Hi,
On 11/10/2006 4:06 PM, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> You need to include your Bacula version -- I don't know why this escapes
> so many people who write in to the list! :)
>
> That said, I'm fairly sure Pool= is not supported in 1.38.x schedule
Kern Sibbald wrote:
On Friday 10 November 2006 16:15, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
If I'm not mistaken (and now I'm thinking I may have lost this stuff due
to an old e-mail purge), someone has done some substantial work doing
bare-metal restores on Solaris. I don't remember the gentle
If dir/fd/sd are going in the same box, and MySQL will hold the catalog, then
bacula-mysql-1.38.11-3.el4.i386.rpm is all you need. client is for boxes that
will be backed up by a remote director. gconsole is for installing the Gnome
console (entirely optional) and mtx is for supporting autochan
I can't speak for this upgrade, but upgrading from 1.36.x to 1.38.x was
relatively painless. Seeing as how the release and your target
deployment dates are so close (and it will definitely matter how many
hosts you have, since you'd need to upgrade them all -- a few is no big
deal, and even mor
Hello,
Sorry to be a bit slow in responding, I'm having problems with my spam filters
these days ...
On Tuesday 07 November 2006 10:21, Jens R. Victorin wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I see that I managed to send the original message without a subject and
> > also without the FSFE Fiduciary Licensin
Kern Sibbald wrote:
> As Arno pointed out this is probably a SuSE kernel problem. From the output
> you have posted above, it looks identical to the problem that I reported to
> them.
>
> I resolved the problem here by upgrading to their 10.2 kernel.
>
> My reading of the situation based on incom
> Excellent point. The servers that are slowest to transfer are also the
> busiest, my front end web server and my mail gateways (Av and spam
> filtering).
>
> That is certainly something to look further into. I could try turning
> off compression for one cycle to prove the theory.
>
> Thanks,
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006 10:09:11 -0800 (PST), you wrote:
>Yes, you can simply install the RHEL RPM, but try running
>
>make uninstall
>
>or something similar first -- because there are files, users, symlinks etc, to
>be removed.
>
OK, so which of the RPM files available are actually needed for a
Cent
Thanks a lot for your feedback Kern and Ryan. I guess I'll just either
use the latest version and not use encryption (since I'm deploying it in
a production env. or see if we can wait till mid-Dec. before deploying).
Kern Sibbald wrote:
> On Friday 10 November 2006 16:43, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
