On Thursday 29 December 2005 14:19, Timo Neuvonen wrote:
> > Someone wiser than me needs to decide, if it's ok simply to change back
>
> user
>
> > to root. Or is there a reason why not to do this? Are there some other
> > changes that would really require a non-root user?
>
> Btw, this applies not
> On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 22:40:23 +0200, "Timo Neuvonen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
>> DIR as non-root:
>> I suspect that the configuration files were not accessible by user
>> bacula. You can easily check this using the ls command (like ls -l
>> /etc/bacula ) and see if user bacula
Hello,
On 12/29/2005 9:40 PM, Timo Neuvonen wrote:
...
For now, 1.38.3 is beta and it's understandable that there may be things to
fix. However, building a binary rpm from a source rpm with build_fc4 option
doesn't now produce a working rpm for FC4, so from my point of view there is
something th
Hello,
On 12/29/2005 2:19 PM, Timo Neuvonen wrote:
Someone wiser than me needs to decide, if it's ok simply to change back
user
to root. Or is there a reason why not to do this? Are there some other
changes that would really require a non-root user?
DIR as non-root:
I suspect that the conf
> On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 15:01:19 +0200, "Timo Neuvonen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
>> Try to figure out why it doesn't start. Find what command line args are
Timo> being
>> passed to bacula-dir e.g. by
>>
>> sh -x /etc/init.d/bacula start
>> Then run bacula-dir with the same
