Re: [tlug] Insync & rclone (was: Dealing with a possibly busted external HD)

[Jim Tittsler <jwt-tlug@example.com>]

On 03/22/2017 06:07 PM, Curt Sampson wrote:
>jwt> I've been using insync for over a year now, but it is not free.
>jwt>   https://www.insynchq.com/
> That's the exact one I've been looking at; I'm glad to hear it seems
> to be working for you. Anything I should watch out for?

On review, I see I've actually been using it for 2 years. During that
time they seem to have gone through 3 or 4 pricing plans with
permutations on Plus, Pro, Business, and now Prime. So I suppose the
business issues and company longevity are something to watch. And Google
appears to throttle access to Drive, so it isn't great if you have a lot
of churn... but I don't think that is the client's fault.

At the time I bought it, I was doing ~75% of my work on OS X, and wanted
a client that was more flexible than the official Google Drive (symlinks
and finer-grained directory exclusion). And I wanted a reliable Linux
client since Google never followed through on theirs.

Now that I am back to Linux (and ChromeOS), I am running Insync headless
on an Odroid ARM machine that is an ad hoc file server for machines
around the house. I could probably replace Insync with rclone at this
point, since 95% of the time it is (encrypted version of file on)
ARM->Google. I am not really using it to maintain sync between machines
as intended.

I suppose if I have a quibble, it is that Insync provides repositories
for Intel deb/rpm builds, but for ARM you still have to manually notice
and download a tarball.