We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
The latest versions of rustic (v.0.9.0+) tail to parse valid TOML files. Taking the example from here, we have the following:
[repository] repository = "/backup/rustic" password-file = "/root/key-rustic" no-cache = true # no cache needed for local repository [forget] keep-daily = 14 keep-weekly = 5 [backup] exclude-if-present = [".nobackup", "CACHEDIR.TAG"] glob-file = ["/root/rustic-local.glob"] [[backup.sources]] source = "/home" git-ignore = true [[backup.sources]] source = "/etc"
Running check fails:
check
$ rustic check -P official_example error: rustic-rs fatal error: parse error: TOML parse error at line 14, column 1 | 14 | [[backup.sources]] | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ invalid type: map, expected a string
Meanwhile, older versions (v0.8.1 and below) parsed the above file without issue:
[INFO] using config /home/vagrant/.config/rustic/official_example.toml error: error opening password file `Os { code: 13, kind: PermissionDenied, message: "Permission denied" }`
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@ossie-git Yes, 0.9 introduced breaking changes in the TOML config. You need to adapt your config, see https://rustic.cli.rs/docs/breaking_changes.html
Sorry, something went wrong.
Thanks @aawsome Shouldn't the example in the official documentation I linked to be updated to this?
@ossie-git Thanks - this is in fact a docu issue - I'll change it in a few minutes!
Docu is changed. Thanks for the reminder!
No branches or pull requests
The latest versions of rustic (v.0.9.0+) tail to parse valid TOML files. Taking the example from here, we have the following:
Running
check
fails:Meanwhile, older versions (v0.8.1 and below) parsed the above file without issue:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: