Selfhosted

40183 readers

779 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
No spam posting.
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
No trolling.

Resources:

selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
awesome-selfhosted software
awesome-sysadmin resources
Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world

HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz

Anyone using rustic? (github.com)

submitted 1 year ago by maiskanzler@feddit.de to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

27 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hey, you probably know about restic and borg for backups. They are pretty mature and very commonly used.

Rustic is a fully compatible reimplementation of restic in Rust and they do seem to have implemented a few improvements over restic. The developer even used to be a contributor on restic.

Is anyone here using it already? It looks super promising but I'd love to hear your opinion!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] saddlebag@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I can never remember the order and I’m using Wefwef which doesn’t offer markdown insert. Thanks :)

[–] 418teapot@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

The way I remember the order is that the parentheses around the link would make grammatical sense outside of markdown (the goal of markdown is to still be fully readable even when looking at the raw source).

For example if I were posting on a forum that didn't have markdown support which one of these would make more sense:

You can find that on this lemmy instance (https://lemmy.world).
You can find that on (this lemmy instance) https://lemmy.world.

Option 2 makes no sense grammatically. Then you just need to use the square brackets (which rarely show up in non-markdown text) to denote the link range.

Alternatively, if you still have a hard time remembering the order, you can use reference-style links which make it even more readable outside of markdown rendered contexts (note that there are no parentheses in this version, nothing to get confused):

[Here is a link][1] and [here is another link][2].

[1]: http://example.org
[2]: http://example.com