1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
|
Return-Path: <obnam-dev-bounces@obnam.org>
X-Original-To: distix@pieni.net
Delivered-To: distix@pieni.net
Received: from bagpuss.pepperfish.net (bagpuss.pepperfish.net [148.251.8.16])
by pieni.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A8314399D
for <distix@pieni.net>; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 14:32:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from platypus.pepperfish.net (unknown [10.112.100.20])
by bagpuss.pepperfish.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E00BCB8D;
Mon, 19 Jun 2017 15:32:55 +0100 (BST)
Received: from ip6-localhost ([::1] helo=platypus.pepperfish.net)
by platypus.pepperfish.net with esmtp (Exim 4.80 #2 (Debian))
id 1dMxjb-0006g6-Pg; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 15:32:55 +0100
Received: from yaffle.pepperfish.net ([88.99.213.221]
helo=inmail2.pepperfish.net)
by platypus.pepperfish.net with esmtps (Exim 4.80 #2 (Debian))
id 1dMxja-0006fv-ND
for <obnam-dev@obnam.org>; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 15:32:54 +0100
Received: from koom.pieni.net ([88.99.190.206] helo=pieni.net)
by inmail2.pepperfish.net with esmtps
(TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89)
(envelope-from <liw@liw.fi>) id 1dMxjV-0004VE-Ab
for obnam-dev@obnam.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 15:32:54 +0100
Received: from exolobe3.liw.fi (unknown [194.111.46.68])
by pieni.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 36D1140616
for <obnam-dev@obnam.org>; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 14:32:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from liw.fi (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by exolobe3.liw.fi (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79E621200D0
for <obnam-dev@obnam.org>; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 17:32:40 +0300 (EEST)
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 17:32:39 +0300
From: Lars Wirzenius <liw@liw.fi>
To: Obnam development <obnam-dev@obnam.org>
Message-ID: <20170619143239.egma6t52nudu6jqq@liw.fi>
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
X-Pepperfish-Transaction: 3013-6f0c-e64c-b93a
X-Spam-Score: -3.4
X-Spam-Score-int: -33
X-Spam-Bar: ---
X-Scanned-By: pepperfish.net, Mon, 19 Jun 2017 15:32:54 +0100
X-Spam-Report: Content analysis details: (-3.4 points)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-1.0 PPF_USER_AGENT_MUTT User-Agent: contains Mutt (Mutt isn't a spam
tool) -0.5 PPF_USER_AGENT User-Agent: exists
-1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
[score: 0.0000]
X-ACL-Warn: message may be spam
X-Scan-Signature: 8614f9a98c2cea3550c6273fd4b10d13
Subject: More informative Obnam progress reporting
X-BeenThere: obnam-dev@obnam.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Obnam development discussions <obnam-dev-obnam.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://listmaster.pepperfish.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/obnam-dev-obnam.org>,
<mailto:obnam-dev-request@obnam.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://listmaster.pepperfish.net/pipermail/obnam-dev-obnam.org>
List-Post: <mailto:obnam-dev@obnam.org>
List-Help: <mailto:obnam-dev-request@obnam.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://listmaster.pepperfish.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/obnam-dev-obnam.org>,
<mailto:obnam-dev-request@obnam.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1406261584211220120=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: obnam-dev-bounces@obnam.org
Errors-To: obnam-dev-bounces@obnam.org
X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4
--===============1406261584211220120==
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="u5ffj4wnngo6r5ce"
Content-Disposition: inline
--u5ffj4wnngo6r5ce
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
It struck me the other day that it would be nice if Obnam could give
more progress feedback reporting:
* position in current file: some files are very large and it taks a
long time to check them completely
* how much duplicate data is NOT uploaded in this run
* how far in the backup we are, compared to previous generatation
* momentary upload speed, both raw and "effective" (chunk data only)
What do others think?
The BackupProgress class needs to be redesigned to implement these,
it is currently a mess.
--=20
I want to build worthwhile things that might last. --joeyh
--u5ffj4wnngo6r5ce
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=wCiO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--u5ffj4wnngo6r5ce--
--===============1406261584211220120==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
obnam-dev mailing list
obnam-dev@obnam.org
http://listmaster.pepperfish.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/obnam-dev-obnam.org
--===============1406261584211220120==--
|
