On 5. apr. 2011, at 09.06, Tor Willy Austerslått wrote:
> On 5. apr. 2011, at 07.19, Bruno Friedmann wrote:
>
>>> Last week we began having problems backing up one particular server. It's a
>>> terminal server with (almost) the exact same contents as servers that backs
>>> up just fine. The bac
On 5. apr. 2011, at 07.19, Bruno Friedmann wrote:
>> Last week we began having problems backing up one particular server. It's a
>> terminal server with (almost) the exact same contents as servers that backs
>> up just fine. The backup doesn't even start, but bombs out with "Fatal
>> error: Soc
On 5. apr. 2011, at 05.40, Mehma Sarja wrote:
> That is a nice name! It could be a file name. It is good that it backs
> up one file, how about one directory?
>
> Mehma
Thanks ;)
Yes, if I expand the dummy fileset with a couple of directories, it works. If I
use the example fileset verbatim, n
On 04/04/2011 11:25 PM, Tor Willy Austerslått wrote:
> Hello all.
> We run Bacula fd, sd and dir 5.0.3 on a single Ubuntu 10.04 LTS server in a
> blade center and are (among other things) backing up several Windows Server
> 2003 x64 servers with it. All the x64 filedaemons are version 5.0.3 x64 V
On 4/4/11 2:25 PM, Tor Willy Austerslått wrote:
> In short: I can't for the life of me see what could be wrong. Anyone have any
> useful pointers with regard to where to start looking?
Tor Willy,
That is a nice name! It could be a file name. It is good that it backs
up one file, how about one di
Hello all.
We run Bacula fd, sd and dir 5.0.3 on a single Ubuntu 10.04 LTS server in a
blade center and are (among other things) backing up several Windows Server
2003 x64 servers with it. All the x64 filedaemons are version 5.0.3 x64 VSS and
we are using the same fileset for all of them. In tot
