On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 11:39:49AM -0600, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 04:28:02PM -0800, John Oliver wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 05:26:59PM -0600, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> > > Just a guess, but I'd say it's because "0" is not a valid date, so
> > > those lines are being ign
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 04:28:02PM -0800, John Oliver wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 05:26:59PM -0600, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> > Just a guess, but I'd say it's because "0" is not a valid date, so
> > those lines are being ignored completely.
>
> Those lines are what results when you amlabel a ta
Hi,
i think all of you are right, but...
lets state a few things amanda does:
1.) you amlabel your tapes for use, and amanda put's them with
a date of 0 in its tapelist.
2.) the date of 0 in tapelist means: this tape has never been written
a backup to, it is a so called "new tape".
3.) amanda will
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 05:26:59PM -0600, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 01:38:46PM -0800, John Oliver wrote:
> > I thought amanda would just read from the bottom of the list.
>
> Nope, amanda goes by date first. List position is only significant
> when 2 or more tapes have the s
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 01:38:46PM -0800, John Oliver wrote:
> I thought amanda would just read from the bottom of the list.
Nope, amanda goes by date first. List position is only significant
when 2 or more tapes have the same last-used date.
> When it
> was done with tape 009, 010 was at the bo
On Wed February 26 2003 14:33, John Oliver wrote:
>1) This morning, my amanda report said:
>
>These dumps were to tape Indyme010.
>The next tape Amanda expects to use is: a new tape.
>
>Instead of "The next tape Amanda expects to use is: Indyme011."
>
>Here's the tapelist:
>
>20030226 Indyme010 reu
>1) This morning, my amanda report said:
>
>These dumps were to tape Indyme010.
>The next tape Amanda expects to use is: a new tape.
>
>Instead of "The next tape Amanda expects to use is: Indyme011."
>
>Here's the tapelist:
>
>20030226 Indyme010 reuse
>20030225 Indyme009 reuse
>20030221 Indyme008 r
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 03:54:16PM -0500, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
> > 20030226 Indyme010 reuse
> > 20030225 Indyme009 reuse
> > 20030221 Indyme008 reuse
> > 20030220 Indyme007 reuse
> > 20030219 Indyme006 reuse
> > 20030218 Indyme005 reuse
> > 20030215 Indyme004 reuse
> > 20030214 Indyme003 reus
On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 at 11:33am, John Oliver wrote
> These dumps were to tape Indyme010.
> The next tape Amanda expects to use is: a new tape.
>
> Instead of "The next tape Amanda expects to use is: Indyme011."
>
> Here's the tapelist:
>
> 20030226 Indyme010 reuse
> 20030225 Indyme009 reuse
> 20
1) This morning, my amanda report said:
These dumps were to tape Indyme010.
The next tape Amanda expects to use is: a new tape.
Instead of "The next tape Amanda expects to use is: Indyme011."
Here's the tapelist:
20030226 Indyme010 reuse
20030225 Indyme009 reuse
20030221 Indyme008 reuse
2003022
10 matches
Mail list logo