Martin,
Yeah, I forgot to create a new output file for the second run. The first
run the client info scrolled off the window buffer, so I ran it again.
Yes it does affect all of the clients, the only thing that runs is the
catalog backup.
Yes, 10.10.10.3 is the correct IP.
No, firewall, well I c
On 12 January 2018 at 18:32, Jerry Lowry wrote:
> centos 7.3
> mariadb 10.2.12
> bacula 9.0.6
CentOS == SELinux! Check that SELinux is not blocking bacula-sd from
properly starting. I don't have a CentOS host on hand to give exact
location where to look, but google should help you!
The storage log shows no sign of any connection from the client (though it
looks like you sent logs from two different jobs).
Does the problem affect all clients?
Is 10.10.10.3 the correct IP address of distress?
Is distress running some firewall (iptables etc)?
You could try
telnet distress 9
Well, I recompiled the source for bacula 9.0.6 on the offending server but
it is still failing to work. I have started each of the processes with the
debug flag set at 100 and am attaching the output for each system (
director, storage,client). It looks to me like the client gets started but
is n
> On Jan 11, 2018, at 11:56 AM, Jerry Lowry wrote:
>
> Hi, Last weekend I ran through a bunch of updates for my backup server. Of
> the many updates it updated the kernel and MariaDB ( 10.2.8 -> 10.2.12 ). I
> have recently upgraded bacula to 9.0.6. The problem is that the following
> error
Hi, Last weekend I ran through a bunch of updates for my backup server.
Of the many updates it updated the kernel and MariaDB ( 10.2.8 -> 10.2.12
). I have recently upgraded bacula to 9.0.6. The problem is that the
following error:
10-Jan 20:36 distress-dir JobId 34724: Fatal error: Bad response
