91
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Ooops@feddit.org 3 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Does it? This looks more like a big field were I can fill in the commands to do that all by myself.

in hopes that the file on the server did not get modified in the meantime

Yeah... locking the file on the remote would be the absolute minimum for an actual sync tool.

[-] Ephera@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 days ago

Well, you have to fill in how the downloading and the uploading is implemented, but the orchestration of when the steps save→download→merge→upload should be done, that's pretty useful IMHO.

Yeah... locking the file on the remote would be the absolute minimum for an actual sync tool.

Hmm, I guess, you could upload a lock-file, then download the database + re-upload with changes, then delete the lock file.

I mean, I do get why they didn't implement it (yet), as it adds quite a bit of complexity and it's just not relevant for personal use.
Hell, at $DAYJOB, we used to have a KeePass database on a share for the entire team, where everyone would just hit save whenever, and I'm not aware of there ever being a problem with conflicting edits, because you just don't add/modify passwords that often.

this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2026
91 points (98.9% liked)

Linux

15322 readers
226 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)

Also, check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS