Slashdot Mirror


Synchronize Data Between Linux, OS X, and Windows?

aaaaaaargh! writes "I'm using a laptop with Ubuntu 8.04 for work, a netbook with Ubuntu 9.10 when I'm outside, Mac OS X 10.5 for hobby projects, and Windows XP for gaming. For backups, I'm currently using Jungle Disk and Apple's Time Machine, and I use a local svn repository for my work data. Now I need to frequently exchange and synchronize OpenOffice and Latex files and source code in various cross-platform programming languages between one machine and another. Options range from putting everything online (but Jungle Disk disks seem to be too slow for anything else than backup), storing my data on external media like USB sticks or SD cards, or working with copies by synchronizing folders over the network. I don't want to give my data away to some server outside without strong encryption (controlled by me, including the source code) and external media like USB sticks are a bit too fragile according to my taste. The solution should be reliable, relatively failsafe, as simple as possible, and allow me to continue to use Jungle Disk for backup. So what would you recommend?"

305 comments

  1. Throw money at it... by EgNagRah · · Score: 1

    Bluehost.com | FTP it

    1. Re:Throw money at it... by omnichad · · Score: 2, Funny

      RTFL. Jungle Disk has that covered. Throwing money included.

    2. Re:Throw money at it... by DesertBlade · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I had my account suspended for this , bluehost is only for hosting files for websites

      --
      Half of writing history is hiding the truth.
    3. Re:Throw money at it... by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 1

      Jeez, either bluehost are dicks or you practically raped one of their servers.

      I've been using my hostspace for years to transfer and backup important stuff and never had a problem.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    4. Re:Throw money at it... by DJRumpy · · Score: 1

      Time Capsule works well. Wireless storage. Just keep security in mind. It supports WPA-2, and password protected access in addition to the usual MAC filtering and such. From there you just need software to sync to the central point. It's local to the wireless point however, unless you also set up WAN access.

    5. Re:Throw money at it... by Venik · · Score: 1

      They raped all of their servers. I am in the process of moving my site to another hosting provider. Bluehost stretched its resources well beyond breaking point.

    6. Re:Throw money at it... by rgrbrny · · Score: 2, Informative

      Time Capsule works well.

      Time capsules appear to have a MTBF of ~18 mos; the power supply dies. Apple will replace it via an APP-covered computer that uses it, but not if you crack the case to get the hard drive out.

      So, either eat the $$ after 18 mos to save your 18 mos of backups, or give Apple your data for a refurbed unit, or find a backup solution for your backup solution.

      I'm not buyin' another one.

    7. Re:Throw money at it... by itsme1234 · · Score: 2, Informative

      They are way beyond dicks and would go to unbelievable lengths not to provide you with the service you bought. They are proactively scanning your account and will shut you down (without ANY warning whatsoever) for any media file that look suspicious (that includes mp3's you recorded yourself, as in you're the artist).
      At first when they started cracking down on people using disk space they just shut down everybody that was using "too much" in their opinion (they were specifically offering 1500 GBytes space and 15000 GB/month transfer at the time - now they are "unlimited"). No questions, nothing. When customers asked they said they modified the TOS and say something like "you're not allowed to store files (!)". They also modified the TOS to say they don't have to notify you when they modify the TOS (which they had accordingly to the old TOS). And they didn't notify anybody, just shut down accounts randomly.
      If you use their whois privacy feature (default on and unmanageable via web interface) they will spam your whois with advertising. They also don't seem to get what this feature actually means and insist that you own the domain which can't be true in any legal and meaningful way (yes, you are the owner in a field in their database but legally and as far as ICANN is concerned they are the owner).

      The last drop in the bucket is the hidden 50000 files limit. The limit is absolutely secret and you can find about it only when you are kicked out or warned that you are above. However they would still insist the space is unlimited but the number of files is limited. And that it is for your own protection because fsck would take far too long if you have too many files. And that if you don't like it you should go away.
      The idea here is only to pay, not to use what you paid for.
      To put things into perspective a default installation of gallery with default plugins will eat about half of those 50000 files you are allowed. And use probably a couple tens of megs of space (keep in mind they were offering 1500GB before going unlimited which should mean for any reasonable person more than 1500GB). Oh, and people hosting linux distributions are abusers as well.
      Of course they would work more flexibly than a random free provider (you get shell access but you need to fax your ID!). But between random crashes and this "anybody using is abusing" policy you won't get too far.

      Stay away from bluehost.

    8. Re:Throw money at it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's funny bluehost would come up, I had a variety of problems with them myself. First things broke constantly, support was terrible, etc. I ended up somehow canceling my account but they continued to bill my card, I had to dispute the charge then cancel the card. The thing was the next host I chose was called fuitadnet, which was recommended to me by a friend... and they were easily worse than bluehost. Basically they pulled a bunch of crap, avoided dealing with any issues as much as possible, so I canceled my account and they still continued to bill me. It was cheap enough to ignore the first month of over-billing but the second month I wasn't going to take so I disputed the charge. That apparently made them angry and they charged me a $5,000 "dispute penalty" - which of course the card company quickly shot down and I canceled yet another card. Now I'm with DreamHost, which has been 100% fantastic. Never any problems, great support, and pretty damn cheap.

    9. Re:Throw money at it... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Similar experience with SiteGround (who may or may not be a Bluehost reseller, whoever bluehost are.)

      Just burning a backup of my server to take down to a friend's celler. Offsite backup - tick.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    10. Re:Throw money at it... by spvo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it is against the bluehost terms of service to use it as a backup server. I switched to dreamhost, they give you a large amount of storage space dedicated specifically to backup, in addition to whatever you use for your website.

    11. Re:Throw money at it... by oldspewey · · Score: 1

      they charged me a $5,000 "dispute penalty"

      I have a hunch this would be something a state AG would be interested in hearing about.

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
  2. Rsync? by Misanthrope · · Score: 5, Informative

    Set up one computer as a server and rsync/ssh to it with either a cron job or at your whim.

    1. Re:Rsync? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do this, but I feel it would be nice to have something with a little less overhead when encryption isn't required.
      I don't think you can turn it off with rsync can you? :/

    2. Re:Rsync? by godrik · · Score: 2, Informative

      of course you can. the ssh support was added on the top of rsync. It originally used the rsyncd daemon which I believe do not use encryption. (similar to rlogin for authentification)

    3. Re:Rsync? by nweaver · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't worry about the encryption overhead, just make sure AES is the first cypher chosen. AES is VERY fast.

      --
      Test your net with Netalyzr
    4. Re:Rsync? by Seakip18 · · Score: 1

      Exactly.

      I use deltacopy on my windows boxes with a linux server.

      All of the data is synced and gets transferred once a month for backup.

      --
      import system.cool.Sig;
    5. Re:Rsync? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You don't even need to set up one as "the server". With the right options, mutual rsyncs between them will be fine.

    6. Re:Rsync? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, you measured the overhead of encryption when syncing locally and it was significant? WTF?

    7. Re:Rsync? by frodo+from+middle+ea · · Score: 4, Informative
      Better yet, Setup ZFS on a opensolaris box, export the ZFS volume as NFS/Samba share or as an iSCSI target, access from Linux,Solaris,Windows etc.
      ZFS can also do compression, and automatic snapshots, not to mention rock solid data integrity with raidz2
      • data integrity - check
      • remote access - check
      • automated incremental backups - check
      • No limitations of software raid neither the need for expensive hardware raid - check
      • Dead Simple to Use - check

      Seriously what more do you want from a storage/backup solution ?

      --
      for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
    8. Re:Rsync? by Shikaku · · Score: 3, Informative

      luckybackup is a gui for rsync and allows you to sync folders.

      I use it to quickly backup everything. It doesn't allow versioning, but I use squashfs-tools to remove all redundant files and compress them with lzma. So I have a folder system of dates for versioning in a highly compressed squashfs file system container, that's mountable.

      sudo apt-get install luckybackup squashfs-tools

    9. Re:Rsync? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Better yet, Setup ZFS on a opensolaris box, export the ZFS volume as NFS/Samba share or as an iSCSI target, access from Linux,Solaris,Windows etc.

      Note that newer releases of OpenSolaris have built-in kernel support for CIFS with ZFS.

        # zfs set sharesmb=on mypool/mydata
        # zfs set sharenfs=on mypool/mydata

      Mapping between Unix UIDs and Windows SIDs is done transparently, and you can change things from the Windows GUI if desired and the ACLs will go live on the Unix side as well: SIDs are first class security objects. None of the usual Samba UID/SID kludginess (though (Open)Solaris comes with a Samba package if you want to go that route.)

      Case-(in)sensitivity is also a user toggle away if so desired.

      De-dupe was also recently committed to the code base. Crypto is being worked on and I think patches are available.

    10. Re:Rsync? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Do not forget about data de-dupe as well.. now you can have multiple copies of the data from point in time saves and it occupies less space.

    11. Re:Rsync? by vtcodger · · Score: 1

      Rsync or Unison or something else. Probably doesn't matter all that much. But I would set up storage somewhere (existing partitions, and/or usb harddrive(s), and/or ()a flashdrive(s)) with a separate partition for backing up each computer and would use it/them for a few months until all (well, most anyway) of the ways to screw up the file synchronization from multiple PCs have been identified and tamed. If one never makes mistakes, that won't be necessary of course.

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    12. Re:Rsync? by localoptimum · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I have a desktop and a laptop. Company "helpdesk" blocks everything except ssh and http. Work desktop has firewire800 disk attached to it, running time machine for hourly work backups. I have two bash scripts that I use once per day: "arriveAtWork" and "goHome", containing various rsync commands over ssh. Works great.

      --
      This message was scanned by European governments and contains no terrorism.
    13. Re:Rsync? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He is using OS X. Apple do not have proper SAMBA support, it's poor, it's old, it's very slow, and it doesn't cope with files over 2GB. Someone asking about trivial file sharing won't be the kind to pull the source, and do the make dance on OS X.

    14. Re:Rsync? by failedlogic · · Score: 1

      I sort of a dummy with backups (or lazy) and haven't really organized anything properly which is making it a major PITA right now. Thankfully I don't have anything I really need backed up on my PC.

      I've used Rsync and some TAR programs (I've considered CVS for just .TXT or .DOC files) but I find that the info gets spread out over different directories and partitions and drives which creates a huge mess.

      Anyone have recommendations on naming/folder conventions for the super-disorganized. I know there been several /. threads on this. I'm just hoping a similarly disorganized person can offer some help to a lazy person such as me.

    15. Re:Rsync? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Except it didn't exactly answer his question. He appears to favor local storage. Ha already has a backup solution and if he wanted a snetwork share, I'm pretty sure anyone running the 3 major OSes can figure out how to share a drive via NFS/AFP/SMB.

      For a home user, ZFS's big achilles is the inability to change raidz geometry. Most home users add another drive to increase capacity, *not* another raidz of drives into a pool. Nor do they typically want to replace all their raidz drives with larger drives. ZFS fails on that particular common home storage scenario. Everyone knows it and it's been talked about to death. And btrfs is looking better every day.

      The answer he's looking for is probably some form of rsync or unison solution. Depends on the complexity of his syncing. And if he needs/wants some form of version control. He knows how to use SVN so he's probably not needing version control.

      I'm curious too; I have to keep local assets for CGI apps in sync on a few different systems and rsync is the best I've come up with. You can't drop extra files into the asset directory structure and you can't rely on their state to tell you anything about the need to sync.

    16. Re:Rsync? by barrkel · · Score: 1

      Solaris combined CIFS and ZFS support is pretty flawed from other perspectives, though. Symlinks are not followed through shares, and nor are mount points last time I checked.

    17. Re:Rsync? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Simple? Just set up ZPS on an Opensolaris box?

    18. Re:Rsync? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, that sounds easy. why don't you just design your own hardware device, firmware, o/s, and application that can perform it for you? call it "wondersync", that should be just as easy and you'll own it all!

    19. Re:Rsync? by fm6 · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're going to have some file semantics issues in any case. Those introduced by CIFS (don't see how ZFS is a factor) are pretty easy to deal with.

    20. Re:Rsync? by illumin8 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Better yet, Setup ZFS on a opensolaris box, export the ZFS volume as NFS/Samba share or as an iSCSI target, access from Linux,Solaris,Windows etc.

      None of those protocols were designed to work well over the public internet. Sure, NFS/SMB/iSCSI are IP protocols but they don't work well over high latency and low bandwidth connections.

      I'm not arguing with your choice of ZFS; I would just look at something more simple like rsync over ssh to a ZFS volume instead of sharing NFS/CIFS/SMB/iSCSI out to the Internet.

      --
      "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
    21. Re:Rsync? by jhol13 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Better yet, use Mercurial (or any other distributed version control system). It is designed for this kind of use!

      I have three clones (of a project), one in desktop, one in laptop and one in an USB stick. Just "pull" (or "push") and "commit". Sometimes a "merge". With network connectivity you do not need the USB stick (in my case it is just a bit easier).

      Should any of those clones/repositories die it would not be a big problem.

      Note: this is not a backup solution, this is a solution to sync the machines!

    22. Re:Rsync? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Or if OpenSolaris doesn't feel right for some reason (e.g. hardware support), FreeBSD ZFS support is working very well these days.

    23. Re:Rsync? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      was this ment to be funny? massive AES encrypted data i think is quite hard on a processor

    24. Re:Rsync? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dropbox.com

    25. Re:Rsync? by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      Depends on the processor. Some modern CPU's have built-in hardware AES acceleration, and are able to offload that encryption to a purpose-built coprocessor so that the encryption gets done faster, but without bogging down the main CPU.

      VIA's C7 platform is one of these systems, if you're looking for a cheap solution... of course, it's also got hardware-based SHA acceleration, too, so you've got some choice in the matter. :)

    26. Re:Rsync? by Kagetsuki · · Score: 1

      Most versions of rsync will default to ssh, but if you use the -e flag (rsync -e "rsh") you can set whatever protocol rsynic will support. Rsh being the non-encrypted version of ssh in the example I gave. If I'm not mistaken you can even do vanilla ftp, but I've never personally tried it.

    27. Re:Rsync? by Kagetsuki · · Score: 2, Informative

      I actually had terrible problems with ZFS, a piece of hardware went bad on a ZFS volume distributed over multiple disks, and despite the fact it was supposed to be able to recover from that but instead it decided to just stop working all together. This was about a half year ago, we've now moved back to individual networked disks and one box on the network regularly rsyncs them to a backup-only RAID-5 array off site twice a day. ZFS would be great if it had actually worked, luckily we had all the data on other discs and managed to re-assemble everything and lost maybe max an hour of work.

    28. Re:Rsync? by barrkel · · Score: 1

      Using samba doesn't have the same issues. If you share a file path on one ZFS file system using Solaris CIFS, you cannot, from a client, navigate via that share from one file system to another file system, even if that other file system is mounted on a path in it. Mounted file systems just show up as empty directories.

      Similarly, symlinked directories show up as symlink files, rather than directories you can browse through from the client.

      Samba doesn't have either of these issues, which (for me at least) means it's a far better solution. ZFS encourages creating a lot of file systems to take advantage of configurable features like quotas, compression technique, block size, etc. If you can't mix and match those file systems into a single unified view from the perspective of clients, it means those features are a whole lot less useful.

      Use samba. The CIFS support isn't worth it, unless you really need the unified account and security ACL stuff, and are prepared to take significant sacrifices for it.

    29. Re:Rsync? by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Well, assuming that the behavior you describe isn't configurable (I'm pretty ignorant of Solaris CIFS) then yeah, there would be applications for which Samba is a better fit. But there are also applications where this isn't an issue. IMHO, sharing files between Windows and Unix-like systems is one of these, especially when you consider that doing a better job of supporting Windows is the main reason Solaris CIFS even exists..

      You'll notice that the blog posting I just linked appeared a couple months after Sun and Microsoft buried the hatchet and agreed to (among many other things) work together to improved Solaris/Windows interoperability. Probably not a coincidence.

    30. Re:Rsync? by barrkel · · Score: 1

      I run Nexenta (OpenSolaris kernel, GNU userland) with an 8-drive ZFS file system as my main storage at home. I've struggled with the ZFS / CIFS combo, given up on it, and installed and used samba instead. I speak from hard-won experience.

      ZFS has its own issues. It can be quite wasteful of space (in excess of 40% wastage) when you store small files in file systems with large block sizes. The configurability of the block size and compression, combined with the unified storage pool from which file systems can freely allocate, means that using lots and lots of file systems for different file characteristics is both desirable and possible. But the way CIFS support is implemented means that you face a major roadblock in providing a unified view. That's why I suggest that samba should be used instead.

      It worked well for me, better than CIFS, particularly since I didn't need the complexity of full ACL support, and could live with traditional Unix permissions.

    31. Re:Rsync? by fm6 · · Score: 1

      OK, your practical experience certainly trumps my theorizing. But I'm going to theorize anyway. If the result is stupid, please go easy on me.

      As I understand it, ZFS supports variable block size, which should avoid the kind of small-file wastage you describe. Is it possible that your problems with ZFS has more to do with your inexperience with it than with its technical limitations?

      It's worth noting how much easier you found it to set up Samba. I personally find Samba a nightmare to administer — the learning curve is way too steep. Now, if Samba were something I'd had to deal with a lot (as apparently it is for you), I'd probably find it a lot more intuitive, despite its complexities. But if I had to try setting up an SMB server like yours, I'd certainly try Solaris CIFS first on the off chance that the learning curve isn't as nasty.

      What I'm getting at is a principle I often see reflected in Slashdot posts: software you're experienced with is subjectively simpler, even if it's objectively far more complex. (Look at the text editor wars for an example.) I don't know the software involved enough to say for sure that this is the case here, but it sure sounds like it.

    32. Re:Rsync? by barrkel · · Score: 1

      The block size increases as the file size increases. It starts out at 512 at doubles up to 128K. The last block in the file, however, is the same size as the general block size throughout the file. This means that a file 129K in size will take up 256K on disk:

      [rupert] ~$ dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=1024 count=129
      129+0 records in
      129+0 records out
      132096 bytes (132 kB) copied, 0.00221615 seconds, 59.6 MB/s
      [rupert] ~$ du -h test
      259K test

      This is something they're working on to fix, but it currently can lead to quite a bit of wastage if you have many small files.

      The configurable block size limits the maximum file block size, so it prevents the excess from building up:

      [rupert] $ sudo zfs create tank/test
      [rupert] $ sudo zfs set recordsize=2K tank/test
      [rupert] $ sudo chmod 0777 /tank/test
      [rupert] /tank/test$ dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=1024 count=129
      129+0 records in
      129+0 records out
      132096 bytes (132 kB) copied, 0.00267835 seconds, 49.3 MB/s
      [rupert] /tank/test$ du -h test
      150K test

      The configurable compression also makes a difference, but it's somewhat harder to demonstrate using data from /dev/zero or /dev/random, for obvious reasons.

      But the grand extent of my samba configuration is just modifying /etc/samba/smb.conf:

      [share]
      hide dot files=yes
      path=/tank/share
      public=yes
      guest ok=no
      writable=yes
      valid users=barrkel eva

      ... and few other fiddles, e.g. default workgroup. I'm not trying to use samba as a PDC or anything complicated. To me, it is no more or less difficult than CIFS sharing, which requires you to make sure the smbsrv module is loaded in the kernel with modinfo, loaded with add_drv, enabled with svcadm, and configured with sharemgr or zfs sharesmb= option.

    33. Re:Rsync? by barrkel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      BTW, from my perspective your own post is more typical of Slashdot than my own: theorizing without data, postulating ignorance on the part of those with experience, and generally trying to adopt a tone of undue authority.

    34. Re:Rsync? by fm6 · · Score: 1

      BTW, from my perspective your own post is more typical of Slashdot than my own:

      Ouch!

      theorizing without data,

      I had some data

      postulating ignorance on the part of those with experience,

      Hey if I hadn't postulated that you were wrong, you wouldn't have bothered to prove that you're right. Said proof was educational for me.

      and generally trying to adopt a tone of undue authority.

      Sorry if I came across that way. Not my intent.

      Please note that I didn't call you any names. I didn't even mention Hitler! I think that destroys my Slashdot Flame Warrior status.

    35. Re:Rsync? by Lally+Singh · · Score: 1

      How's Nexenta vs the latest opensol? Most of the gnu commands are already the first in my PATH. Is there anything else different?

      --
      Care about electronic freedom? Consider donating to the EFF!
    36. Re:Rsync? by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      What’s even better than rsync, is git! Faster at syncing, and a fully-fledged version management system already included. Which is always a very good thing.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  3. Unison by samuraiz · · Score: 5, Informative

    I like Unison for this sort of thing.

    1. Re:Unison by nine-times · · Score: 4, Informative

      I second the suggestion. It's basically like rsync except it's more like real synchronization. What I mean is, AFAIK with rsync you basically have to say, "Sync folder A and folder B by assuming that folder A is the copy I want to keep, and changing only folder B." With Unison, on the other hand, you can say, "Sync folders A and B by keeping track of when files get modified, and keeping the most recent version of each file. If a file has been modified in both folders since my last sync, let me know and ask me what to do."

      One minor annoyance is the project page links to an OSX version that includes a Cocoa interface, and that's kind of a pain if you want to script it to run in the background. Even if you call it from the command line, the GUI will still open up. Also, if you install it from MacPorts, it doesn't do a good job of maintaining resource forks. Of course, if you're syncing to Linux or Windows, you might not care about resource forks.

      I think the best place to get the OSX version is here: link

      It's been a while since I've downloaded it, though.

    2. Re:Unison by liquidsunshine · · Score: 1

      I second Unison. It has pretty robust configuration options, and it's handled my synchronization needs wonderfully the last few years. It's basically rsync with an awesome wrapper to make it better at two-way mirroring.

    3. Re:Unison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This.

      It's also extremely useful to upload your website (assuming you can ssh to the server) through the narrow upstream bandwidth often available as it will only transfer differences between your local copy an the server. And if something is moved locally, it will detect it and also move it on the other side instead of sending it again.

      It feels a bit like magic.

    4. Re:Unison by McPint · · Score: 4, Informative

      I cannot say whether unison is the best solution, but it is one that I have been using for 7 years or more, between two desktops (home and work), a laptop an external hard drive and another offsite backup. These were on a variety of filesystems between Linux and Windows flavours. MacOS X should be no different.

      While I have seen graphical interfaces to unison, the command line interface is so much easier to use.

      I would definitely recommend unison... while it is not a revision control system it is an effective solution at working on the same set of files wherever you are provided you synchronise twice a day.

    5. Re:Unison by quercus.aeternam · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Agreed - but if rsync works fits, it is preferable.

      That said, the constraints where rsync works flawlessly are pretty strict:

      1. You always rsync down at the start of a session
      2. You always rsync up at the end of a session
      3. You never have more than 1 session

      Just make sure you use the best settings - don't forget --delete or whatever it is to handle removed directories.

      Unison works much better due to its 2-way change propogation, but it is only designed to handle 2 sources of documents, not 3.

      I've never had to handle this sort of thing with unison, so though it may work, I'm not sure of the mechanisms it uses to handle resolution in batch mode. If it's timestamp based, you could hose yourself.

      If you make the Mac and XP boxes share your data over nfs, you restrict yourself to the 2 source case, and Unison should work fine.

    6. Re:Unison by richg74 · · Score: 1

      I will also recommend Unison. I've been using it to synch files / directories among Linux and Windows machines, and it works great.

    7. Re:Unison by iCharles · · Score: 1

      this is what I would suggest, too!

    8. Re:Unison by samuraiz · · Score: 2, Informative

      Unison works much better due to its 2-way change propogation, but it is only designed to handle 2 sources of documents, not 3.

      I sync between 3 computers using a hub-and-spoke system. My file server is the hub; my desktop and laptop both sync only with the file server.

    9. Re:Unison by RichardJenkins · · Score: 1

      Isn't that a distributed vcs?

    10. Re:Unison by pjl5602 · · Score: 1

      I use Unison too and love it (Mac, Linux, FreeBSD and Windows.) However, it does not handle Windows ACLs. Does anybody have a solution for this?

    11. Re:Unison by nine-times · · Score: 1

      I think you can use more than 2 sources of documents, but you basically need to treat one server as your master. So if I have 4 computers, I think I can pick 1 computer as the master and sync the other 3 with it, which will keep all 4 in sync.

      You have some choices in handling resolution. I don't know what it checks to determine when a file has been changed, but it keeps some kind of database to keep track of which files have been synced where. During a normal sync, it compares the changes since the last sync and updates the other source to match. In cases where both sources have been changed since the last sync, it will ask you which file you'd like to keep. If you want, you can tell it to "prefer" one of the sources, and it will resolve conflicts in favor of the preferred source if both files have been updated, or you can tell it to "force" one of the sources, in which case any conflicts are resolved in favor of that source no matter what.

      I use Unison to sync my laptop and desktop, and I tell it to prefer my laptop. But then my desktop is a Mac and I have Time Machine running, so even if I "hose myself", it just means hunting down the lost files in Time Machine.

    12. Re:Unison by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Sort of, but I'd hesitate to call it that. It's very simple, both in that it's easy to use and that it doesn't handle much complexity.

    13. Re:Unison by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      No. It doesn't do rollbacks.

    14. Re:Unison by coaxial · · Score: 4, Informative

      I agree, unison is great. I used unison for several years to sync machines. It worked great for linux-linux, and seemed to mostly work for linux-mac/mac-linux syncs as well. The main problem was with resource forks causing a bunch of ._foo files, but there's not too much you can do about that if you're copying data from HFS+ to something else. It's been a while since I used unison (I gave up my desktop, and now only use a laptop.), but seems like unison has the ability to actually merge files by fire off something like meld to resolve conflicts. That's a big win.

    15. Re:Unison by samuraiz · · Score: 1

      You can configure unison to ignore files like OS X's ._blarg stuff (or anything else for that matter) while syncing.

    16. Re:Unison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I use Unison to synchronize my iTunes music library (~20GB) between a server and three other machines, and it works perfectly. The initial sync is slow (as you'd expect), but subsequent syncs are much faster. Furthermore, unlike using Subversion or most other revision control systems, there's no local duplication overhead. This does mean a speed impact for determining changes, but it's much nicer to store a 20GB music library in 20GB of space instead of 40GB.

    17. Re:Unison by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

      Holy crap, my professor wrote that. I've been using it for years without even realizing it...

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    18. Re:Unison by agrif · · Score: 1
      seconded

      Seriously, unison preforms very well, and it's highly configurable, and cross-platform to boot. I use it to synchronize my music library across multiple hosts, so I can keep up to date on my laptop and mpd server. It's like rsync, with sync rules and no mucking about in serverspace (it runs over ssh).

    19. Re:Unison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Rsync has many options, which you can apply to amazing ends if you become an rsync wizard. Before I explain some of them, consider that setting up a CVS or SVN repo behind SSH might be the easiest thing to manage "some openoffice files, latex, and sourcecode". I even use CVS to manage my own calendar files.

      With rsync you can use timestamps and -u (update) mode to only transfer from A to B if A is newer. You can run once in each direction to transfer a sparse mixture of files you have modified at either site. You lose if both sites are "newer" than the last sync time, as you will not detect a conflict.

      With rsync -n (no modification) you can simulate a transfer, review the affected file list, and intervene with special cases before you let it destroy data. With --exclude and --include patterns, you can selectively copy only certain files you wanted from a complex tree.

      You are playing with fire if you do any of this without a backup system which can allow you to recover from an rsync mistake.

    20. Re:Unison by ColoBikerDude · · Score: 3, Informative

      I use Unison to synchronize data between 5 user accounts across 3 computers, all running Mac OS X, and I'm very happy with it. I set up a LaunchAgent from each of the user accounts to automatically run a Unison profile periodically, and that profile can also be run from the GUI tool if so desired.
      The Cocoa interface can be disabled if you're writing a script to run in the background. There is a "-ui text" flag to the command line tool (/usr/local/bin/unison) that will prevent the Cocoa GUI from being shown, and also a "-batch" flag that keeps it from expecting user input. Finally, an "-auto" flag will accept the default action for any files without conflicts.
      And no, I'm not affiliated with the author. ;)

    21. Re:Unison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One minor annoyance is the project page links to an OSX version that includes a Cocoa interface, and that's kind of a pain if you want to script it to run in the background. Even if you call it from the command line, the GUI will still open up.

      If you use the '--ui text' option to unison it won't open the gui interface.

    22. Re:Unison by jhol13 · · Score: 1

      How does it handle merges? That is, situations where the data has been modified in both (or several) machines.

      You see, there are distributed version control systems (Mercurial, ...) which are designed to handle that kind of situations. And they handle them extremely well (at least Mercurial does and I have no reason to believe the others do not).

    23. Re:Unison by jhol13 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So why bother? Why not use distributed VCS?

      They are quite easy (to learn), they handle merges apparently much better, they give version history, rollback, branches, etc. After all, the OP was using SVN.

    24. Re:Unison by pipatron · · Score: 1

      How well does it handle changes in binary files? If I sync my music folder with my laptop (mostly FLAC files) and change the metadata for the files in a couple of folders, what will it do then? Will it keep the old binary files? I can easily see how that could grow out of hand, storage-wise. What about if you move or rename file? Unless you take special care when doing these operations, a VCS might act like the old file was removed and there was a new file, but of course keep the old file around. This is also something you don't want to happen when you rename or sort your gigabyte-sized photo album.

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    25. Re:Unison by jhol13 · · Score: 1

      Binary files (as long as they are not large - YMMV) are no problem for any VCS.

      Rename/move is better handled in e.g. Mercurial than in SVN - the version history follows. But you need to do it in the DVCS (e.g. "hq mv A B" instead of "mv A B").

      Photo album where the photos do not change (almost at all) might not be the best for DVCS, they are designed for text files where merge makes sense and file size (and therefore history size) is not huge. After all, they do waste disk (you need the repository and the working copy).

    26. Re:Unison by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Because I don't need to handle merges, give version history, rollback, branches, etc. I just need to keep two directories in sync even though changes might be made in either directory.

    27. Re:Unison by jhol13 · · Score: 1

      Either but *NOT* both? If so, Unison might be perfect for you.

      It isn't for me.

    28. Re:Unison by ibennetch · · Score: 1

      The main problem was with resource forks causing a bunch of ._foo files, but there's not too much you can do about that if you're copying data from HFS+ to something else

      Try rsrc = false in your unison profile.

    29. Re:Unison by nine-times · · Score: 1

      It's my personal files, so it's pretty unlikely that I'll be editing the same file on both of my computers at the same time. If I am doing that, I'll probably be aware of it and be able to take steps to ensure I don't lose the version that's important to me.

    30. Re:Unison by jhol13 · · Score: 1

      In my case version history is important, so important that I "need" VCS anyway. Mercurial "in one shot" gives excellent tool to keep the files in sync, too. It guarantees[1] that no change is ever lost.

      I write computer programs, sometimes on the desktop, sometimes on the laptop. It is possible I make changes in both machines between syncs (it has happened) and was PITA to solve before I used Mercurial. Now it is almost fully automated.

      Note that my files are pure text, so the merge tools (like WinMerge) work.

      [1] well, it is SW so I do take backups ... (Mercurial has never let me down this far)

  4. dropbox? by kperrier · · Score: 4, Informative

    www.dropbox.com

    1. Re:dropbox? by rinoid · · Score: 2, Informative

      The two posts above are my two suggestions. ssh+rsync and/or dropbox.com

    2. Re:dropbox? by fasuin · · Score: 1

      I support dropbox. It allows you to access your data from any computer via a web interface, and to keep PCs synchronized using a simple apps that runs in background. It support versioning too.

    3. Re:dropbox? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Absolutely, its the most amazing service unless you need gobs and gobs of space its very good

    4. Re:dropbox? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Dropbox is great. I use it between all my computers (PC and Linux) and I have absolutely 0 complaints with it!

    5. Re:dropbox? by koick · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't want to give my data away to some server outside without strong encryption

      Use dropbox with a Truecrypt encrypted container as the file which gets synchronized.

    6. Re:dropbox? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Are you insane?
      The image is random data, and adding or removing a small file in the image would require a complete resync.

    7. Re:dropbox? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better to go with encfs for your encryption layer - with Truecrypt, if you change one file in the container the entire container will need to be resynchronized, so will be very inefficient.

      Can't say for certain that encfs is cross-platform but google it.

    8. Re:dropbox? by badpazzword · · Score: 1

      Well, getting 500 megs for free (that's a 25% bump) is rather easy:

      1. Find a friend who does have Dropbox and use his referrer url. Use it when subscribing. Bam! When you're done installing you have 250 extra megs.
      2. Take the Getting Started tour: https://www.dropbox.com/gs -- complete five out of six and you get 250 more free megs.

      --
      When ideas fail, words become very handy.
    9. Re:dropbox? by dc2447 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Of course when someone steals your laptop which is syncing to dropbox, the data is theirs. You can unlink updates to the stolen device but the data is gone. I'd love a remote wipe facility.

    10. Re:dropbox? by nametaken · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dropbox is good up to a few gigs, but their pay service is expensive per GB. I presently use it with SyncToy (scheduled) to keep stuff up-to-date between machines... but only for a small set of important stuff.

      For larger things, the OP's selection of Jungledisk is far more cost effective... and if speed is an issue I wonder if he/she knows that Jungledisk backends to EITHER Rackspace or Amazon. They should try the other.

    11. Re:dropbox? by EsJay · · Score: 1

      Of course when someone steals your laptop which is syncing to dropbox, the data is theirs.

      Which has nothing to do with Dropbox.

      Actually, on another machine synced with Dropbox, you could copy the files to another directory and empty the Dropbox folder. When online, the stolen machine will sync and delete its files, too.

    12. Re:dropbox? by moronoxyd · · Score: 1

      No, since Dropbox only transmit the parts of a file that changed.

    13. Re:dropbox? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      2 Complaints:

      1) no command line/daemon version. My 2 Linux systems are headless. No GUI of any sort. I want something that goes in init.d and behaves like everything else debian (start|stop|restart) for these machines.

      2) I can't use my own service. The people that plan on using their own hosting service really don't overlap with the type of people that are paying them big money to host their data. XMarks (Formerly FoxMarks) lets you host all your data on a WebDAV host. Let me add my own SSH/SFTP/WebDav host and I'd even consider paying for it with how awesome it works.

      As someone else posted, I have everything benign at the root level (Fine, steal my grocery list) and everything else is in a true crypt disk.

    14. Re:dropbox? by teg · · Score: 1

      Of course when someone steals your laptop which is syncing to dropbox, the data is theirs. You can unlink updates to the stolen device but the data is gone. I'd love a remote wipe facility.

      You think you want it. If you think a bit more, you realize it will only help for the scenario where the thief has the password to your account, can log in, dropbox then runs and the computer has a network connection. It won't do anything to protect your data against just reading the hard disk as a super user or from a different computer.

      The right way to protect this and other personal data, is to encrypt the whole home directory - Mac, Windows and Linux all have solutions for this (Windows will require the professional version). Make sure to back up frequently, as you've increased your exposure to disk, filesystem or user errors significantly.

    15. Re:dropbox? by cottandr · · Score: 1

      Dropbox's beta builds have LAN sync.

      --
      my other sig is also a porsche
    16. Re:dropbox? by rrwood · · Score: 1

      Dropbox is fantastic! It's definitely not a subversion respository, though it does support versions of files if you're willing to pay for that feature.

      I finally ponied up the money for a paying account yesterday after having used it daily for about a year now....

    17. Re:dropbox? by supersloshy · · Score: 1

      Dropbox isn't open and it stores the files online. I would suggest it as well, but he can't control the encryption. Not sure about "Jungle Disk", whatever that is.

      --
      "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
    18. Re:dropbox? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seventh'd... Dropbox. Solves all problems with minimal administration burden. Plus having Web Access (and iPhone now) to my data has saved my ass more times than I can count.

    19. Re:dropbox? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      www.dropbox.com

      I was going to suggest dropbox but someone beat me to it! ...You might also consider an online host for your SVN repository, I used to store SVN under the Dropbox sync'd folder but there's still the hastle of setting everything up when you switch to a new PC. The one I use is http://www.webfaction.com

    20. Re:dropbox? by dc2447 · · Score: 1

      I'd like webdav type solution where the data is only available when you have a connection and the machine is authorized, a bit like the iphone app. Your point about encryption is also valid.

    21. Re:dropbox? by nine-times · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's also the question of whether you really want to store things online. If I want to sync a few MBs of documents, syncing over the Internet to a server might be fine. On the other hand, if I want to keep 100 GB synced between two computers on the same network, pushing that over a 512k Internet connection just to download it again might be less than ideal.

    22. Re:dropbox? by Sancho · · Score: 1

      The way most encryption works, if you change a piece of the plaintext file, you get a wildly different ciphertext file. It's different enough that transmitting only the parts which changed will cause you to end up transmitting most of the file.

      I don't know if this is the case with Truecrypt's volumes, but I bet that it is.

    23. Re:dropbox? by Shikaku · · Score: 1

      1 MB truecrypt filesystem file created, formatted FAT with AES-Twofish-Serpent encryption and SHA512 hash.

      Copied it for empty versus adding a file.

      Added a 453 byte file to one.

      command: diff test.tc test\ \(copy\).tc -a > truecrypt.diff

      du -h truecrypt.diff
      8.0K truecrypt.diff

      It changes far too much.

    24. Re:dropbox? by Shikaku · · Score: 1

      ... On second thought, maybe that was the block size, because the format dialog is vague. Carry on, it will work just fine.

    25. Re:dropbox? by lhoguin · · Score: 1

      You don't need to, dropbox already uses encryption for both transfer and storage.

      https://www.dropbox.com/help/27

    26. Re:dropbox? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From another computer just delete (or move elsewhere) all the data in that dropbox account, then unlink the stolen laptop so the thief can't access the web portal. That's the same thing as a remote wipe.

    27. Re:dropbox? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But then you have to write all content on every sync, even if you only changed a 4kb file.

    28. Re:dropbox? by koick · · Score: 1

      I'm assuming when he says "I don't want to give my data away", he means he doesn't want the cloud hosting company access to his data, not that he's concerned with data transport sniffers. Of course, using a TrueCrypt container (with a strong password of course) solves both those problems.

    29. Re:dropbox? by jacksonj04 · · Score: 1

      Another one voting for this. It also has the benefit in that it installs entirely within a roaming 'Documents and Settings' directory if the windows network makes use of one. I use Dropbox to sync my Mac laptop, my Ubuntu VM, my XP installation, and my University roaming profile (and the app follows me around campus with no need to install on every machine). The web interface is quite good as well, plus it sports sharing of files if you want to.

      It lacks the ability for you to encrypt it with your own key, however it's a matter of convenience vs security. I'm not keeping my doomsday device plans on there and I think it fairly unlikely that the company is going to sell my lab reports, so the lack of 'privacy' in an absolute sense is balanced out by the fact that communication between client and server is encrypted and it does what I want it to.

      --
      How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
    30. Re:dropbox? by Unequivocal · · Score: 1

      I've been using spideroak, and I have one complaint which is restorations are sometimes fairly slow (10 minutes to pull down a 300k file). Sometimes it's fast-ish (30 sec) , so I guess it's where the file is in their cloud.

      How is restoration time on Dropbox?

    31. Re:dropbox? by FrederikNS · · Score: 1

      3. Get more friends to rign up as your referrals, and receive 250 mb per referal until you hit a total of 5 gb

    32. Re:dropbox? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hence the use of truecrypt

    33. Re:dropbox? by Scotter · · Score: 1

      Dropbox + encfs is what I did.

      Create an encfs folder within the dropbox folder and everything in it is encrypted locally before going up to the cloud and other machines.

      My encfs portion isn't set to maximum security, but by keeping folder/file names encrypted-but-consistent it updates as fast as dropbox always does.
      There are resources on the web describing how to set up a repository for minimal dropbox interference.

