Score:0

how to determine deja dup error source

kp flag

I'm trying to restore a backup on Ubuntu 22.04 5.19.0-38-generic.

Did a backup of the home folder onto a HDD which is now supposed to be restored to the home folder after a reinstall.

    INFO 1
. Using temporary directory /tmp/duplicity-kokbuhzf-tempdir

INFO 1
. User error detail: Traceback (innermost last):
.   File "/usr/bin/duplicity", line 92, in <module>
.     with_tempdir(main)
.   File "/usr/bin/duplicity", line 75, in with_tempdir
.     fn()
.   File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/duplicity/dup_main.py", line 1555, in main
.     action = commandline.ProcessCommandLine(sys.argv[1:])
.   File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/duplicity/commandline.py", line 1188, in ProcessCommandLine
.     args = parse_cmdline_options(cmdline_list)
.   File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/duplicity/commandline.py", line 802, in parse_cmdline_options
.     lpath, backend_url = args_to_path_backend(args[0], args[1])
.   File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/duplicity/commandline.py", line 1080, in args_to_path_backend
.     arg1_is_backend, arg2_is_backend = backend.is_backend_url(arg1), backend.is_backend_url(arg2)
.   File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/duplicity/backend.py", line 170, in is_backend_url
.     pu = ParsedUrl(url_string)
.   File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/duplicity/backend.py", line 344, in __init__
.     raise InvalidBackendURL(u"missing // - relative paths not supported "
.  duplicity.errors.InvalidBackendURL: missing // - relative paths not supported for scheme invalid: invalid://
.

ERROR 23 InvalidBackendURL
. InvalidBackendURL: missing // - relative paths not supported for scheme invalid: invalid://

How would you go on determine the error source, supposing its a filename

Thanks in Advance

Organic Marble avatar
us flag
Looks similar to this unaswered question https://askubuntu.com/q/1148939/243321
I sit in a Tesla and translated this thread with Ai:

mangohost

Post an answer

Most people don’t grasp that asking a lot of questions unlocks learning and improves interpersonal bonding. In Alison’s studies, for example, though people could accurately recall how many questions had been asked in their conversations, they didn’t intuit the link between questions and liking. Across four studies, in which participants were engaged in conversations themselves or read transcripts of others’ conversations, people tended not to realize that question asking would influence—or had influenced—the level of amity between the conversationalists.