> Rather than spend a lot of time loading a new version of Linux, why don't you > simplify your build/install. Having wx-console and the gnome-console working > are not absolutely essential for getting Bacula up and running, so it seems > to me wise to remove the build of wx-console and gnome-console. Once you've > figured out how Bacula works, then you could over time added these features.
> As Arno, I think, pointed out, the kludges you are doing to get things like > the gnome-console to build will in the end cost you a lot of pain and agony. This would be my approach. I guess I'm having trouble understanding my boss. After emphasizing several times in several ways his desire to have some sort of gui, asking if I had installed those features, he also declared that I should get it working in a simple way first, then impliment the gui. So, I will press on with testing my configuration files. At present, Bacula is happy with my hardware. Btape reads and writes to the tape; Bacula starts with no errors. I am having difficulty getting the configuration files into a condition where they will cause Bacula to back files up to the tape, but I am making progress. Tks n rgds, Richard White CNE6 Network Engineer Mason County, Washington 360-427-5501 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&op=click _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