      Data is secure in the "cloud" and secure on your laptop until you mount the drive.
      Yes, a stolen laptop could blow away the directory, which may cascade to other machines before you can stop it, but you can "undo" deletions within a limited time-frame.
      If you're writing a lot of architecture-specific code, you might want to keep your build trees outside the Dropbox.
      2Gb is MORE than enough for day-to-day work that needs to be shared among machines.

      For files that are more-or-less read-only (music, etc.) ssh/rsync from the master repository less frequently.

    34. Re:dropbox? by moonbender · · Score: 1

      $ echo 1>test

      $ ls -hl test
      -rw-r--r-- 1 user user 1 2009-11-20 05:23 test

      $ du -h test
      4.0K test

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    35. Re:dropbox? by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      I've also had good experience with dropbox. I share not only between computers, but also project files between developers. It supports file versioning and all the other stuf you'd expect out of a VCS. Download and upload speeds are consistently fast for both American and European team members. I'm running this on windows and linux flavors.

      Hmm, shameless plug - you get yourself and me an extra 250 MB free storage by using this link to sign up... https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTExNzI1MzE5

    36. Re:dropbox? by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1
      It's on their feature wishlist.

      Disclaimer: I'm a dropbox user.

    37. Re:dropbox? by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Dropbox uses Amazon S3 on the backend as well.

    38. Re:dropbox? by operator_error · · Score: 1

      Try a different approach. Use full disk backups, especially on notebooks. Then dropbox works well, securely.

      FWIW, Ubuntu Netbook Remix is awesome; I love it! Only problem is the easy installer doesn't support full disk encryption like the other Ubuntu installs do (just download/use the 'alternate install disk', which offers no 'live' test-drive options on the CD). To encrypt netbooks, here's an easy way: http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=7489558&postcount=13

      Also, if you support an office, why not have folks (transparently) proxy the office dd-wrt router via ssh, from the unsecure coffee-shop 'free' wifi they like so much? So they use only truly trusted networks?

    39. Re:dropbox? by HMage · · Score: 0

      I support dropbox. It's easy, fast, works on mac, windows and linux plus iphone client and secure web access to the files too.

      --
      Eugene 'HMage' Bujak
    40. Re:dropbox? by HMage · · Score: 0

      I've been using spideroak, and I have one complaint which is restorations are sometimes fairly slow (10 minutes to pull down a 300k file). Sometimes it's fast-ish (30 sec) , so I guess it's where the file is in their cloud.

      How is restoration time on Dropbox?

      As fast as Amazon S3.

      --
      Eugene 'HMage' Bujak
    41. Re:dropbox? by HMage · · Score: 0

      1 MB truecrypt filesystem file created, formatted FAT with AES-Twofish-Serpent encryption and SHA512 hash.

      Copied it for empty versus adding a file.

      Added a 453 byte file to one.

      command: diff test.tc test\ \(copy\).tc -a > truecrypt.diff

      du -h truecrypt.diff
      8.0K truecrypt.diff

      It changes far too much.

      That's because TrueCrypt uses blocksize of 4K.

      --
      Eugene 'HMage' Bujak
    42. Re:dropbox? by Trollino · · Score: 1

      I really love dropbox. But as it is not open. Maybe the source of dropbox will be open in the future and we will install dropbox server in personnel server. Or some project like dropbox will be create.

    43. Re:dropbox? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dropbox looks like good suggestion, thanks.

      I tried it out, however, and found its killing Windows Explorer.exe on both a Vista sp2 and an XP sp2 box:

      http://forums.dropbox.com/topic.php?id=14856&replies=1#post-92196

      Bummer.

  5. aaaaaaargh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nuff' said.

  6. Dropbox by Tennguin · · Score: 1

    https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTE5NDk3Mzg5 Use this link and both you AND I get an extra 250 megs space. The first 2 gigs cost nada.

    1. Re:Dropbox by mujadaddy · · Score: 1

      Done, bro. :-)

      --
      Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
      "Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
    2. Re:Dropbox by richard.cs · · Score: 1

      Another shameless attempt to get some free space: Click here and sign up and we'll both get an extra 250 MB.

      Seriously though. Dropbox is great, I was dubious about it at first but it's so very useful and it just works.

    3. Re:Dropbox by Tennguin · · Score: 1

      my hero :-) thanks!

    4. Re:Dropbox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get a room, FFS!

    5. Re:Dropbox by scotch · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      9.99/50 = .1998 $/G
      19.99/100 = .1999 $/G

      So it's more expensive per Gig for the larger package. Hilarious.

      --
      XML causes global warming.
  7. wish USB was tougher by Blue+Shifted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    USB sticks are a bit too fragile

    damn straight. that is the number one problem with USB anything. i've seen more broken jump drives, and more broken usb ports from someone tripping over usb cable, than i care to fix. yes, they ARE handy as can be, but to WHOMEVER is designing USB 4 or whatever it will be called, PLEASE make the damn connection more sturdy.

    1. Re:wish USB was tougher by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      With the price of USB sticks today you could just buy 10: use 1 to carry around in your pocket, put another one in an unused port on your main machine and put a script in a cronjob to synchronize regularly. If it breaks replace the main with the backup and plug a new one in the backup slot.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    2. Re:wish USB was tougher by Jake+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Where would you get the backup if you only bought 10? One is in your pocket and the other is in the main machine...Or, did you not mean 10 as in binary for two?

      --
      SIG FAULT: Post index out of bounds.
    3. Re:wish USB was tougher by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      Or make it like the Apple quick release power port

    4. Re:wish USB was tougher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      WHOMEVER is designing USB 4 or whatever it will be called, PLEASE make the damn connection more sturdy.

      They should make the connection more fragile, not more sturdy. The components should be sturdy, but if you design them to easily separate, things like tripping over the cable will cause little to no physical damage.

      Apple's MagSafe power adapter is a good example of this. You can trip over the power as much as you want and it just disconnects. But neither the cord nor the laptop is damaged in any way and you're free to simply plug it in again and continue working. This should be the goal of every computer connection. The last thing I want is to trip over a cord and send both devices at either end flying across the room because the connection is sturdy enough to not break.

    5. Re:wish USB was tougher by speculatrix · · Score: 0

      magsafe power is pointless without magsafe network cable! admittedly, it's probably the primary cable in use that needs it

    6. Re:wish USB was tougher by Quantumstate · · Score: 1

      I was personally wondering what he did with other 719... Or, did he not mean 10 as in base 720 for 720.

    7. Re:wish USB was tougher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its obvious (at least to me; I have a high school education) that one is in his pocket, one is in the machine, (10-1-1=8) so 8 are in reserve for the "If it breaks replace the main with the backup and plug a new one in the backup slot." After you break 8 of them, its time to buy another 10.

      Smartass is too good of a term for trolls like you, I have to go with the Red Forman "Dumbass" here.

    8. Re:wish USB was tougher by dotgain · · Score: 1

      Exactly why do you have a laptop if you're going to keep it hooked up to wired ethernet all the time? If it's going to be a hassle to pick your laptop up and take it away somewhere, without destroying all your network connections, what's the point? Don't tell me you need Gigabit Ethernet all day long?

    9. Re:wish USB was tougher by rwa2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      All the little lock tabs on my RJ-45 ethernet jacks have broken off, so my network cables typically separate with minimum effort.

      Magsafe had to be an Apple invention, though... since the older power plugs that came with them were way more fragile than any other laptop I've used. I've had to buy 2 replacement power supplies for my wife's old ibook already, and even now I still can't get power to it through the bent-up connector. It's a shame because it'd make a decent "Ken Burns effect" photo frame if I could power it up again, but I don't want to throw any more money at it :P

    10. Re:wish USB was tougher by snadrus · · Score: 1

      Wikipedia says magsafe magnets find paricles and can become trouble. I imagine usb could be made reversable though (if we are going with a redesign). Idea: let's use the velcro on baby clothes instead of magnets. Its so quick-release that babies can pull it off.

      --
      Science & open-source build trust from peer review. Learn systems you can trust.
    11. Re:wish USB was tougher by EvanED · · Score: 1

      and more broken usb ports from someone tripping over usb cable

      I haven't had that, but I have had something fall on the USB connector sticking out of the front of my case and break one of the front two USB ports. Seeing as I spent a fair bit of money on an Antec P180 not too terribly long ago, and was hoping to use it even for my next computer, I'm kinda pissed about that.

    12. Re:wish USB was tougher by Massacrifice · · Score: 1

      I've almost put a case USB port on fire because I'd wrongly connected the header on the motherboard and short-circuited it. After a few minutes of my external HDD plugged in but not showing up on the desktop, the computer started to smell bad, but it took another 3 minutes for me to find out what was wrong. When I did, the cable had fused to the USB jack. The motherboard mysteriously died a year later, and then I saw the PSU header having overheat marks, too. Can they make a USB plug that will protect againt one's own stupidity?

      --
      -- Home is where you eat your heart out.
    13. Re:wish USB was tougher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes - a good example of a fragile connector. Even though the MagSafe connector sounds like a good idea in theory, in practice it has enormous problems making me hope Apple had equipped this mid-2007 MacBook with a normal power plug. At least once in month I have to clean both the socket and the plug, and still I have charging problems if I don't fit the connector just in the right way to the socket. My ten year old Dell laptop hasn't had any charging problems to this date, and I still use the original battery provided with the laptop. My MacBook is on it's second battery and third power adapter.

    14. Re:wish USB was tougher by Jake+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Troll? It was a friggin joke. WHOOSH to you.

      --
      SIG FAULT: Post index out of bounds.
  8. Dropbox by rtobyr · · Score: 4, Informative

    https://www.dropbox.com/ will give you 2gb of free space. It'll keep all files in your "dropbox folder" synchronized on all computers where it is installed. It works on Linux, Mac, and Windows. A video on installing Dropbox on Linux from The Linux Journal's Shawn Powers is here: http://www.linuxjournal.com/video/dropbox-linux

  9. Dropbox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I personally use Dropbox for a similar type of setup (Ubuntu 9.10, OS X 10.6, XP). It uses SSL, but would most likely not meet your requirements of allowing you control of the source code that sits on their servers. It provides 2 GB of storage for free with the option to upgrade to 50 or 100 GB for $9.99 or $19.99 respsectively.

  10. Chronosync, rsync, Jungle Disk by aclarke · · Score: 4, Informative

    Three options that I use, or have used, are rsync, Chronosync and Jungle Disk.

    Jungle Disk is the best solution if you have more money than time and can rely on being online a reasonably good percentage of the time. In the Jungle Disk settings, you can specify a certain portion of your disk to be used as an offline cache. Jungle Disk will then keep downloaded files in that disk cache, so you don't have to worry about the download speed so much, assuming you have the disk space available for the cache. If you don't have the disk space you'll need an online solution anyway.

    Chronosync is Mac-based, but you can set it up to sync your files with your Windows and Linux computers. I recently bought it and haven't been through all its features yet, but I'm pretty sure it will do everything you need it to for about $40.

    Rsync is of course great if you have the time and expertise to set it up. If you want to take the time to learn how it works, it's probably the best solution. OTOH I think Chronosync will do 99% of what rsync will do (from what I've seen) and is easier so I felt like the purchase price of Chronosync was worth it to me.

    1. Re:Chronosync, rsync, Jungle Disk by screeble · · Score: 1

      Agreed...

      I use rsync to keep an iPhoto library mirrored between two macs. It's the easiest and fastest method I've run across. I did have to make a symbolic link to the library using a name without spaces but it "just works."

      #!/bin/bash
      /usr/bin/rsync -azvE -r --exclude '.DS_Store' --delete --verbose --progress /Users/otherdude/Pictures/iPhotoLibrary/ somedude@macbook-pro.local:/Users/somedude/Pictures/iPhotoLibrary/

  11. They make a pill for this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd recommend that you check out any of a variety of psychotropic drugs known to reduce the symptoms of extreme paranoia.

    But seriously, if your data is important enough to worry about somebody sneaking backdoors into the encryption package, it should be worth enough to apply some serious $$$ to security. If it isn't, then relax.

    Also note that strong encryption is still subject to rubber-hose cryptanalysis, or the more modern variant, waterboard cryptanalysis.

  12. Rsync by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    End of discussion.

    1. Re:Rsync by nldavepc · · Score: 1

      I second this. rsnapshot (rsnapshot.org) for synchronizing the folders over the network, atalk and smb to make the machines talk to each other and you should be all set.

    2. Re:Rsync by numbski · · Score: 1

      What, no love for Unison?

      And why on earth does OpenAFS never get a sniff? I know it's a pain to set up, but I would have figured by now that many would have taken it and run with it.

      --

      Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

    3. Re:Rsync by JimFive · · Score: 1

      atalk and smb?

      Don't use atalk. Use NFS or similar.
      --
      JimFive

      --
      Please stop using the word theory when you mean hypothesis.
  13. SMB by tomz16 · · Score: 1

    Pick the laptop that you travel with (perhaps between home and work). Store all shared data on it. Samba mount that directory on the OS you are currently using (all of the OS's you list support samba).

    You can work on your data on that laptop while on the move... but when you are using another computer (e.g. desktop) that laptop just effectively serves as an external disk. As long as you use GigE, there is no performance drop over a single locally-attached disk.

    As an added benefit, you can backup this data whenever you mount the share (i use rsync). This ensures that I automatically have redundant, geographically diverse, versioned backups of my important files!

