Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Synchronize Data Between Linux, OS X, and Windows?

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the please-be-more-specific dept.

Data Storage 305

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?"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Throw money at it... (1)

EgNagRah (1650283) | more than 4 years ago | (#30163904)

Bluehost.com | FTP it

Re:Throw money at it... (2, Funny)

omnichad (1198475) | more than 4 years ago | (#30163958)

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

Rsync (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164144)

End of discussion.

Re:Throw money at it... (1)

DJRumpy (1345787) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164720)

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.

Re:Throw money at it... (2, Interesting)

DesertBlade (741219) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164396)

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

Re:Throw money at it... (1)

Captain Splendid (673276) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164448)

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.

Or dont' throw money (4, Informative)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164614)

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.

Re:Or dont' throw money (2, Informative)

evilad (87480) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164952)

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.

Rsync? (5, Informative)

Misanthrope (49269) | more than 4 years ago | (#30163932)

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

Re:Rsync? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164080)

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? :/

Re:Rsync? (2, Informative)

godrik (1287354) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164170)

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)

Re:Rsync? (4, Insightful)

nweaver (113078) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164442)

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

Re:Rsync? (1)

Seakip18 (1106315) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164654)

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.

Unison (5, Informative)

samuraiz (1026486) | more than 4 years ago | (#30163944)

I like Unison [upenn.edu] for this sort of thing.

Re:Unison (4, Informative)

nine-times (778537) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164512)

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 [haifa.ac.il]

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

Re:Unison (1)

RichardJenkins (1362463) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164954)

Isn't that a distributed vcs?

Re:Unison (1)

liquidsunshine (1312821) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164526)

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.

Re:Unison (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164566)

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.

Re:Unison (4, Informative)

McPint (127046) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164576)

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.

Re:Unison (2, Insightful)

quercus.aeternam (1174283) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164580)

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.

Re:Unison (2, Informative)

samuraiz (1026486) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164832)

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.

Re:Unison (1)

richg74 (650636) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164588)

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

Re:Unison (1)

iCharles (242580) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164602)

this is what I would suggest, too!

dropbox? (4, Informative)

kperrier (115199) | more than 4 years ago | (#30163954)

www.dropbox.com

Re:dropbox? (2, Informative)

rinoid (451982) | more than 4 years ago | (#30163984)

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

Re:dropbox? (1)

fasuin (532942) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164052)

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.

Re:dropbox? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164058)

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

Re:dropbox? (1)

badpazzword (991691) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164606)

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.

Re:dropbox? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164098)

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

Re:dropbox? (1)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164930)

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.

Re:dropbox? (2, Interesting)

koick (770435) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164264)

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.

Re:dropbox? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164502)

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

Re:dropbox? (1)

moronoxyd (1000371) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164906)

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

Re:dropbox? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164590)

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.

Re:dropbox? (2, Insightful)

dc2447 (920780) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164690)

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.

Re:dropbox? (1)

EsJay (879629) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164844)

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.

Re:dropbox? (1)

teg (97890) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164932)

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.

Re:dropbox? (2, Insightful)

nametaken (610866) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164724)

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.

aaaaaaargh! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30163978)

Nuff' said.

Dropbox (1)

Tennguin (553870) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164018)

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

Re:Dropbox (1)

mujadaddy (1238164) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164140)

Done, bro. :-)

Re:Dropbox (1)

Tennguin (553870) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164798)

my hero :-) thanks!

Click on me! https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTI (1)

stefanlasiewski (63134) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164494)

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

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

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.

Re:Dropbox (1)

richard.cs (1062366) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164780)

Another shameless attempt to get some free space: Click here [dropbox.com] 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.

wish USB was tougher (2, Insightful)

Blue Shifted (1078715) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164030)

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.

Re:wish USB was tougher (1)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164218)

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.

Re:wish USB was tougher (1)

Jake Griffin (1153451) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164594)

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?

Re:wish USB was tougher (1)

Quantumstate (1295210) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164818)

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

Re:wish USB was tougher (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164988)

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.

Re:wish USB was tougher (1)

jgtg32a (1173373) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164610)

Or make it like the Apple quick release power port

Re:wish USB was tougher (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164674)

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.

