
btrfs is a great filesystem and btrbk complements it easily. Switching between snapshots is also really easy if something goes wrong and you need to restore.
Archwiki docs for btrfs: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Btrfs#Incremental_backup_to_external_drive
Of course you'd still want a remote location to backup to. You can use an encrypted volume with cloud storage. So google drive, etc all work.
Oh interesting! I might take a look at btrbk
Thanks. Heard a lot about it. Will check it.
This is the way !
I only have backups of my important files, encrypted and synced through rclone.
I'm currently working on a disaster recovery plan using fsarchiver. I have very limited experience with it so far, but it had the features and social proof I was looking for.
I have so far used it to create offline filesystem backups of two volumes, one was LUKS encrypted (has to be manually "opened" with cryptsetup).
It can backup live filesystems which was important to me.
It's early days for my experience with this, but I'm sure others have used it and might chime in.
Just one warning. If doing live, think about state and test your restores. Just mention because things like databases and ecryptfs will not properly archive live. There are various ways around, but consider if you have concerns regarding getting really good complete backups taken at one point in time and on live systems.
For my Ubuntu desktop, I use the builtin backup tool to take backups on my NAS. For my homelab, I have everything running on Proxmox and my Proxmox backup server takes care of the homelab backups.
You will reconsider calling strategy a backup should the filesystem get corrupted for whatever reason.
I've tested my full system backup restore once with btrfs. Worked out fine.
Maybe Photoprism isn't a backup strategy, but Syncthing for sure is, because you can have multiple backup units in it.
I'm additionally use software RAID on one of devices, that receives Syncthing backups.
I work with VMs mostly, so I go for Veeam B&R. The free tier allows you to backup 10 VMs or machines.
I've used borg for a while and like it a lot. I would say your best option for pure linux is borg+borgmatic/vorta just because borg is battle-tested.
If you run any other OSs and don't mind a relative newcomer, I've found kopia to be easy to recommend to my windows friends. At this point kopia has been around long enough (~4 years of actual beta) that I think it's safe to trust its integrity with personal data. It has all the important features from borg in a cross-platform solution, so it's also a viable alternative for borg on linux if you don't like borg's frontends for whatever reason.
I'm currently using TimeShift to backup my desktop onto an external hard drive (the why is because of how simple it is to use) and I'll be making a copy of anything I upload to my jellyfin server onto the external hard drive as well. I hope to eventually have a dedicated backup server and have a duplicate of it at a friend's house for offside backup too
I am old school. I just use GNU Tar with the Pax format and multiple external detachable encypted hard drives. Reason is it is simple and a well known tool that is very common with a standard archive format.
I'm curious - how much data are you backing up with that method and how frequently are you doing your backups? Doesn't sound like it would scale well, but I'm also wondering if maybe this is perfect and I've justbeenoverthinking it.
There is not a size limit. Lot of these other methods actually use GNU Tar behind the scenes anyway. More then that GNU tar has been used for decades for this purpose. Pull out any Unix book from 2 decades ago and you will see "tar", "cpio", and "dump/restore" as the way. The new tool out there is Pax and in fact GNU Tar supports the new "pax" format. Moreover GNU Tar with Pax format can backup almost full disk structure including hard links, ACLs, and extended attributes which a lot of tools do not do. It is still useful to archive some things at a lower level like your partition table, and boot blocks of course. You also have to decide what run-level (such as rescue) you want to archive in, and/or what services you should stop, or provide separate to file system dumps for depending on your system. Databases, and things like ecryptfs take some special thought (thought it does for any tool). It is also good to do test restores to verify your disaster plan.
