Re: [BackupPC-users] is there a wiki for backuppc somewhere?
Don't know of one, but I like the idea, I think a wiki would be brilliant.. Riaan On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 12:40 -0700, Huck wrote: Just looking where to find more info and maybe contribute some. --Huck ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/ ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
Re: [BackupPC-users] Conf{FullKeepCnt} = 1 again
On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 08:18, Travis Wu wrote:
Thus, I could just set the Conf{FullKeepCnt} = 1 or any number. So
why do we even need to change the FullKeepCnt setting?
All fulls needed to support any existing incrementals will
be kept regardless of the setting, but you might want to
keep more older fulls, letting those incrementals expire.
(I am using rsync so the space consumption doesnât seem to be an
issue)
Space consumption is the same regardless. With other methods
files are copied over but then duplicates are linked into
the pooled copy.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
[BackupPC-users] deferred restore
Hi, I was trying to restore a folder so first I got the ok message and the request was sent. However, the process didn't start until 2 hrs later. Today again, for another restore job, the request was sent at 7am but the The log shows: 7success 6/14 08:53 0.2 22 0.0 0 0 In both cases, there was nothing showing on the status page before I did the restore. Nothing should be running coz the backup/incr was done few hrs prior to it. How can I avoid this deferred restore behavior? Thanks. Btw, I really love this program, spending time on it and working out the kinks have been actually fun. : ) Travis Wu ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
[BackupPC-users] Blackout settings
I want most systems on my network to backup
overnight but I have several notebooks that are only attached to the network
during business hours. I reviewed the blackout settings in config.pl and wanted
to know if I was interpreting them correctly.
It seems that if I use the following settings
the system will "learn" which systems are notconnected after working hours
and back them up during the day when they become available.
WakeupSchedule =
[1..24] # wakeup every
hour
BlackoutBadPingLimit =
3 # default setting
BlackoutGoodCnt =
7
# default setting
BlackoutPeriods =
[
# set blackout 8am to 5:30pm Monday through Friday
{
hourBegin = 8.0,
hourEnd = 17.5,
weekDays
= [1, 2, 3, 4, 5],
}
]
Is this an accurate assessment?
Tom Maguire
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
[BackupPC-users] fileListReceive failed, ruled out a dirty shell, what next?
Hi all, One of the machines I backup stopped syncing last week. The machine running BackupPC and the system being backed up are both running Fedora Core 4. I upgraded the BackupPC machine from FC3 to eliminate the possibility of version conflicts with rsync, but it's worth noting that before the upgrade I was using an rsync compiled from source, I'm not using the same RPMs on both sides. The most confusing part is that another system is still getting backed up successfully, and it's running FC2 and using rsync compiled from source (2.6.3 compared to 2.6.8 on the server and failing system). I had some time to trying the standard resolution methods I found via Google, but no joy and I'm at a loss. I've changed the remote machine's domain name to remotehost for sake of anonymity, but below is my shell session: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ ssh -l root remotehost /bin/true out.dat [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ cat out.dat [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ ls -alh out.dat -rw-rw-r-- 1 backuppc backuppc 0 Jun 14 12:09 out.dat [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ /usr/bin/ssh -q -x -l root remotehost /usr/bin/ rsync -vv --server --sender --numeric-ids --perms --owner --group -- devices --links --times --block-size=2048 --recursive --exclude=/tmp --exclude=/proc --exclude=/sys --ignore-times . / [server] add_rule(- /tmp) [server] add_rule(- /proc) [server] add_rule(- /sys) (Server) Protocol versions: remote=168430090, negotiated=29 protocol version mismatch -- is your shell clean? (see the rsync man page for an explanation) _exit_cleanup(code=2, file=compat.c, line=64): entered rsync error: protocol incompatibility (code 2) at compat.c(64) [sender=2.6.8] _exit_cleanup(code=2, file=compat.c, line=64): about to call exit(2) Any hints on how to troubleshoot this further? Thank You, Troy ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
Re: [BackupPC-users] Backuppc_Nightly
Never got an answer to this question - anybody have an idea? Randall Barlow wrote: Suppose you are using a machine that is not on all the time as your backuppc server. If BackupPC_Nightly is supposed to run, say at 1am, and the machine is off at 1 am, will BackupPC_Nightly automagically run the next time the machine is on during a wakeup? Or will it wait until the next time the machine is on at 1 am? Thanks, Randy ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/ ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
Re: [BackupPC-users] fileListReceive failed, ruled out a dirty shell, what next?
I learnt a couple of days ago that when using rsync 2.6.8 you need to change --devices to -D in your config file. That fixed it for me. Nils. Excellent, that did the trick. Thanks Nils! Is there any updates in the works for BackupPC? If so, it would be great if this change was included in the next release. Thank You, Troy ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
[BackupPC-users] odd errors in XferLOG.0.z
SNIPPET: Running: /usr/bin/ssh -q -x -l root 10.1.3.35 /usr/bin/rsync --server --sender --numeric-ids --perms --owner --group --devices --links --times --block-size=2048 --recursive --exclude /proc --exclude \\\*.tmp --exclude=/proc --exclude=/tmp --exclude=/temp --ignore-times . / Xfer PIDs are now 18917 Got remote protocol 28 Xfer PIDs are now 18917,18921 [ skipped 67266 lines ] Unable to write 186163 bytes to /var/lib/backuppc/pc/10.1.3.35/new/f%2f/fhome/fhousta/f.mozilla/fdefault/fi99opixf.slt/fCache/f28E29DF4d01 (got -1) [ skipped 97 lines ] Unable to write 174348 bytes to /var/lib/backuppc/pc/10.1.3.35/new/f%2f/fhome/fhousta/f.mozilla/fdefault/fi99opixf.slt/fCache/f5EEE692Ed01 (got -1) [ skipped 31 lines ] Unable to write 124105 bytes to /var/lib/backuppc/pc/10.1.3.35/new/f%2f/fhome/fhousta/f.mozilla/fdefault/fi99opixf.slt/fCache/f6EE585B2d01 (got -1) [ skipped 14 lines ] Unable to open /var/lib/backuppc/pc/10.1.3.35/new/f%2f/fhome/fhousta/f.mozilla/fdefault/fi99opixf.slt/fCache/f76FC7BB9d01 for writing Botch, no matches on /var/lib/backuppc/pc/10.1.3.35/new/f%2f/fhome/fhousta/f.mozilla/fdefault/fi99opixf.slt/fCache/f76FC7BB9d01 (d4a7751259737cad7b9fcc98eebde415) [ skipped 1 lines ] Unable to open /var/lib/backuppc/pc/10.1.3.35/new/f%2f/fhome/fhousta/f.mozilla/fdefault/fi99opixf.slt/fCache/f7963A545d01 for writing Botch, no matches on /var/lib/backuppc/pc/10.1.3.35/new/f%2f/fhome/fhousta/f.mozilla/fdefault/fi99opixf.slt/fCache/f7963A545d01 (918d697017be917cfa73874c511e188d) [ skipped 1 lines ] Unable to open /var/lib/backuppc/pc/10.1.3.35/new/f%2f/fhome/fhousta/f.mozilla/fdefault/fi99opixf.slt/fCache/f7A4451BCd01 for writing Botch, no matches on /var/lib/backuppc/pc/10.1.3.35/new/f%2f/fhome/fhousta/f.mozilla/fdefault/fi99opixf.slt/fCache/f7A4451BCd01 (77f2d8d2f6ee1cb0be3b153438e32fad) [ skipped 1 lines ] Can't link /var/lib/backuppc/pc/10.1.3.35/new/f%2f/fhome/fhousta/f.mozilla/fdefault/fi99opixf.slt/fCache/f7A6C31EDd01 to /var/lib/backuppc/cpool/4/a/5/4a54412cbd890cbeb2e082829238281e [ skipped 1 lines ] Unable to open /var/lib/backuppc/pc/10.1.3.35/new/f%2f/fhome/fhousta/f.mozilla/fdefault/fi99opixf.slt/fCache/f7B3FDB53d01 for writing Botch, no matches on /var/lib/backuppc/pc/10.1.3.35/new/f%2f/fhome/fhousta/f.mozilla/fdefault/fi99opixf.slt/fCache/f7B3FDB53d01 (5403ee894903b3a30c52569d84c6402c) [ skipped 1 lines ] Unable to open /var/lib/backuppc/pc/10.1.3.35/new/f%2f/fhome/fhousta/f.mozilla/fdefault/fi99opixf.slt/fCache/f7B943D7Ed01 for writing Botch, no matches on /var/lib/backuppc/pc/10.1.3.35/new/f%2f/fhome/fhousta/f.mozilla/fdefault/fi99opixf.slt/fCache/f7B943D7Ed01 (f79604485d549ec90644a4e2c22d5987) [ skipped 1 lines ] all those 'f's getting prepended to directories is odd no? I have no idea where it's getting that from. --Huck ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
Re: [BackupPC-users] rsyncd based only on full's
