#5
|
|||
|
|||
ahhh.. I didn't look at it from a vulnerability aspect, makes sense. I guess psync exposes files renamed or moved to potential data loss.
Now I'm a bit more nervous about the suggested work around (erase then copy). This potentialy leaves the entire drive vulnerable for data loss. I guess this is a no-win situation. I suppose it's best to have a backup drive larger than the orignal for maximum safety and in that case it's good to know SuperDuper will keep the data as safe as possible during the copy operation. |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Smart Update Question | gbjerry | General | 1 | 06-24-2006 07:43 AM |
Smart Update in Reverse? | jaydisc | General | 1 | 06-09-2006 09:28 AM |
Smart Update Vs Copy Newer | etb | General | 4 | 06-06-2006 10:48 PM |
smart update didn't work due to remaining space problems | JohnCoffee | General | 1 | 05-08-2005 09:42 AM |
Smart Update Deletes Rest of Volume? | Pixx | General | 12 | 04-26-2005 10:04 AM |