  14. How come ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    ... someone like you who is using three different Operating Systems cannot figure out how to sync data?

    1. Re:How come ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... someone like you who is using three different Operating Systems cannot figure out how to sync data?

      Now THIS question is worthy of an Ask Slashdot! On the other hand, notice that he did say he's using Ubuntu, so it's not like he actually needs to know what he's doing. He just needs to know how to click OK to install an OS (or 3).

    2. Re:How come ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Syncing data is a hard problem. It doesn't look like it could be a problem at first, but there is only a surprisingly small number of products which come close to solving it. Different meta data across platforms (time resolution and time zone, different types of time records, permissions, naming etc.), extended file structures (streams, resource forks, ...), comparatively slow and intermittent network connectivity, concurrent changes in more than one place, huge binary files with only small changes, renamed or moved files, open file handles, the list goes on and on. Finding a sync tool which satisfies your requirements is just as hard as finding a reliable backup solution: They are similar problems and there are heaps of tools for both, but only very few which are even worth considering. The rest are half-assed marketing-driven data-eating annoyances. (BTW, I use rsync, but it has deficiencies. For example, it does not deal with open files.)

    3. Re:How come ... by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

      My Mother uses Windows (work), Mac (at home), and some random Linux Distro (vacation/travel), and she couldn't get them all on the same wireless without my help.

      The # of OS's you are familiar with has ZERO effect on your actual technical abilities.

  15. Another rsync like option by frooddude · · Score: 2, Informative

    Unison from UPenn http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/unison/

    Works on all the platforms you mentioned... It can synchronize 2 disparate directory trees (you made updates to files A, B, C on one system and D, E, F on another system and want to merge them) and when it can't figure out what to do it asks you.

  16. One computer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can easily quad-boot Ubuntu, Windows, and OS X on a single computer.

    1. Re:One computer? by Jake+Griffin · · Score: 1

      You can easily tri-boot Ubuntu, Windows, and OS X on a single computer.

      FTFY

      --
      SIG FAULT: Post index out of bounds.
  17. SVN+SSH by nweaver · · Score: 2, Informative

    Set up one computer as a master repository and do everything over SVN+SSH.

    Its what I do for the complete working set I have, passing between 3+ systems, is everything is through subversion over SSH to a backed-up system.

    --
    Test your net with Netalyzr
    1. Re:SVN+SSH by rvw · · Score: 1

      Set up one computer as a master repository and do everything over SVN+SSH.

      Read before you post! He is already using SVN. And I think it goes without saying that he knows about SSH.

    2. Re:SVN+SSH by agent-o2 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Then he must not realize that SVN can do everything he's wanting to do.

    3. Re:SVN+SSH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's using a local repository. He is not using a server based SVN solution, which can do everything he wants, easily and simply.

      Seriously, WTF is he doing asking such a simple question on slashdot, my god, this has been a non issue for a looooong time. What kind of developer can't setup a simple file server, or a svn+ssh solution? Whats with this online storage crap?

      He must really be clueless, a teenager with several boxes and no idea how this all really works. This is not some unique scenario where he needs some novel solution. I don't care how much linux you drink, it doesn't give you a clue automagically.

    4. Re:SVN+SSH by jgrahn · · Score: 1

      Then he must not realize that SVN can do everything he's wanting to do.

      My thought exactly. If he doesn't like that answer, it's his fault for not mentioning why it wouldn't work for him.

      I use CVS for exactly what he describes. I don't do binary files that way, but then again you cannot do anything like this reliably with files which cannot be merged -- edit them in two places and you lose.

  18. Distributed version control by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Informative

    Mercurial for...

    Windows

    MacOS

    For linux it should be in standard repos.

    This way you can make changes on any of your systems and move them around as required, merging only when needed.

    1. Re:Distributed version control by Randle_Revar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I second this, although I use Git. Works great.

    2. Re:Distributed version control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The problem with Mercurial, Git, etc are the amount of space they take up because you're keeping the entire revision history on every machine. When I use these though I use Git because it's way faster than Mercurial.

      I don't think revision control systems are suitable for synchronization like we're talking about though. If you don't commit the changes then they don't show up on the other machines. That can be a huge pain in the ass. A true automatic distributed filesytem-type thing is what we really want. These exist but from what I seen none are any good (eg. they are generally very unstable). So I think you're stuck with some sort of manual solution like rsync, those online data storage things people keep suggesting (personally I would never trust my data to some 3rd party), revision control, etc...

    3. Re:Distributed version control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Have you really tried it? Last time I tried, Mercurial died with files over 10 megabytes in size.

    4. Re:Distributed version control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Well, I tried, and it still can't manage any system:

      file.bin: files over 10MB may cause memory and performance problems

    5. Re:Distributed version control by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Have you really tried it? Last time I tried, Mercurial died with files over 10 megabytes in size.

      Thats a warning. I have successfully used mercurial with 100 megabyte files.

    6. Re:Distributed version control by Digicrat · · Score: 1

      I concur - another git user here for my personal systems. Distributed version control systems are ideal in this situation, so you don't have a single point of failure in a central repository, and can easily track and merge conflicting changes when you forget to sync before coding . . .

      Shared folders (NFS or Samba) also work great in some scenarios (ie:work). Particularly if your on a secure internal network (/w VPN for remote access), this is by far the easiest way to keep files accessible to all machines and/or multiple users.

    7. Re:Distributed version control by ranulf · · Score: 1
      Me too, I've used git for about 18 months synchronising files between my desktop, laptop, netbook and server.

      I only use it for documents really, but it works extremely well.

      I've got a simple script which is the same on all systems:
      #!/bin/sh
      cd ~/Documents
      git add .
      git commit -a -m sync
      git pull
      git push
      and I've added this as a custom app to my top panel, so a single click kicks off a full sync with the server.

  19. dropbox yarrrr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTMwODU3ODA5

  20. Unison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    If you don't mind having to manually synchronize (and even this limitation can be worked around with a careful set up), I'll say Unison over SSH. It handles circular version conflict resolution quite well, it's not too difficult to setup if in the chain there's only a windows machine (so you don't need to setup a ssh server on the win box) and it's serving me very well. I don't know about OSX but I think it should work there good enough.
    It has a nice GUI too to manually resolve nasty conflicts (e.g. you modified a document in on two different environments before the sync.)

  21. Unison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just discovered Unison last week. Sounds perfect for your needs.

  22. Proven technology by eln · · Score: 4, Funny

    external media like USB sticks are a bit too fragile according to my taste

    That's because you're using the wrong external media. You're going for new and exciting and not old and reliable. What you need to do is convert all of your data to human-readable binary (you know, 1100110001111 and so on), and chisel it on to large stone tablets. These are extremely resistant to wear, especially if stored with the written side down, and are virtually theft proof (who's going to steal a bunch of 500-pound rocks?).

    You can also easily transfer data from one machine to another either via forklift or just by bringing the machines to the tablets themselves. Backup to Jungle Disk is simple: store a second set of tablets in the Amazon (you can even have a DR site in southeast Asia!), and hire local villagers to update them for you. You should provide a telegraph machine to the villagers to send data back and forth for synchronization purposes. If the telegraph is too unreliable, you can use an elaborate network of smoke signal or semaphore (the thing with the flags) specialists to send data back and forth.

    Encryption may be a little more difficult, but easily solved if you happen to have a couple of old Enigma machines sitting around (and really, who doesn't?). If the Enigma machine isn't reliable enough, Little Orphan Annie decoder pins can be used instead.

    HTH.

    1. Re:Proven technology by HockeyPuck · · Score: 1

      Obviously, you've forgotten your history lessons taught by Mel Brooks:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HE7tTT8khf0

    2. Re:Proven technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a lot faster to use a stylus to make marks in clay. It doesn't become read only until you fire it.

    3. Re:Proven technology by gigoguy · · Score: 3, Funny

      My personal experience with tablet-based backup makes me say that the Amazon is a bad idea. I rented a helicopter and tried to store my data stones in the Amazon's clouds... Let me tell you, their cloud platform does not have the stability you are looking floor. 30 seconds after upload, I was left with fragmented, unrecoverable data.

  23. svn by fermion · · Score: 1

    I use SVN with my Latex and oo.org files. The only, well known, issue with SVN is iWorks, which may or may not be an issue for this situation. I am told git is functional. I am thinking of migrating to git just because of the local overhead.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    1. Re:svn by Dynedain · · Score: 1

      I second this. It sounds like the poster wants to synchronize his programming projects. In which case, SVN or CVS plus the IDE of his choice is a hands-down winner (and it gets him thinking about version control).

      Then you just need a cross-platform IDE (like Eclipse)

      Now if what the OP wants is to synchronize his user profile, then the best idea is dump everything on a removable drive or a network share that all his machines can access.

      --
      I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
    2. Re:svn by Simon80 · · Score: 1

      I already use git to manage any files in my home directory that I want to follow me to different machines, as well as to synchronize source code between machines. The OP is highly encouraged to do it this way, you can do the synchronizing over ssh or rsync. Anyone considering cvs or svn for the same thing should use git instead, otherwise they will be stuck syncing from each machine to their cvs/svn server, and not between machines arbitrarily.

    3. Re:svn by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Will git handle files on the Mac? I mean things like "resource forks" and the like. When I last looked into it, they were discarded - which limited what you could use it for. I ended up using Unison, even though it lacks version control. I still use Unison, though now far less as I keep my active work in Dropbox.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  24. XtreemFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was meant for XtreemOS, but works as a standard fuse filesystem.

    Just released version 1.1 a few days ago (read it on LWN and tried their public demo server - worked nicely).

    1. Re:XtreemFS by BrentH · · Score: 1

      Could you elaborate on this? The website doesnt tell me much.

  25. Unison on Cygwin by LikwidCirkel · · Score: 1

    I've been using unison for many years and it works just fine and should be as secure as ssh. It's even smart enough to warn on errors caused by things like synchronizing between case sensitive/insensitive filesystems and illegal characters. Combined with dynDNS for the home computer, and I'm all set anywhere.

  26. SpiderOak by DesertBlade · · Score: 2, Informative

    Been using it for awhile, works great windows, Linux and Mac. Also you don't have to place files in the dropbox folder, you can choose what folders to sync and backup. The also have zero knowledge of your files, which I find reassuring.

    --
    Half of writing history is hiding the truth.
    1. Re:SpiderOak by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You, sir, are a god. I've been using Dropbox, but the zero-access encryption is a killer feature in my opinion. Cheers!

    2. Re:SpiderOak by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah works well. Much better sync and backup options that DropBox. You don't have to create one special folder and put everything in it you can just choose which folder you want to backup on each computer and create syncs between any two or more folders on two or more computers... Very nice.

    3. Re:SpiderOak by Unequivocal · · Score: 1

      I've been using it too. It has some great features. My experience is that it's a little buggy. For example, it doesn't always catch new folders that have been created, so I've found myself unable to remotely access a file b/c the new folder was not caught by the service (and so none of the files were backed up). Second complaint is that restorations are slow-ish sometimes (10 min for a 300k file). Sometimes the restorations are fast and I can't tell if it's the specific file (due to fragmentation in the cloud or something) is slow or if it's their server utilization. Finally I can't ever get the folder sync to work - it always errors out with a weird message.

      Do you have any of these problems?

      Overall I like the product but I think it has to mature.. Your input would be great!

  27. JungleDisk 3.0 Has Sync features by dreamnid · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure if you knew, but JungleDisk just released version 3 of their software which lets you sync any folder in your computer. This is better than DropBox in that the synced folders can be located anywhere. I'm not sure how this works with the backed up files though, but I would imagine that synced files are also part of the backup vault.

    Of course, this still requires you to upload the files Amazon or RackSpace. Just want to make sure that you are aware that you don't have to use DropBox if you're already using Jungle Disk :)

    1. Re:JungleDisk 3.0 Has Sync features by drumcat · · Score: 1

      Ditto. Found this today, and it's a HUGE help. Sync was the only thing missing. JD3 FTW!

  28. Dropbox, Unison by kjeldahl · · Score: 1

    If you're looking for a commercial hosted solution with limited storage, Dropbox is probably the best product there is right now. Unison also syncs great both ways against a central "master" copy (if you delete a file from _one_ child copy, it will get deleted from the master and other children as well), although I have no personal experience with Unison on Windows. It also doesn't come with a fancy UI AFAIK.

  29. Unison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I once saw Unison advertised as a generic cross-platform user-friendly system on top of rsync.

    Dunno if it works in real life or even if it was completely finished as Google SoC project. Perhaps someone else here has tried it?

  30. Click on me! https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTI by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 1

    No no, clearly you need to click on MY link.

    https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTI0MDY5MDU5

    Not only will you and I both get an extra 250MB of space, but you will help me keep more precious photos of my children in the cloud, for FREE!

    I currently run Dropbox on 3 computers-- One Ubuntu Server, one Windows Desktop and one Windows Laptop. It's nice to have the same set of files everywhere. Not only is it convenient to have the same set of files on all 3 machines, but I like the redundancy offered by the distributed storage-- It's on 3 drives here and is also hosted in the cloud.

    I can take the laptop with me to show the family photos & videos to my folks. But the files are still kept safe at home and at dropbox.com.

    I might also install it on another machine outside of the San Francisco quake zone, to offer one more point of redundancy.

    --
    "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
  31. Wuala by etu · · Score: 1

    I use Wuala to keep files identically in Windows and Linux. Likely works with Mac as well. I find it quite cool.

