HI, i want to make a backup just like copying the files, not in data volumes, is this possible? i dont like that 50mb chunk or data volumes, it is not about the 50mb size, its about i cant access files without restoring… dont want an workaround to access files, just want to make a backup-copy.
Thanks in advance
Welcome to the forum @wallyhenderson
Duplicati only gives you its full features per Introduction in the manual. You want only one copy, or do you have enough space at the destination for many copies? That’s one of the first pains that Duplicati solves.
What OS, and what destination? Duplicati can’t do what you want, but maybe someone will have an idea.
Hi friend thanks for the reply… i want multiple copies, i know how to do that, but want copies, with original filenames and folder structure like this
original drive
c:\folder 1
c:\folder 2
c:\folder 3
backup drive
d:\backup of c\folder 1
d:\backup of c\folder 2
d:\backup of c\folder 3
I don’t see that in the picture, though maybe you don’t show it because you don’t care about layout?
File Versioning explains FreeFileSync plan. DSynchronize might work too, but specifics are scarce.
rclone is a powerful CLI tool that will let you add remote copies more easily, if you want to someday.
https://forum.rclone.org/search?q=backup%20script and similar will find some people’s script work.
It seems more usual for sync programs to do versioning than for backup programs to do file copies.
There are probably some other things around, but I haven’t personally used programs like you want.
Another free system, Cobian, has produced a product that does what the OP requested. We use it all systems. It will do a simple copy to either SMB or FTP site. No need to restore, just go over and grab the file. Why looking now?? The engine hasn’t been updated for awhile and looking for something more compatible with Win 10 and Server. But it’s a simple proceure Duplicati really need to get in their mix.
It is a simple type of backup but I really doubt Duplicati will support it as the current design is totally different. There are a lot of other good tools for file synchronization. I recommend rclone!
Not sycronization, missing the point. One way file copy is what’s needed. Copy to various backups just like the compression systems do, but without the need to use a special program to retrieve. Mystifying why not
Synchronization comes in many forms, and what’s available depends on the program.
Synchronization Settings shows what FreeFileSync offers, and their forum has Q & A.
SFTP and FTP Setup says it can do FTP for you. I haven’t personally used any of this.
Video Tutorials Mirror Synchronization might suit you, or maybe you will prefer Update:
The Update variant can be viewed as an example of such a customization: It is just like Mirror but adapted to avoid file deletions.
rclone doesn’t have much GUI yet, but is powerful, and can do the style of copy you like:
Other programs that might suit you are:
FBackup although it looks like the free program would have to use SMB instead of FTP.
SyncBack Free can do Backup, mirror, basic sync and restore. Paid versions do more.
Karen’s Replicator is quite simple.
You can look these over, and there are others that are designed for this. Duplicati is not.
Can’t I Just Copy Everything to Back Up? explains some pitfalls to taking that approach.
Duplicati has a deduplication engine at its core, which allows you to store many, many backup snapshot versions while using minimal space. This is inherently incompatible with backup methods that keep files in native format, which is what you’re looking for.
Yes, I’m yelling…FILE SYNC IS NOT WHAT IS BEING ASKED FOR…
Quite simply then the oldest does the best. Cobian will do simplE copy to both FTP and SMB. Been using it for years. But wanting to update so something more Win10 compatible. It does multiple schedules, logs, etc. Will encrypt if needed or send to zip, very versatile and absolutely free.
We are in the position to pay 25-50 for a program to work that is up to date, doesn’t have to be free, but apparently everyone wants to reinvent the wheel.
Close this thread as apparently few understand the true needs of simple backups.
Please read what I wrote. You asked for copy. I pointed you to several. What do you consider different between what you asked for (copy), and copy suggestions that I spent quite a bit of time trying to find?
Please clarify what you see as the difference between
and
which is going one-way. Typically a copy doesn’t sync deletes, but the programs I cited don’t have to.
Duplicati’s history is summarized at About the Project. It began in 2008, then somewhere around 2011 Block-based storage engine began, for reasons cited, and that’s what is now in use and being finished.
Software development is difficult. Duplicati is still in Beta, with efforts on fixes and stability, not features.
Asking for a completely new design to be added on the old one is roughly like asking for a new product.