Re:wish USB was tougher (0)

speculatrix (678524) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164788)

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

Dropbox (4, Informative)

rtobyr (846578) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164084)

https://www.dropbox.com/ [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 [linuxjournal.com]

Dropbox (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164118)

I personally use Dropbox [dropbox.com] 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.

Chronosync, rsync, Jungle Disk (4, Informative)

aclarke (307017) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164122)

Three options that I use, or have used, are rsync, Chronosync [econtechnologies.com] 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.

They make a pill for this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164136)

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.

SMB (1)

tomz16 (992375) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164152)

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!

How come ... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164178)

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

Re:How come ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164356)

... 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).

Re:How come ... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164762)

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.)

Another rsync like option (2, Informative)

frooddude (148993) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164202)

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

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.

One computer? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164206)

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

Re:One computer? (1)

Jake Griffin (1153451) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164670)

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

FTFY

SVN+SSH (2, Informative)

nweaver (113078) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164208)

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.

Re:SVN+SSH (1)

rvw (755107) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164648)

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.

Re:SVN+SSH (2, Informative)

agent-o2 (923169) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164692)

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

Distributed version control (4, Informative)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164216)

Mercurial [selenic.com] for...

Windows [berkwood.com]

MacOS [berkwood.com]

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.

Re:Distributed version control (3, Interesting)

Randle_Revar (229304) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164900)

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

dropbox yarrrr (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164222)

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

Unison (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164228)

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.)

Unison (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164266)

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

Proven technology (4, Funny)

eln (21727) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164278)

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 [wikipedia.org] 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.

svn (1)

fermion (181285) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164318)

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.

Re:svn (1)

Dynedain (141758) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164738)

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.

Re:svn (1)

Simon80 (874052) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164968)

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.

XtreemFS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164398)

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).

Re:XtreemFS (1)

BrentH (1154987) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164880)

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

Unison on Cygwin (1)

LikwidCirkel (1542097) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164426)

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.

SpiderOak (2, Informative)

DesertBlade (741219) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164430)

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.

Re:SpiderOak (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164800)

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

JungleDisk 3.0 Has Sync features (1)

dreamnid (869129) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164434)

I'm not sure if you knew, but JungleDisk just released version 3 [jungledisk.com] 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 :)

Re:JungleDisk 3.0 Has Sync features (1)

drumcat (1659893) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164636)

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

Dropbox, Unison (1)

kjeldahl (65177) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164474)

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.

Unison (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164486)

I once saw Unison [upenn.edu] 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?

Wuala (1)

etu (300362) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164498)

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

Backuppc and a server you own (1)

AtomicDevice (926814) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164554)

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

too fragile (1)

frovingslosh (582462) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164558)

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.

Super Flexible File Syncronizer or Unison (1)

mal0rd (323126) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164572)

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.

iFolder (Novel^WKablink?!) (1)

mverwijs (815917) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164578)

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 [ifolder.com]

Re:iFolder (Novel^WKablink?!) (1)

LinuxDon (925232) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164854)

Novell has never abandoned iFolder, it's part of the Open Workgoup Suite offering. http://www.novell.com/products/openenterpriseserver/ifolder.html [novell.com] 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 [ifolder.com]

Too Fragile? (1)

b0bby (201198) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164616)

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.

Dropbox (2, Informative)

PhunkySchtuff (208108) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164634)

https://www.dropbox.com/ [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.

Mercurial or Git FTW (1)

Clith (5063) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164666)

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

Bacula? (1)

gblfxt (931709) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164700)

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!

You don't need a computer... (1)

sbeckstead (555647) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164718)

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.

Answers his own question. (4, Informative)

Rantastic (583764) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164782)

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.

Dropbox. (1)

exploder (196936) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164836)

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

Dropbox! (1)

Movi (1005625) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164840)

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.

Never used it but... (1)

belloc1 (1118477) | more than 4 years ago | (#30164876)

http://www.powerfolder.com/ [powerfolder.com]

Might be worth a look?

ZFS + NFS/SMB + SCM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30164986)

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.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?