  32. Backuppc and a server you own by AtomicDevice · · Score: 1

    First off I'd dump the cloud business, get a cheap little box and put a huge hard disk in it. It's cheap, super secure, nobody else owns/controls your data.

    Then I set me up a backuppc server, it's super easy to set up (on ubuntu at least) then have all your machines regularly backing themselves up.

    Backuppc has a very excellent web interface allowing you to request full or incremental backups at any time, and an awesome interface to allow you to push (restore) files to any of the systems you are backing up (i.e. files backed up from system A can be restored to system B).

    at the end of each workday you do an incremental backup of your work machine, and push whatever files you need to sync back onto your other machines and vice versa. It's easy to schedule and script, and easy to use the web interface to do unscheduled backups/restores/browse and download backed up files

    --
    Ze Atomic Device! It iz Ztolen!
  33. too fragile by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

    and external media like USB sticks are a bit too fragile according to my taste. ... So what would you recommend?"

    I would recommend that if you consider USB flash devices too "fragile" then you likely don't have enough good backups. There might be other reasons for not using a flash drive, and there might be other ways to address your need, but if you are concerned that USB drives are too fragile then I suspect that you are setting yourself up for disaster when something other than flash drive failure compromises your data.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    1. Re:too fragile by GasparGMSwordsman · · Score: 1

      Fragile is not about loosing data, it is about loosing immediate access to data. USB drives are less resilient compared to most types of data storage.

      If you are in the field and get wet then chances are, your USB drive is toast. Dust, heat or simply dropping, stepping on or loosing them because they are so small are all very common ways for them to become inoperable.

      A friend of mine is in the army and stationed in Iraq. The first time he went over there he took with him one of those "survive anything" laptops. At one point he told me about the laptop falling out of the vehicle he was in. He had to take the cover off and pour about a cup of sand out of the case. It still booted up and had all of his data after this. That would be something I would consider not fragile...

  34. Super Flexible File Syncronizer or Unison by mal0rd · · Score: 1

    Use unison (free) or Super Flexible File Synchronizer (better). Keeping several hosts synchronized is tough because of conflicting changes, temporary files, large stuff you don't want to transfer and moving files. You need a good UI and smart change tracking, which is what these programs provide.

  35. iFolder (Novel^WKablink?!) by mverwijs · · Score: 1

    I was gonna say: "Why, oh dear Novel, why did you abandon iFolder?!", but it appears it has been granted a third life:

    http://ifolder.com/ifolder

    1. Re:iFolder (Novel^WKablink?!) by LinuxDon · · Score: 1

      Novell has never abandoned iFolder, it's part of the Open Workgoup Suite offering. http://www.novell.com/products/openenterpriseserver/ifolder.html We have been actively using it in our company for several years and I installed version 3.8 a few days ago as part of OES2 SP3. It's a great product, I can highly recommended. The Open Source version can be found here: http://ifolder.com/ifolder

    2. Re:iFolder (Novel^WKablink?!) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I will agree with using iFolder - we started using it about a year ago to do almost exactly what he wants to do and it works well... on windows, mac and linux...

  36. Or dont' throw money by goombah99 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I;m a little confused if you are syncronizing, mirroring or backing up data. the title says synch, but time machine and jungle disk are more for backup, and at most can be used for mirroring a master rather than synching.

    If you want to backup, take a look at Crashplan. It's got two unique features the other plans lack. 1) you can backup to your own physical media, not theirs. This solves the problem of how do you backup and restore say 200GB of data in less than a month to a remote service. if the disk is yours you do the initial backup locally, them move the disk to the remote location for incremental backups. And then you do the reverse when you need to do more than in incremental restore. 2) they will sell you just the software-- a one time cost-- and you don't have to pay for a monthly remote service cost unless you want to. in which case you just backup to a freinds computer that is hosting your disk. Your data is both safe and remote (and encypted) but you can also go get the drive is if you need it using your toyota rather than the internet.

    On the other hand if you want syncronization then look into Unison. It appears the source forge project is not highly maintained but also mature enough to work well. it is cross platform and scriptable.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Or dont' throw money by evilad · · Score: 2, Informative

      Seconded. I use Unison between Linux and OSX with no trouble, and used Win32 in the past as well. It isn't perfect, but it's closest by a wide margin.

    2. Re:Or dont' throw money by tyroneking · · Score: 3, Informative

      Unison is quite stable and I use it daily to sync between Linux PCs over a network and Windows PCs via a USB key - add some flags to allow it make some decisions automatically and 99% of the time it works silently - add a cron/WindSchedule to it and it works a bit like Dropbox.

    3. Re:Or dont' throw money by chundo · · Score: 1

      CrashPlan is pretty great, but the Linux client was too much of a resource hog when I used it. Whether that's bad programming or that fact that it's a Java service, I don't know.

  37. Too Fragile? by b0bby · · Score: 1

    If USB sticks seem too fragile for you, you could try an SD card in a USB adapter - slightly larger, but easy to swap the SD card out if the USB connector gets broken. Decent SD cards should last a long time for just moving data around.

  38. Dropbox by PhunkySchtuff · · Score: 2, Informative

    https://www.dropbox.com/

    "Free for Windows, Mac, and Linux"

    Creates a folder that is kept in sync between different computers. You can share files with other dropbox users too via shared folders. 2GB or so of space is free. It also keeps multiple versions of files so you can go back to a previous version of a file if you need to.

    I don't have any affiliation with the company, other than being a satisfied user.

  39. Mercurial or Git FTW by Clith · · Score: 1
    Use one of the many peer-to-peer file control systems like hg, git or even fossil. It's the obvious way to do it:
    • no central server
    • secure
    • backed up
    --
    [ReidNews]
  40. Bacula? by gblfxt · · Score: 1

    Set up the linux as a bacula server and put clients on the other systems, maybe a bit overdoing it, but youll have a database of sync data as well!

  41. You don't need a computer... by sbeckstead · · Score: 1

    Dude you don't need a computer, you need a typewriter. Only thing as safe as you want. Or you could try DropBox.com and use encryption.

  42. Answers his own question. by Rantastic · · Score: 4, Informative

    I use a local svn repository for my work data. Now I need to frequently exchange and synchronize OpenOffice and Latex files and source code in various cross-platform programming languages between one machine and another.

    Am I missing something here? What doesn't SVN do that you need? Clients exist for all named platforms and it handles OO, Latex, and source code files very well.

    --
    Ask Slashdot: Where bad ideas meet poor googling skills.
    1. Re:Answers his own question. by mr_da3m0n · · Score: 1

      I second this. At first I tried using a sync solution in .net/mono made by Novell, the name escapes me at the moment. It was dodgy at best. Then I tried using unison.

      Then I realized I had a subversion repository, and just shoved all of my work documents in it. No huge binary files aside from the occasional giant word document and PDF. It works fairly well and handles all my needs.

      Were I do to it again from scratch, i'd probably use Bazaar or git. The ability to push and pull my local repos everywhere it is needed would be useful, but right now I don't mind syncing with a centralized master. I have had very little conflicts over the years, except when I did stupid things like do my Quickbooks invoices in a rush on random machines. Changes were difficult to reconcile, but that would have been a problem no matter what solution I would have used.

    2. Re:Answers his own question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have been a longtime SVN fan. However, I'm liking git these days... and have only been using it for about 4 hours.

      Advantage: `git commit` commits to your local checkout. You then "push" your local repository to a centralized repository to effectively do what svn commit does in 1 step. This two-step commit has the advantage that you can make commits to your repository without having net access... and when you do get net access, you push i.e. commit to the central repository. More useful is that when I'm developing a change-set, I can commit many disparate changes all over the project (in this case, my entire home directory) and then push specific directories and files of related changes.

  43. Dropbox. by exploder · · Score: 1

    You didn't google this even a little, did you?

    --
    Yo dawg, I heard you like the Ackermann function, so OH GOD OH GOD OH GOD
  44. Dropbox! by Movi · · Score: 1

    Looks like a job for Dropbox, money-throwing included. Word is they're also working on LAN sync, so no need for the data to go to the server and back.

  45. Never used it but... by belloc1 · · Score: 1

    http://www.powerfolder.com/

    Might be worth a look?

  46. ZFS + NFS/SMB + SCM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) setup your own server, small CPU plenty of harddrives

    2) Install (Open)Solaris or another ZFS capable OS. 1 small HD for OS, and the rest for RaidZ (or RaidZ2). ZFS self-healing will catch many silent errors

    3) Create a work folder and export it as NFS /SMB as needed

    4) Create a Subversion or similar repositotry on the server

    Under normal work conditions you work directly on the NFS/whatever share and then commit to SVN at the end of the day.If you need data offline, then checkout from SVN or rsync before you go offline.

  47. Windows Domains! by Gyorg_Lavode · · Score: 1

    I can tell you what I do. I have a Windows 2008 SBS that runs a domain. You should be able to join ubuntu, mac os x, and windows (assuming pro) to it. I also have a single internal file server. You can map directories off of it to mount as home directories using NFS and you can map the Windows 2008 SBS data stores to the file server as well. I'd also enable samba on the file server so you can simply mount the shares when needed. When you need to access them outside of your network, I'd set up the VPN capabilities of your external router. Then you can either VPN in to access or you can go through the SBS website to access. (Of course a static IP and domain help with this.)

    --
    I do security
    1. Re:Windows Domains! by Malc · · Score: 1

      Not very cost effective for a home user, considering the cost of a Win 2008 or MSDN license. I could buy a reasonable NAS for that price.

  48. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.buffalotech.com/products/network-storage/linkstation/linkstation-quad/
    Buffalo makes an incredible network storage device. Its tiny, you can hide it in your house incase someone steals your computers, it also has all of the following (copied from the webpage above). Money well spent. (I love the print server feature):
      Simplified File Sharing on Your Home or Small Office Network
      Easy Setup Does Not Require Drivers
      BitTorrent client for all of your file sharing needs
      Seamlessly Integrates with iTunes® and Allows you to Access your Music Files on the LinkStation from Your iTunes Software
      Access all your files via any Web browser from Anywhere
      Built-in DLNA CERTIFIED server for easy playback of multimedia files to any DLNA CERTIFIED device
      Protect Data by Restricting Access With Group and User Level Security
      Built-in Print Server to Print Files from Anywhere on your Network. Multi-function printers not supported. Works in Windows only.
      Direct Copy Feature Allows you to Quickly and Easily Transfer Photos from a Digital Camera Directly to a LinkStation
      Expand Storage by Adding a USB Hard Drive
      Scheduled Backup via USB 2.0 to External Storage
      Support for Time Machine Functionality
      Memeo AutoBackup Software for PCs and Macs Included
      RAID 0 (Striping), RAID 1 (Mirroring), RAID 5 (Parity) and RAID 10 (Striped Mirrors)

  49. ExpanDrive + SSH, ftw by gravyface · · Score: 1

    Does JungleDisk provide SSH access to your data? ExpanDrive easily mounts S/FTP, SSH, etc. in Windows (as a mapped drive) and Mac (as a mount point in Finder).

    --
    body massage!
  50. iFolder!! by LDAPMAN · · Score: 1

    It's open source and cross platform. Works great!! http://www.ifolder.com/ifolder

  51. Traditional backup not always possible by Temujin_12 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    On a somewhat related note, my wife recently gave up on backing up to a different medium all together and now just builds backup into her work flow. She is a photographer and takes 50,000+ digital photos a year (in raw TIFF format). Each file is ~70MB so she requires several terabytes of storage. Loosing these images is unacceptable (ie: would result in a financial loss) and ripping to DVD for backup is simply impossible (would require a full time job in and of itself).

    So she builds backup into her work flow such that at any one point in time she has at least one copy of the image spread across multiple drives. In the work flow, photos go from raw TIFF -> PSD pre-proccess -> PSD final -> JPEG for online viewing and she uses different drives for each stage in the process. That way, if a drive goes out, she only looses time, not data. For data retention requirements (~2-3 years), she just has ~10 TB of storage and rotates files from older jobs out onto other drives (spreading across 3 - drives as per the work flow).

    Of course if something catastrophic were to happen to cause all of the drives to die (since they are all in the same location) then files would be lost, but that's what insurance is for.

    --
    Faith is a willingness to accept something w/o complete proof and to act on it. Reason allows you to correct that faith.
    1. Re:Traditional backup not always possible by gaspyy · · Score: 1

      I am in a somewhat similar situation - not 50,000 files per year but around 50,000 in total.
      My solution:
      - DNG for archival - at around 12Mb much smaller than uncompressed TIFFs anyway and you get the benefit that advancements in demosaicing and optical corrections or noise reduction means that you can process the file again and get better quality out of it
      - JPG2000 for finals - even at 2-4 Mb they are undistinguishable from originals (I tested), suport 16bit channels, etc.
      (I admit I don't usually keep intermediary PSD files unless it's really complex work with lots of layers).

      I keep the DNGs tagged and indexed on a hard drive rsync-ed to another one and I backup new files to DVDs once a month. Every year I test the DVDs and if one has the slightest issue, I create a new copy.

    2. Re:Traditional backup not always possible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course if something catastrophic were to happen to cause all of the drives to die (since they are all in the same location) then files would be lost, but that's what insurance is for.

      Read the fineprint in you insurance policy. Most compensation for loss/theft/fire/etc clearly exclude loss of data. They will only replace the 10Terabytes of hardware and with the cheapest they can find, but I am sure you will have given up caring by the time you find this out.

  52. iFolder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    its OSS, multi platform and can be encrypted:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IFolder

  53. got bandwidth? by mirix · · Score: 1

    SSHFS But if you just need sync, I fail to see why SVN doesn't cut it for you...

    --
    Sent from my PDP-11
    1. Re:got bandwidth? by corychristison · · Score: 1

      I use SSHFS to interact with a VPS web server I rent from the states.

      The problem is that large files bog your system down to nothing. I tried transferring a 1.2GiB file (via command line) and it essentially made my computer unusable until it was done. Luckily I do sleep sometimes so I stopped and started it before I went to bed and let it do it's thing and it worked fine.

      I think my upload speed was mostly to blame, but I think it had something to do with the FUSE wrapper that slowed down everything and not just the internet connection. Perhaps it was a bug and has been fixed in recent versions? This was over a year ago.

      Otherwise it's great and it's directly integrated with my OS and "just works" for me and my use. Generally I deal with files under 1MiB, that 1.2GiB file was a tarball of all of the files to roll out on the new server when I switched from hosting my own in my home.

  54. AFS space? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Set up your own AFS cell. There are clients for all the above, and you could resell it to other slashdot readers to lower the costs.

  55. Need Version Control and Backups - rdiff-backup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For version control, use whatever you like, but place it on the same system from which remote, off-site backups will be run. Git and BZR are recommended repositories.

    For backups, use rdiff-backup to a central, local server area. If your clients are NOT RAID-something, this area should be.

    For remote backups, just rsync the rdiff-backup areas where ever you normally store off-site backups. If you want them encrypted, do that too.

    Make certain this stuff all happens automatically. Manual backups fail too often for lack of running them.

    1. Re:Need Version Control and Backups - rdiff-backup by Lennie · · Score: 1

      Duplicity does encryption/librsync. Duplicaty for windows. Very similair (but not compatible !)

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
  56. Portable Hard Drive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm starting to see some pretty good portable (note portable, not just external, fits in your pocket) hard drives for carrying data around such as this one http://www.wdc.com/en/products/Products.asp?DriveID=701

    If you don't want to rely on having to carry around this hard drive with you all the time, you can use Dirsyncpro (FOSS, all platforms) http://directorysync.sourceforge.net/index.html and install it on all your PCs and just sync said hard drive with each one on occasion.

    If you want all the data in sync all the time without requiring you have the hard drive with you, you could probably make a network drive at home that you can access from anywhere by entering your ip address and password in somewhere, or use vnc to access the files on on your other computers.

    I'm currently looking at doing something like this myself since I have 2 windows PCs and a Laptop with Ubuntu that I want to keep in sync but want to be in complete control of everything myself. I don't want to be stuck relying on anything/one but myself and no monthly fees/data limits outside of my 100GB/monthly bandwidth.

  57. You Might Try SpiderOak by uninet · · Score: 1

    I've tried Dropbox and SpiderOak. I think I've settled on SpiderOak for now, since it is cheaper per MB and offers really nice, granular controls. For example, I can sync specific sets of data between different computers and backup some computers without syncing them to others at all (unlike Dropbox which syncs everything to everyone). Like Dropbox, you get 2GB free with no purchase necessary and the client automatically encrypts data in such a way that allegedly the company cannot decrypt it without you providing them with your password. It also counts your quota against the size of your data once it has been "deduplicated" rather than before (Dropbox does it before).

    As an added bonus, while the client takes more resources when sending data (since it encrypts it on the client side), it idles much lower -- virtually at 0% processor usage -- than Dropbox, I found.

    Of course, giving a referral link is mandatory, right? This link provides both you and me with an extra gig of free space. :-)

    --
    -------------
    "You would not get a high grade for such a design" -- Andy Tanenbaum on Linus' Linux design.
    1. Re:You Might Try SpiderOak by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      It also counts your quota against the size of your data once it has been "deduplicated" rather than before (Dropbox does it before).

      I think this has a downside, though. SpiderOak includes your version history against your quota and Dropbox does not IIRC.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  58. ZFer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use ZFer. http://zfer.net
    I got invited to the beta and it's very easy to use.

  59. Did no one read the fine summary? by Sancho · · Score: 1

    I don't want to give my data away to some server outside without strong encryption

    Man, no one reads anymore!

    Depending upon how much work and money you're willing to expend, you might check out Tarsnap. It's not going to have a pretty GUI or anything, and you'll need Cygwin to get it running on Windows, but it's got pretty much everything you want.

    It's snapshotting, so you only transfer small changes.
    It encrypts (and it does so on the client, before sending it to the server) and the source code to the client is available for review. Unfortunately, the terms of use for the Tarsnap server do not allow modifications to the client. I'm not sure if this counts for your open source requirement.
    The back-end is Amazon S3, much like Jungle Disk (though unfortunately, you wouldn't be able to continue using Jungle Disk to access this data, as you hoped.)

    The biggest problem I have with it is that it doesn't do true syncing. There's nothing stopping you from writing a few scripts to effectively get syncing. I could envision storing/backing up your subversion repository with Tarsnap and downloading the last snapshot any time you need to start working on a new machine.

    There's really not much else that suitable without running your own server somewhere.

    1. Re:Did no one read the fine summary? by cperciva · · Score: 1

      Tarsnap is really designed as a backup service rather than a synchronization service: While it is very good at recognizing duplicate data and only uploading new blocks when you create an archive, it has no such mechanism for making archive extraction more efficient -- I wrote it with the presumption that people would only be extracting archives after losing data. That said, I think I can see a way to implement "tarsnap -x --sync" efficiently.

      But for right now, as much as I'd love to get more customers, I don't think Tarsnap really matches the submitter's requirements.

    2. Re:Did no one read the fine summary? by Sancho · · Score: 1

      Fair enough. Thanks for the great product, regardless!

  60. hard drives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    there is something called external hard drives that allow you to transport the data anywhere just plug it in and go

  61. Trouble is, almost nobody uses WebDAV. by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 1

    Trouble is, almost nobody uses WebDAV.

    It seems like WebDAV would be a natural for this sort of thing-- Robust HTTP protocol, security over SSL, delta compression using Deltav, easy to set up with well known webservers like Apache HTTP, supported by Windows, MacOSX and Linux (Looks like a local folder, but it's on the network), etc.

    But there are very few products that use WebDAV, and the idea has been around since the late 90s.

    I can't tell why. Maybe something is horribly wrong with the WebDAV specification. I've tried a few implementations, but they seem immature and slow.

    --
    "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
  62. Re:Unison UTF8 problem by formfeed · · Score: 3, Informative
    I second Unison. A "tiny" problem if you're using Unison: It can mess up filenames that have non-ASCII characters.

    That problem is mentioned all over the net, what's not mentioned is that the problem stems from transfers across different OSs.

    A suggestion that might be a work-around : Sync Windows to a smb share, and use unison locally on that directory.

    I am not using windows, so I'm fine. But, I also can't guarantee that my suggestion works.

  63. Truecrypt is fine in these conditions. by jvonk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    No, since Dropbox only transmit the parts of a file that changed.

    The way most encryption works, if you change a piece of the plaintext file, you get a wildly different ciphertext file.[...]I don't know if this is the case with Truecrypt's volumes, but I bet that it is.

    I have done what was described: rsyncing a TrueCrypt volume file that changes over time. Yes, there is an "expansion factor", but I would peg it at 2 - 5x the size of the diff within the encrypted volume. To restate: this scheme is entirely tenable with TrueCrypt volumes and rsync. A good binary diff capability is required, but that is the raison d'etre of rsync. I have never used Dropbox, so I have no idea how their deltas work for binary files.

    I was originally of the same opinion as you. I anticipated some sort of avalanche effect from small changes in the ciphertext. However, this isn't the case for several reasons -- first, you can read about TrueCrypt's crypto modes of operation and how the blocks work. Second, you can reason that TrueCrypt would be completely unusable if writing a single byte near the beginning of an encrypted hard drive/volume caused a chain reaction that would require the entire partition to be re-encrypted due to cipher block chaining cascading to the whole drive.

    I don't claim to be a cryptography expert (perhaps someone can further enlighten me), but it seems that CBC would break down in a disk encryption scheme if there weren't a new IV rather frequently (for the same reason as I mentioned above). Of course, TrueCrypt uses XTS mode, so it seems that I am just idly musing at this point and should click Submit.

  64. But this assumes you are online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What if you need a local copy for those times you don't have connectivity or just poor bandwidth.

  65. AFS All the way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I do this now with AFS... works great. with a little effort, you can even get it working with portable home directories on the Mac, and Roming profiles on windows.

  66. My solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I built a file server.

    Linux based with a drive backplane, 4 large drives configured with software RAID 5. Shared out via NFS and Samba. I setup port forwarding so I could get to it via ssh/ftp when not at home if I forgot a file.

    Worked well enough to share between me and my (now ex) girlfriend.

  67. iFolder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps iFolder can help...

    http://www.ifolder.com/ifolder

  68. nfs & git by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    git for small files. nfs for large ones.

  69. CrashPlan? by Kryten107 · · Score: 1

    I was researching this earlier today and found something called CrashPlan, but admittedly I haven't had time to read about it yet. Could be useful? Supports Win/OSX/Linux. http://www9.crashplan.com/landing/index.html

  70. The easiest answer... by itlurksbeneath · · Score: 1

    You already have JungleDisk. JungleDisk 3.0 just came out in the last couple of days and has the capability of synchronizing arbitrary folders between computers. Upgrade is free if you already have JD. (FYI - not a JungleDisk or Amazon employee, just a happy JungleDisk user of close to 2 years).

    --
    Have you ever considered piracy? You'd make a wonderful Dread Pirate Roberts.
  71. Yup Unison by meist3r · · Score: 1

    I think that's why it's called that right? I use it to sync folders and documents between my desktop and laptop to keep browser, email, rss feeds and other things up to what I've done on the desktop when I'm on the go. The SSH implementation works great, UI could be better (at least under Linux from what I can tell) but it works and didn't do anything stupid so far. Can't say anything about the Windows or OS X implementation but I'd think it works equally well.

  72. what I do by tverbeek · · Score: 1

    I use a similar mix of OSes and devices. I don't have a serious strategy for keeping files in synch between them, but what I do works pretty well. First, I have a Linux box running Samba which is the official "home" for all data; OS X, Windows, and Linux can all access this anywhere around the house. For stuff I'm working on that I know I'll want to access away from home, I use my MobileMe account; OS X knows how to use the iDisk natively, and there's a utility to map a Windows drive letter to it (but without background synching, damnit). (A Linux laptop should be able to access the iDisk through WebDAV, but I haven't had a reason to try that.) For files I didn't know I'd want on the road, there's always SFTP back to the Linux server. I manually copy files from the iDisk to the server every few days... like I said, it's mostly for active projects. For semi-remote backup, the server "cp -dupR"s files nightly to a wifi-connected little Linux box with a big disk, tucked away in the basement, and the Macs use my Time Capsule, mostly for their software (the Aperture and iTunes libraries are on the file server).

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  73. Re:Click on me! https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/ by Shikaku · · Score: 1

    I want free space too! Click my link in my sig :(

  74. DropBox by SlightOverdose · · Score: 1

    I use DropBox for this between work and home, and it's fantastic.

    That said, I don't believe it supports encryption (But it's a commonly requested feature, and they are generally quick to respond to demand so it's probably in the works).

    My plan B would be an rsync server sitting in a colo somewhere. I'm sure you could find automated dropbox style clients that would work with it.

  75. Zotero! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After proving to be very capable of synchronizing references (w/ PDF files), I've found Zotero (http://www.zotero.org) quite handy in synchronizing my other documents as well. Coupled with one's own webdav server, it comes very close to my idea of least-effort backup.

  76. Folder Redirection onto Mac SMB Share by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Folder Redirection on Windows XP (definitely on Pro - not sure about Home) works incredibly well with SMB shares. Consider exporting a share from your Mac - it and Windows can work offline any time, and when they can connect sync will be fast and automatic. No new software to install or buy.

    Then set up sync between Ubuntu and Mac - multiple options, including rsync and Unison.

  77. spideroak by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use spideroak http://www.spideroak.com . Bascilly Dropbox, but with the added "we don't know your data" thing. They tell you that once you loose your password, your data is gone. While it's not (yet) open source and maybe won't be ever, they at least seem to try to keep your data secure. And storing it in the cloud is just soo much more convinient!

  78. Jungle Disk now has Sync in version 3.0 by crt · · Score: 1

    You're in luck! Jungle Disk 3.0 was released this week, with Sync support (for Windows, Mac, and Linux).

    http://blog.jungledisk.com/2009/11/17/jungle-disk-launches-an-all-new-product-lineup/

    Since you're already a Jungle Disk customer, the upgrade is free. Jungle Disk 3.0 also has a new backup engine that does block-level de-duplication and compression, making it by far the most efficient method for doing online backup.

  79. Re:Rsync?nike jordan shoes,coach,gucci,ed hardy by blazemonkey · · Score: 0

    Man, these fuckers are tossing up shitty clothing adds all over the intarwebs, what gives?

  80. Synching between operating systems by cwarner7_11 · · Score: 1

    Actually, I have been synching data between operating systems (Linux and Windows only, I haven't had a call to do this with OsX yet). I use my old Palm E2 with Palm OS5, hot synch with each computer in turn. Documents, spreadsheets, calendar, phone book, expenses, etc. I don't even have to think about where I last worked on a particular file- HotSync takes care of that. It is a shame newer technology can not accomplish the same tasks that were trivial a couple of years ago...