I use tar on many systems. My workstation is about 1TB of data. Backup is about 11 hours though I think it could be faster if I disabled compression (I currently use the standard gzip compression which is not optimal). I think the process is CPU bound by the compression at the moment. Going to uncompressed or using parallel gzip at level 2 is probably the fastest you can do and should really speed things up by 4X or more. I have played with this some for my wife and her raw backup is a lot faster now. My wife uses USB 3 external drives specifically plugged into USB 3 ports (the one with the SS symbol and the blue interior), and with a USB 3 related cable. I use 6TB naked SATA drives I insert into a hot mount enclosure and store in storage boxes. My backup system can theoretically do incrementals too, but it has some issues since I have moved to BTRFS so I do not use that at the moment. Did always use before. I have an idea how to fix, but need to debug and test incrementals now.
How often: I backup monthly. When my incrementals were working I use to do it weekly or whenever I got nervous. Other option for the BTRFS file systems would be to use their native backup tools. Not sure though, I like to use generic stuff. Lot to be said for generic.
Big downside of tar is the mind numbing man page. Getting the options correct takes some real thought. You also have to be comfortable with the shell and Bash scripting. Big upside you can customize exactly what you want.
tar dates all the way back to the 70s.
Yes, I actually did not know how far back, thanks. Wikipedia seems to say 1979. I know my system admin book dated 1992 talks about it and it was common then. I think my brother use to use it in the early 1980s for his job and maybe I did too a few times. Wikipedia says GNU Tar is newer and traces back to 1987. The formats have changed some and there are several. The PAX format is much newer which I think was standardized in 2001 but GNU Tar would have taken time to implement it. I do not know that date.
People seem to forget that tar worked well back then and still does.
I had the chance to play with late 70s Unix for a bit a few years ago. (Hardware on loan from a museum.) VERY minimal, but still recognizable. (Well, my Unix reflexes are old - I started in the mid 80s.)
Interesting. About then I was using a VAX. Somehow I spend most of my time on other stuff until I switched to Linux around 2000.
My first Unix was 4.3BSD on a VAX-11/750. (There was another 11/750 running VMS, but I didn't like that nearly as much.)
Yes VMS. That was what I was using. Unix. I did use it for something a few times. The university had one of those mini-supper computers that were a thing for awhile.
Oooh - what mini super? Something weird, or just a small vector machine? That was an interesting niche...
Not really sure what it was. Maybe a small vector machine, or maybe a small cluster of them. I frankly do not remember much about it. Kind of forgotten about VMS until you reminded me. It was a time of much change in the 80s. I started on an IBM 370, then a departmental VAX, a Xerox Star System (a Word Processor on which the Mac was based), then we moved to Macs and Workstations. I had a Micro VAX I used, and Macs. All very expensive stuff. Personally I had a video terminal at at home at the start of the 80's, then a Commodore 64, then late 80's I bought a Mac at a huge price which I used until about 1997. There were some other systems kicking around during that time too that are hard to remember. One was something from Honeywell at a company I worked for during summers.
Actually fun reminiscing a little. Have not thought about this stuff in decades. One thing I always though was kind of fun. When I started collage terminals were just coming in for students and there was not enough of them. Huge lines. Me I would go over to the row of empty card punches and punch up a deck for my assignment, walk over the the window and give it to the operator and have it read. Then I would get in line for a terminal which by then was often shorter, login, do any editing and debugging, and run and print my assignment in like 30 minutes. Not sure why others did not do this. Just seemed like the way to go.
Multiple. Locally I have Timeshift doing btrfs snapshots every so often. This is mostly to roll back to a snapshot if something breaks. I've never had to use it (and probably should).
I use Pika backup every once in a while for a local backup to an external drive. Mostly because it's easy to restore quickly.
I have duplicacy doing backups to a cloud provider. I used to use duplicati for this, and it was fine - although I didn't like that it seems to be forever in beta. I like that duplicacy can do deduplication between backups of different machines which most other solutions I've seen cannot. I like its selection of cloud providers vs Borg/Vorta and some others.
I use FreeFileSync. It's the only GUI tool I found that let's me sync folders while omitting file deletions. It lets you create batch files from the GUI that I execute with crontab multiple times per day.