First I want to say "thanks" to the folks contributing to this thread. I'll be the first to admit the Amanda documentation could use more work (of course, I'd be the first to say that about almost *any* software :-). I'm watching the comments go by and will try to incorporate as much as possible.
To save some time (which translates to getting things improved faster), I would ask that specific examples be cited where possible. Saying the whole thing sucks gets the point across :-) but doesn't help figure out how to make it better. It's much more helpful to suggest a specific paragraph or reference would be better if it said XXX. >We use amanda for our 'traditional' backups, via multiple configs & and >cron. ... Are there any >other reasons to move away from our "traditional" ways? I think you answered your own question :-). Look at the effort you had to put in (multiple configs, multiple cron entries) to bend Amanda into doing things the "traditional" way. Reduced effort is another reason for letting Amanda do its thing. That being said, though, "comfort" is a very important thing when it comes to backups. If you understand your setup and it works for you, that's by far the most important thing. >--Chris John R. Jackson, Technical Software Specialist, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
