On Friday 23 January 2009 01:06:08 Frank Sweetser wrote:
> Dan Langille wrote:
> > On Jan 22, 2009, at 6:54 PM, Kern Sibbald wrote:
> >> On Thursday 22 January 2009 23:59:26 Dan Langille wrote:
> >>> This sounds clever. Hard to do?
> >>
> >> No, it is essentially the same a item 24 in the projects
On Friday 23 January 2009 01:02:15 Dan Langille wrote:
> On Jan 22, 2009, at 6:54 PM, Kern Sibbald wrote:
> > On Thursday 22 January 2009 23:59:26 Dan Langille wrote:
> >> This sounds clever. Hard to do?
> >
> > No, it is essentially the same a item 24 in the projects file.
> > since it was
> > 24
Oh that dreaded word upgrade I knew my php was a bit behind, must be stubborn
had to try. I am running ubuntu 6.06 LTS on this machine have not checked but
guessing this would require a php install from source.
As another option i will be moving to knew hardware soonish maybe i sould use
this
The webacula "System Requirements" also described in inline help
http:///webacula/help/
or main menu "Help"
2009/1/23 Bruno Friedmann :
> I've verify, the minimal version for running ZF should be at least 5.1.4
> your is only 5.1.2 and ZF embedded with webbacula is 1.5.1
> Did you see the readme
I've verify, the minimal version for running ZF should be at least 5.1.4
your is only 5.1.2 and ZF embedded with webbacula is 1.5.1
Did you see the readme inside the ZF.tar.gz
It clearly state that.
Better is a 5.2x version ( due to spl requirement ).
Actually with 1.7x version the minimal was rai
Full error report not sure what you mean? please explain webacula newbe here!
nothing is showing up in my apache error or access logs now that i have fixed
the permission problems. The only error i can find is the one mentioned in my
last post when i try to list the files on the job screen.
Fa
Dan Langille wrote:
> On Jan 22, 2009, at 6:54 PM, Kern Sibbald wrote:
>
>> On Thursday 22 January 2009 23:59:26 Dan Langille wrote:
>>> This sounds clever. Hard to do?
>>>
>> No, it is essentially the same a item 24 in the projects file.
>> since it was
>> 24 on the last vote, given the items
On Jan 22, 2009, at 6:54 PM, Kern Sibbald wrote:
> On Thursday 22 January 2009 23:59:26 Dan Langille wrote:
>> This sounds clever. Hard to do?
>>
>
> No, it is essentially the same a item 24 in the projects file.
> since it was
> 24 on the last vote, given the items above it, unfortunately we
On Thursday 22 January 2009 23:59:26 Dan Langille wrote:
> This sounds clever. Hard to do?
>
No, it is essentially the same a item 24 in the projects file. since it was
24 on the last vote, given the items above it, unfortunately we are unlikely
to get to it any time soon, even though many of
On Thursday 22 January 2009, Wolfgang Denk said something like:
> In message <200901221238.33834.jos...@eeinternet.com> you wrote:
> > Are there any pending plans to add a "multi core" option to the FD
> > to enable compression to happen on more than one core? We have a
> > few eight-core servers
Dear "Joshua J. Kugler",
In message <200901221238.33834.jos...@eeinternet.com> you wrote:
> Are there any pending plans to add a "multi core" option to the FD to
> enable compression to happen on more than one core? We have a few
> eight-core servers that are rather idle during the backup window,
Are there any pending plans to add a "multi core" option to the FD to
enable compression to happen on more than one core? We have a few
eight-core servers that are rather idle during the backup window, so it
would be great to use more than one core for compression. Something
like a Max Core d
Hi,
Just to make sure I've got this correct: Bacula does a simple calculation
when parsing retention config options such as month=30 days*24 hours*60
minutes*60 seconds everywhere.
An example:
maximum volumes=3 (per pool)
volume use duration=1 month
volume retention=5 weeks
file retention=2
Problem resolved. The FC switch was acting up and due to that, the tape
backups went crazy while doing FC path failover. Replaced the switch and
everything is back to normal. Thanks!
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:52 PM, Win Htin wrote:
> I'm seeing "st0: Error 1 (sugg. bt 0x0, driver bt 0x0, ho
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Trouble is management these days in a lot of places doesn't know enough
to make a decision other than on a cost or name basis. You'd expect if a
person was unsure, they'd ask for a walkthrough or a synopsis, maybe
with an extended trial period -- not
bacula-us...@compulab-consult.de wrote:
> Does anybody have a howto which helps me to compile the current bacula
> version with opensolaris?
> At the moment I'm failing with missing mysql libs (even they are
> installed) during the configure process.
You need the option --with-mysql=, where the pa
Hello together,
we installed bacula 2.4.4 win32 fileserver-deamon and console on a
windows 64 bit system, called clapton.
We use bacula 2.4.3 on a opensuse 11.0 system for bacula directory
daemon and bacula storage daemon.
We configured a job to backup the vista machine.
Here the job conf
Reynier Perez Mira wrote:
>> With what you indicate it would be reasonable to launch the same flags I use.
>> I've several quite identical pc running same spec with this compilation.
>> ( ok on opensuse, not debian but this would normaly doesn't change a lot. )
>
> Thanks a lot Bruno, I compile wi
18 matches
Mail list logo
