On Tuesday 30 January 2007 17:48, Chris Hoogendyk wrote: > Ryan Novosielski wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > Not to be chomping at the bit here, but I guess questions that I have > > are A) How hard is it likely to be to get this thing built for Windows? > > I don't expect you to have an answer for that as I suppose Robert does > > most of the Windows work, but I'd be curious to know. B) If anyone is > > familiar with this, on Solaris, is there a set of files that one can add > > to a system that is relatively lightweight to support something like > > this? Perhaps you have other KDE apps and know how this works. In my > > experience, most distros want the qt libs package, but then that package > > wants about 30 others. > > > > Thanks for any insights from the peanut gallery. I'd love to start using > > this, but would pass for the time being if it will require extensive > > dependency building. > > I'll just reply to the Solaris part. > > I typically grab a good deal of this sort of stuff from sunfreeware. I > try not to get things I don't need, but when you have a chain of > dependencies, you don't have much choice -- either you want that > capability or you scrap the whole thing. > > I have a directory /usr/local/pkg and a directory /usr/local/src, and I > keep everything I have installed in one or the other of those. Some > things you need source, some things it's unnecessary overhead and trouble. > > For me, Solaris is for servers. My desktop is Mac OS X. I don't use any > graphical interface on my servers. I typically have a dozen or more > terminal windows open with ssh sessions. > > If I were going to use a gui for something like bacula, I would want it > at my desktop, not on the server. So, while my backup servers and > everything would be on Solaris,
> I would want a client/server arrangement > where I could do the administration from a gui on my Mac. Don't know if > that fits with the current plan, but it seems most logical to me -- > architecturally more robust and not caught up in the exporting of > graphical interface through something like X11. From my perspective, > that's not what a server ought to be spending its time doing. I would > want the bacula install to be modular enough that I wouldn't have to > install the graphical stuff on my server. What is written above is not totally clear to me. The bat is a GUI application that will run on a large variety of machines Linux, Windows, Solaris, FreeBSD, Mac OS X and others. The communications to the Director does not use X11 but simple TCP/IP. There is no requirement to have the GUI installed on the server. > > > --------------- > > Chris Hoogendyk > > - > O__ ---- Systems Administrator > c/ /'_ --- Biology & Geology Departments > (*) \(*) -- 140 Morrill Science Center > ~~~~~~~~~~ - University of Massachusetts, Amherst > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > --------------- > > Erdös 4 > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT > Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share > your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV > _______________________________________________ > Bacula-users mailing list > Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