What is the status of Cobian Backup? gives history and possible futures (by new owner, or by Cobian).
It’s not your thread to close, and I think the information in it will be useful to people who will consider it.
I think you can delete your own post, if you wish. I’m sorry about Cobian, but we won’t likely reinvent it.
Possibly either its new owner or the original author Luis Cobian (see my link above) will do something.
EDIT 1:
More options, courtesy of a Google search. Programs keeping native format are scarce, but they exist.
Commonly the program calls file copying “sync”, but sometimes the program focus is “backup”, e.g. in
A raw (native) file copying mode is also available for those who want a complete directory structure outline backed up in its original form.
Backup4All which is the paid version of FBackup (previously link- cited) which also has this capability:
The resulted backup will be an exact copy (mirror) of the source files, without altering their initial file format.
EDIT 2:
Another one that sounds like it does copy: How about if some people wanting this helped search for it?
Viewing and managing data backed up in native file format
File History in Windows for the simple built-in solution. Files are copied, but the names hold the dates, meaning it’s not quite grab-to-restore, but you shouldn’t have to worry about unreadable fancy formats.
There is also special handling of long paths because of Windows restriction on maximum path length.
Finally, it wasn’t very reliable for me, but that might be because it preferred an always-on share server.
There are many ways of doing backups. A long time ago I backed up to 7-zip files and then used FTP
onto a different PC. A .bat script helped set up the 7-zip includes and excludes. That was for disaster protection. If not a disaster, you get compression advantage and local restore, e.g. using File Explorer.
Such methods still exist, e.g. the below, though it’s not exactly a file copy, it does use standard format:
Toucan sync, backup and encryption utility
EDIT 3:
How to Restore Previous Versions of Files in Windows 10 shows how the current built-in File History restore process uses File Explorer and the right-click menu Restore previous versions to select.
I’m pretty sure that some commercial backup systems have File Explorer integration, if that’s enough.
There are traadeoffs between native or standard formatting, space efficiency, multiple versioning, etc.
For those who don’t mind a single-version backup (which can be enhanced at net destination with a versioned backup by a sysadmin), plain old robocopy can do that and some GUIs exist, for example
RoboMirror which looks kind of dusty. I found some other dusty attempts at robocopy GUIs as well…
Anybody else have a suggestion? Just as in code, test, support, etc., Duplicati needs volunteer help.
Nope, nothing beyond what’s already been suggested!
Plain file copy also goes against Duplicati’s security model. If someone wants to simply copy files to some destination, there are plenty of other tools for that (as @ts678 kindly outlined above).
Tools like Goodsync and Gs Richcopy 360 meet the requirements
Since this topic has been revived, I’d note that Cobian Backup got reimplemented as Cobian Reflector. There might also be mentions of all of the suggestions elsewhere in forum. Use search box in top right.
Some software is payware, but if it suits your needs and your budget fine, no need to limit your options.
Actually, I think that the best answer to this kind of request is that when Duplicati started and was originally a tool to copy files, it was a wrapper around Duplicity (hence the name). Duplicity is doing just that: copy files. It still exists, is open source, free to use and change. It should be the reference in this case.
Situation seems different to me.
https://duplicity.us/features.html
Duplicity uses the rsync algorithm so only the changed parts of files are sent to the archive
Other backup programs may save a complete copy of the file.
Block-based storage engine describes the original Duplicati which used compressed archives.
This is in order to compare it with Duplicati 2 which is the rewrite with the current block design.
I don’t think it was ever a file copier, and I don’t think it ever will be. That’s a very different plan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duplicati#History has old history. Duplicity wrapper didn’t happen.
That’s exactly what was in the first git commits. This class was not called DuplicityRunner for nothing.
I guess it depends on what qualifies as “happen”.
This included a port of the Duplicity code for use on Windows, but was dropped in September 2008, where work on a clean re-implementation began.
You’d still not have a file copier unless Duplicity was as well, but its reimplementation appears rdiff-like.
DuplicityRunner class exists in 1.3.4, but isn’t used. We’re in ancient history here, but I’m still thinking it wasn’t ever a file copier as a released product, which is what the “dropped” in history suggests to me…