  81. Use Bazaar and make your own dropbox by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    In about 10 minutes you can set up a Bazaar repository on a hub machine and commit your files to it. I've been using mine now for about 8 months and it works great. Just do the following every time you start work:
    $ bzr update

    And then when you are done:
    $ bzr add .
    $ bzr commit -m "bulk commit"

    ..or something like that. You can do it from all your machines. Be sure to use a LIGHTWEIGHT CHECKOUT or the local repository will double your folder size.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    1. Re:Use Bazaar and make your own dropbox by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      P.S. Really, any version control system will do with the added benefit of tracking all versions of all files. I tried this with Subversion as well and it worked ok but I couldn't figure out how to prevent another copy of the files in the local repository. I was overjoyed when I found Bazaar with the lightweight option. I once even set up some hook scripts with WebShare and in about an hour I had a complete replacement for dropbox. I didn't use that part though so I haven't kept it up.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  82. JFileSync by __aasmho4525 · · Score: 1

    One i've not seen anyone mention yet is JFileSync.

    Yes yes, we all know that java is anathema around here, but this is an exceptional tool to have in the toolchest...

  83. Build a freenas server by okmijnuhb · · Score: 1

    freenas.org
    Seems to do everything a synology server does.

  84. I am using Novell iFolder by sam0737 · · Score: 1

    (http://www.ifolder.com/ifolder)
    to sync "My Documents" between my Win7 and Linux box.

    The client is a open source .NET client that could run on MS .NET Framework and Mono. Supporting Windows, Mac, Linux.

    It is a client + server arch. The server holds all the data. I setup my Linux box to be the server.
    It works by detecting the changes and send the differences to the server when you are online. Conflict are resolved manually, through the client app.

    You could create different repository, say me Workplace desktop has the Work folder sync, and my laptop has both Work and Home folder in sync. While I also has an Archive folder which keeps all the unused junk, not synced to any machine, but available through the web interface included with the server package.

    Then of course, the data on server are regularly backup. I have another very old P4 which is woke every 2am, using Dirvish to rsync the data.

  85. Why do you need to backup the gaming box? by ajlisows · · Score: 1

    I know this isn't particularily helpful, but if your Windows XP machine is just a gaming box, why do you need to back it up or have it share data with the other boxes? If you are worried about the drive crashing and having to reload windows and all of your games why not just toss an external hard drive on it, take an image, and put it away until your drive crashes. You are taking one OS out of the equation that way.

  86. FreeFileSync by theblondebrunette · · Score: 1

    I cannot believe nobody mentioned FreeFileSync yet (http://sourceforge.net/projects/freefilesync/).
    It's a portable-app, and you can create batch jobs..

  87. Because DVCS'es... by warrax_666 · · Score: 1

    usually don't handle large files all that well, plus you often need to manually say "start tracking file X" rather than having it happen automatically -- usually you want "track everything in folders X,Y,Z". Essentially DVCS'es are too complex for this task and rsync is too simplistic. Unison is "about right" (though it does have some shortcomings.)

    However, if you're talking synchronising only stuff like shell scripts (like profile scripts, little self-made utilities, etc.) then I'd prefer a DVCS too for the reasons you've already stated.

    --
    HAND.
    1. Re:Because DVCS'es... by jhol13 · · Score: 1

      I agree large files may pose a problem, especially if one of the machines is "memory limited".

      Adding files is very much automatic (GUI frontends handle that, e.g. qct or tortoisehq for Mercurial).

      My point was, if s/he is already using SVN, then Mercurial (or Git, or ...) would be a drop in replacement which more than solves all problems BETTER than Unison and SVN combined.

  88. that's totally unrelated by jipn4 · · Score: 1

    ZFS isn't a synchronization solution, it's just a file system.

  89. eyeos by mahadiga · · Score: 1

    Run eyeos in your server.

    --
    I'd like to buy homeland for our 10 million people. http://twitter.com/mahadiga
  90. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  91. iFolder from Novell or Teamdrive.net by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been playing with this problem for a long time. You could try iFolder (http://www.kablink.org/). It's free, you can run your own server, and everything is encrypted during transport and on the server.

    Teamdrive (http://www.teamdrive.net/) is also worth a look. They have linux, mac, and windows clients and you can run your own server (webDAV) or buy their server software an run it yourself - or they also offer hosting of your files. One if the cool things about teamdrive is that it has built in revision control.

  92. My solution... by bradley13 · · Score: 1

    I have much the same problem. Here is my solution:

    First: Unison is a good, cross-platform solution. There are two important things to be aware of with Unison: first, use a star-configuration. Something should be the master, and this master is then synchronized with each client. In my case, the master is a USB stick that I always have with me. The second thing is: set Unison to filter out unnecessary stuff. For example, configuration files that apply to specific platforms.

    I don't recommend it, but you can also use Unison to synchronize source code - if you do this, you will need to set more filters. For example, Eclipse stores lots and lots of files that you never want to see - and certainly don't want to synchronize.

    A much better solution is to put your source code in a subversion repository and synchronize the clients with this repository as necessary. So two parts: SVN (or CVS) for code, and Unison for everything else.

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
  93. Don't buy a fragile USB stick! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The reason USB sticks are so fragile is because people tend to prefer sticks which are more GB per dollar.

    If you want a sturdy USB stick you got to pay the money for it. There are good options for consumer-grade disks and dongles, in addition there are military-grade usb sticks (though I have no idea if it is possible to get them in the USA).

    1. Re:Don't buy a fragile USB stick! by Blue+Shifted · · Score: 1

      and stronger ports would be nice. is there such a thing as military grade usb ports?

  94. http://getdropbox.com/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have been using dropbox for past 8-10 months in a similar scenario and it has worked for me very well. I have a server machine at home on Debian etch, my workstation is on Ubuntu 8.04 and my laptop is on OSX with dual boot on Ubuntu 9.10
    With a single account i am able to sync files across all these machines. The beauty is once you have installed it, you don't have to do anything to sync. All of the sync occurs automatically moment you save the files. Disadvantage is, it has it's own folder that it syncs up on and you need to manually copy or mange the files within that folder. I ended up creating a lot of 'soft links' to handle this.

    Another advantage was I could share certain files/folders with my colleagues and and another set with my wife without any hassle.

  95. Those would be security risks. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    So maybe it is not a bug, but a feature.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:Those would be security risks. by barrkel · · Score: 1

      Software that's not fit for purpose certainly isn't a security risk, in so far as it is not used.

      It's the lack of configurability that's the problem. There are very necessary reasons for putting together a unified view of multiple file systems when using ZFS, as I explained in my other posts in this thread - ZFS encourages you to create tens or hundreds of filesystems with different options, as they are cheap and draw from a unified storage pool. But such configurability is rather pointless if you can't actually use it in practice.

  96. Yes, it is simple. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    But of course you need some computing literacy beyond knowing how to turn on your computer, but the original poster seems to fit that profile,

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  97. I use SVN+SSH by Qbertino · · Score: 1

    I use svn for that exact task. Runs everywhere, tools are abundant, CLI-handling is fast and easy. I only use TortoiseSVN on Windows because the Windows shell sucks big time. Do a regular backup of your repository and you've got that in the mix aswell.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  98. One multiboot machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Put all three operating systems on one computer and use a data partition shared among them. That is what I do.

  99. nas box running NFS by smash · · Score: 1
    All 3 OSes can hook up to NFS (windows using services for unix, built into 7 and vista as well i think. download for XP i believe).

    Your big problem will be file formats, but openoffice runs on all 3, and other data should be saved in cross-platform friendly formats.

    Just save it onto a NAS box that can run NFS, and work from NFS?

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  100. Tonido by boldie · · Score: 1

    Maybe Tonido? Your own p2p cloud! http://www.tonido.com/
    There are clients for Mac, Windows and Linux. There are your syncing solution. Backup the data should not be a problem. Maybe the TonidoPlug as a home server? Its a sheevaplug running Ubuntu with Tonido-software.
    http://www.tonidoplug.com/

  101. XP-dev by ksp · · Score: 1

    Strange nobody mentioned this service:
    http://www.xp-dev.com/

    Subversion repository, 200MB free (should be enough for a few personal files) and lots more if you pay.
    HTTPS support for SVN for paying customers.

    Lots of extra stuff (bug tracking, wiki etc) if you are a developer.

    No affilitation, just a happy customer!

    --
    What is the sound of one hand clapping?
    cat /dev/null > /dev/audio
  102. tarsnap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.tarsnap.com/ may prove helpful.

  103. Opera Unite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://unite.opera.com/application/472/
    For the server side and http://unite.opera.com/application/331/ for the client side, super simple. I don't know if there is any encryption (I don't care, I only use it for safe data) But even without, have anything you care about and encrypt it and then move it to the folder.

  104. Re: by andrea.sartori · · Score: 1

    I use Meld locally for backups, but for multiple machine syncing/backup I am considering trying Bacula. Anybody already uses it?

    --
    Mostly harmless.
  105. rsync can do that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AFAIK with rsync you basically have to say, "Sync folder A and folder B by assuming that folder A is the copy I want to keep, and changing only folder B." With Unison, on the other hand, you can say, "Sync folders A and B by keeping track of when files get modified, and keeping the most recent version of each file. If a file has been modified in both folders since my last sync, let me know and ask me what to do."

    Perhaps Unison makes this simpler - rsync has an "IT pro" CLI interface - but this is trivially achievable with rsync.

    Consult rsync --help and man rsync and apply a little thought, no big deal. Unless you're GUI-dependent of course.

  106. iFolder matches what you need by Degrees · · Score: 1

    The connections are SSL secured. It has clients for Windows, Linux, and Mac. You are going to need to set up your own server though.

    --
    "The most sensible request of government we make is not, "Do something!" But "Quit it!"
  107. OpenAFS by numbski · · Score: 1

    Sorry, helps to provide the site:

    http://www.openafs.org/

    --

    Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

  108. oh... by EgNagRah · · Score: 1

    Well thank you for this info, I do use bluehost for a business drupal install but didn't really think about it. I was trying to be funny mostly, because doing that wasn't something the OP wanted to do or deal with.

  109. I use a great backup service for synchronizing.. by gilgsn · · Score: 1

    Wrote a blog about it..: http://keskydee.com/wordpress/archives/625

    Gil.

    --
    PGP public key at: http://keskydee.com/gil.asc
  110. iFolder - FOSS DropBox from Novell by ClashTheBunny · · Score: 1

    This is an FOSS Dropbox that functions on Windows, OS X, and Linux. I have the server running on Ubuntu based off of http://www.x2b4.com/howto/how-to-install-ifolder-on-ubuntu-server/ and it works wonderfully. All of my files are synced immediately and it's open source and it's MY storage. No limitations, I pay for the bandwidth and electricity already, and now I get the benefit. Everything can be individually encrypted, if you want to offer the same service to family or friends. It's just a great solution. If you want to use Amazon, I'm sure you could just set it up to store the data on your Jungle Disk, or you can just switch to backing up your local data directory to your Jungle Disk.

  111. git scripts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i wrote some git scripts to synchronize my computers on my blog http://faltufund.wordpress.com

  112. NAS by DarthVain · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I looked into this problem myself, and it isn't pretty. I use a Windows box for everyday stuff, a Linux based server, and my Sister uses a Mac.

    Basically I had the idea that I wanted to share some Anime videos with my Sister who also enjoys the TV shows. Anyway originally my idea was to buy an external USB HD, copy the files and then give her the HD, this way she also gets a new external HD out of the deal. However when I looked into it, not as simple as I thought. While most external drives are compatible with Mac or PC, the emphasis is on "OR". Usually they are formatted differently and are not compatible with the other once formatted.

    The only other solutions I could find were to use a NAS (Networked Attached Storage), and this would work, because you would be using the network protocol to translate the data between OS, SMB I think it is called. Anyway at the time, they were very expensive and still are to a degree however they have come down in price more recently and I have seen solutions out there for 200-300$ range. Which is still more than I wanted to spend as an external HD only runs you about 100-200$.

    I settled for the getto version and just spent the time and burned like 10 8GB DVD-R's as it was easiest. However for a continual solution, this would not work. I would say your only choice is some sort of NAS with SMB. I am sure given the time and know how you could also build your own linux box to do the same thing, but for price it likely depends if you have an extra kicking around someplace. Either could likely be set up for remote FTP. I would recommend just buying a NAS, likely simpler that way.

  113. Two options for you by plazman30 · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you're willing to pay, you could use Dropbox. If you keep it under 2 GB, it's free. Anything you drag into your dropbox gets synced to their servers and then synced back down to your other PCs you have linked to your dropbox account.

    If you would prefer a roll your own solution, and are willing to build a server, then go look at Novell's iFolder http://www.ifolder.com./

    Andy

  114. local: vcs+Ironkey, online: jungledisk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For your local needings use a vcs (subversion http://subversion.tigris.org/ or a distributed vcs as mercurial http://mercurial.selenic.com/ or bazaar http://bazaar-vcs.org/en/) and store a copy of your repository on Ironkey S200 https://www.ironkey.com/compare-hardware, a multi-os (linux, win, mac) military-grade encrypted usb key with good size (up to 16gb) speed (Up to 27MB/s read and 24MB/s write) and SLC technology (100K write cycles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_memory#Write_Endurance).

    And continue to backup online with Jungledisk.