Hi, On 6/27/2006 9:49 PM, Timo Neuvonen wrote: >>>For the idea of fixing this... My first guess: how about changing the >>>directory owner from root to bacula? That is, to bacula:bacula >>>Is there spesific need it must be owned by root? >> >>You can change it to bacula:bacula and I don't think it will cause any >>problems. However, as long as the user bacula is in the group bacula and > > the > >>bacula group has write permission on /var/bacula, it should all work fine. >> > > > I don't know how groups stuff really _should_ work. > But for me it very much looks things don't work that way. > I guess since process is running with gid=disk, group permissions for bacula > seem not to be effective, although process uid=bacula. > > I have a uncertain idea that you used to run SD as root? > How is this working with someone else having an autochanger, and SD is run > as root?
Naturally, running the SD as root always works, although it might be a security problem or against security policy. Anyway, I'm always running the SD as root, but this is on a dedicated backup server without user access. Arno -- IT-Service Lehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] Arno Lehmann http://www.its-lehmann.de Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
