On Wednesday 16 August 2006 18:29, Martin Simmons wrote: > >>>>> On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 11:08:28 +0200, Kern Sibbald said: > > > > On Wednesday 16 August 2006 00:33, Jo Rhett wrote: > > > > On Tuesday 08 August 2006 22:29, Timo Neuvonen wrote: > > > >> It's worth noting, that the messages above don't necessarily mean > > > >> that the > > > >> filesystem mentioned wouln't be backed up at all. > > > >> > > > >> The message is generated, when a mounted filesystem is met, but the > > > >> filesystem may be backed up anyway if it is specifically included > > > >> in the > > > >> fileset configuration. The message just means, that the mounted > > > >> filesystem > > > >> isn't backed up as a part of the parent directory's backup. > > > >> Personally, I find this a little bit annoying. > > > > > > On Aug 13, 2006, at 12:52 PM, Kern Sibbald wrote: > > > > Well the messages are there to warn the unwarry, but it would be > > > > nice if > > > > someone would submit the code necessary to do a "forward and > > > > backward" look > > > > through the filesets to see if the filesystem has been specified > > > > directly > > > > somewhere else so that the message could be suppressed. > > > > > > Or how about an option to disable these messages in the Message > > > section? Trust me when I say that we always backup all we care to. > > > I never want to see these messages (and have it fact disabled them > > > for us by editing the source, which isn't all that portable). > > > > I am not much in favor of an option to disable these messages -- possibly we > > could put them into a separate message class, but this is getting to be a bit > > overkill, and previous user comments on this list were not too favorable to > > that idea. > > > > I have modified the messages to include the directory from which the > > filesystem change is not permitted, which gives the user a bit more > > information about what is going on. > > > > I think the simplest and best solution is to suppress these messages as I > > wrote above if they are in fact backed up somewhere else in the backup. This > > will ensure that the messages are printed only if there is a danger that the > > user is missing a partition, but it will also require someone to write some > > code (well, any solution will). If it bothers you enough and you would like > > it fixed, you might try coming up with this kind of code. > > Another workaround is to list the mounted filesystems in an Exclude option.
That's a very interesting solution :-) > > __Martin > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
