On Tuesday 20 March 2007 14:15, Alan Brown wrote: > On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Kern Sibbald wrote: > > > What I don't understand is why you don't build your own current (non-static) > > version of Bacula on your older systems. > > Because in several cases they won't compile - lack of libraries, etc.
Well, I would say that they have a *serious* oversight in their procedures. I am not talking about the fact that the system is "frozen*, which makes a lot of sense, but as a *minimum* precaution, they should assure that there is a similar system in standby or that they can re-create the *full* system on another machine, load any needed libraries and rebuilt any piece that starts failing. > > These are old boxes and they're "frozen" - no updates of core software > allowed in case it breaks the running software. Yes, and they have thus assured that the system cannot be maintained for the desired lifetime -- see my comments above on how to resolve this. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
