> If your tape are blank or if you don't care about the jobs which are on it:
>
> shutdown bacula
>
> mount one tape in the drive
>
> mt -f /dev/nst0 rewind
> mt -f /dev/nst0 weof
>
> start bacula
> label
>
The label step should be avoided if the user has a barcode reader.
John
-
Le 29/03/2013 21:22, unix1988 a écrit :
> Hello everyone. I am running Bacula version 5.0.3-1. The hardware
> configuration is a HP DL380 attached to a HP MSL4048. The issue I am running
> in to is that the tape library inventory and updates slots match but when I
> run "list volumes" from the b
Hi,
I am not sure what do you mean about invisible tapes, so could you write a
bit more information about your issue?
How many tapes have you labeled, and how many tapes is showing when you
call "list volumes" command?
Could you give an output from update slots and list media commands?
Do you u
Hello everyone. I am running Bacula version 5.0.3-1. The hardware configuration
is a HP DL380 attached to a HP MSL4048. The issue I am running in to is that
the tape library inventory and updates slots match but when I run "list
volumes" from the bconsole prompt there are about 6 tapes that are
Hi everyone,
I recently just updated my bacula-postgresql install from version 2.4 to 3.0.1.
I read the release notes, and noticed that it stated that the RPM would update
the tables in the database to the new format automatically. I am using the
RPM's from rpms-contrib-fschwarz on the Baula s
On Thursday 01 February 2007 08:12, pedro moreno wrote:
> Hi people.
>
>I install bacula 2.0.1 in FreeBSD 6.2 Release. I have in another
> computer running bacula 1.38.11 OS FreeBSD with MySQL 4.1, is working
> really great i had already restore over 85GB to one Linux client running
> Centos
Hi people.
I install bacula 2.0.1 in FreeBSD 6.2 Release. I have in another computer
running bacula 1.38.11 OS FreeBSD with MySQL 4.1, is working really great i
had already restore over 85GB to one Linux client running
Centos 4.4 from tape, bacula again show his power.
Well my doubt is thi
On Saturday 09 September 2006 21:04, Jaime Ventura wrote:
> Hello.
> I will expand the use of bacula to a greater number of computers to backup.
> Im using the 1.38.x version.
> Should I update now to 1.39.x?
No
> What about backward compatibility?
> - Clients (fd)
> - Volumes
> - Ca
Hello.
I will expand the use of bacula to a greater number of computers to backup.
Im using the 1.38.x version.
Should I update now to 1.39.x?
What about backward compatibility?
- Clients (fd)
- Volumes
- Catalogs
- ...
If this is on documentation/bacula page, point me out where.
On Friday 09 December 2005 20:44, Landon Fuller wrote:
> Kern Sibbald wrote:
> > On Friday 09 December 2005 09:00, Davide Bolcioni wrote:
> >>Kern Sibbald wrote:
> >>>The current "production" release is Bacula version 1.38.2. Between the
> >>>time it was released (22 November 2005) and now, there
Kern Sibbald wrote:
> On Friday 09 December 2005 09:00, Davide Bolcioni wrote:
>
>>Kern Sibbald wrote:
>>
>>>The current "production" release is Bacula version 1.38.2. Between the
>>>time it was released (22 November 2005) and now, there are a number of
>>>bugs that have been fixed, which some us
On Friday 09 December 2005 09:00, Davide Bolcioni wrote:
> Kern Sibbald wrote:
> > The current "production" release is Bacula version 1.38.2. Between the
> > time it was released (22 November 2005) and now, there are a number of
> > bugs that have been fixed, which some users might want to include
Kern Sibbald wrote:
The current "production" release is Bacula version 1.38.2. Between the time
it was released (22 November 2005) and now, there are a number of bugs that
have been fixed, which some users might want to include in their system.
The problem is that these fixes are for the mo
I think you really have to go with option 1. If it's not really 1.38,
then releasing it as 1.38 is going to give a lot of people headaches
(especially those that are relying upon stable versions).
_ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _
|Y#| | | |\/| | \ |\ | | | Ryan Novosielski - User Support Spec. II
Kern,
I really don't have a dog in this fight, as I am running Debian "Sarge"
servers which still are at 1.36.2, however, I would like to make these two
observations.
1) This raises a question about just what version numbers mean. I've read an
article or two about "corruption" to versioning sc
On Thu, 2005-12-08 at 18:03 +0100, Kern Sibbald wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have an important decision to make concerning updates to 1.38, and before
> making it, I would like to get your input.
>
> The current "production" release is Bacula version 1.38.2. Between the time
> it was released (22 Nov
Hello,
I have an important decision to make concerning updates to 1.38, and before
making it, I would like to get your input.
The current "production" release is Bacula version 1.38.2. Between the time
it was released (22 November 2005) and now, there are a number of bugs that
have been fixed
17 matches
Mail list logo