Paul writes: I'm doing my backup using the rsyncd service on the PC's. I'm also quite new to backuppc. I was wandering why the rsyncd method uses as base the last full, and is not taking into account the last incremental. My experience with rsync is mostly Unix, and there I can mirror a tree using only minimal network traffic and CPU-usage. But of course, the resulting tree is not linked into some pool. Is it just implementation issues, easier to base on a full, much more difficult to use the combination of full + incrementals? Would it be easier when I fill in the incrementals? Or or there more fundamental reasons? It's just something that isn't fully implemented yet. Most of the pieces are in place. However, it will take more work to support only incrementals since that would require the original full and all incrementals to be kept forever, and an increasing number of incrementals would have to be merged together. That's why doing a periodic full is necessary. The solution would be to fill in each incremental as the oldest backup is removed. That said, doing periodic fulls is good practice since that's the only time the file contents are really checked. Also, there is no '--delete' option used: an incremental is now unaware of deleted files. Is that because File::RsyncP has no provision for that? The delete operation is not really meaningful since BackupPC is creating a new directory tree for each backup. With rsync it does keep track of deleted files in incrementals. Les M. also mentioned that each backup method has some quirks that are only resolved when doing a full. Are there any issues that rsyncd runs into when doing only incrementals? (besides the notion of removed files) The quirks are for tar and smb, not rsync. Removed and renamed files work with rsync incrementals. The significant missing pieces with rsync are hardlinks and ACLs. Hardlinks will be supported in the next release. ACLs will be supported with BackupPCd. Craig ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
Re: [BackupPC-users] Funny ssh Problems
Nils Breunese (Lemonbit Internet) writes:
Travis Fraser wrote:
What version of rsync are you using? Later versions need --devices
changed to -D in $Conf{RsyncArgs}.
I guess I need to change this for $Conf{RsyncRestoreArgs} as well?
Yes.
Craig
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
Re: [BackupPC-users] deferred restore
Travis writes: I was trying to restore a folder so first I got the ok message and the request was sent. However, the process didn't start until 2 hrs later. Today again, for another restore job, the request was sent at 7am but the The log shows: 7 success 6/14 08:53 0.2 22 0.0 0 0 In both cases, there was nothing showing on the status page before I did the restore. Nothing should be running coz the backup/incr was done few hrs prior to it. Was BackupPC_nightly running? Look at the server LOG file. Craig ___ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
Re: [BackupPC-users] Blackout settings
Thomas Maguire writes:
I want most systems on my network to backup overnight but I have
several notebooks that are only attached to the network during
business hours. I reviewed the blackout settings in config.pl and
wanted to know if I was interpreting them correctly.
It seems that if I use the following settings the system will
learn which systems are not connected after working hours and
back them up during the day when they become available.
WakeupSchedule = [1..24]# wakeup every hour
BlackoutBadPingLimit = 3 # default setting
BlackoutGoodCnt = 7# default setting
BlackoutPeriods = [ # set blackout 8am to 5:30pm Monday
through Friday
{
hourBegin = 8.0,
hourEnd = 17.5,
weekDays = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5],
}
]
Is this an accurate assessment?
Yes, this is correct. Putting these settings in the main config
file will do the right thing. Clients that are reliably on the
network will be subject to blackout (after a week). Clients
that are not reliably on the network will be backed up whenever
they are available.
Craig
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
