Yeah, I've been searching for a great general archiver for a long time. I tried borgbackup a couple of years ago and immediately hit a handful of issues that put me off, though I can't really recall the specific technical details clearly (I'm vaguely recollecting something about incompatible block sizes).
Whatever the details were, I came away with the distinct impression that the borgbackup developers didn't really respect the gravity of archived records and long-term storage. While that's probably not a totally fair conclusion from a one-shot use, in my defense, I'll offer up the latest version of their changelog [0], where:
* the first thing listed is an apparently serious data corruption bug that lived through several stable releases
* the second thing listed is an apparently-very-serious security vulnerability ("a flaw in the cryptographic authentication scheme used in Borg allowed an attacker to spoof the manifest ...")
* the third thing listed is another data corruption bug titled "Pre-1.0.9 data loss"
* the fourth thing listed is another data corruption bug titled "Pre-1.0.4 potential repo corruption"
Note these are all post-1.0 versions. To be frank, I dare not scroll further.
Users are depending on this software to safeguard important files with the assumption that it will be able to reproduce them bit-for-bit-intact some years down the road. Any long-term storage software requires developers with a fanatical devotion to compatibility, longevity, and integrity if it's ever going to be more than a toy.
I hate to pile on open-source devs who're trying their hand at making software that a lot of people appreciate, but overall, it's hard for me to say I regret the choice to pass it up and stick to combinations of ZFS, rsync, and the trusty old tarball.
[0] https://github.com/borgbackup/borg/commit/75dcf9356334188276...
Whatever the details were, I came away with the distinct impression that the borgbackup developers didn't really respect the gravity of archived records and long-term storage. While that's probably not a totally fair conclusion from a one-shot use, in my defense, I'll offer up the latest version of their changelog [0], where:
* the first thing listed is an apparently serious data corruption bug that lived through several stable releases
* the second thing listed is an apparently-very-serious security vulnerability ("a flaw in the cryptographic authentication scheme used in Borg allowed an attacker to spoof the manifest ...")
* the third thing listed is another data corruption bug titled "Pre-1.0.9 data loss"
* the fourth thing listed is another data corruption bug titled "Pre-1.0.4 potential repo corruption"
Note these are all post-1.0 versions. To be frank, I dare not scroll further.
Users are depending on this software to safeguard important files with the assumption that it will be able to reproduce them bit-for-bit-intact some years down the road. Any long-term storage software requires developers with a fanatical devotion to compatibility, longevity, and integrity if it's ever going to be more than a toy.
I hate to pile on open-source devs who're trying their hand at making software that a lot of people appreciate, but overall, it's hard for me to say I regret the choice to pass it up and stick to combinations of ZFS, rsync, and the trusty old tarball.
[0] https://github.com/borgbackup/borg/commit/75dcf9356334188276...