Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula and Large File Support (LFS) on Mac OS X 10.4.8 Intel
On 11/27/06, Erich Prinz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Thanks Martin, that got it. So yes, running 1.36.x on OS X 10.4.x shows that large file support is enabled. Erich Thanks Erich (and all others) for beating me to the punch and solving this question. Its a good one to solve with certainty and to know that the next version of Bacula (its configure script) can look at the target platform its being built on, detect that its Darwin (OS X) and then essentially assume large file support from there on out. Cheers! On Nov 27, 2006, at 2:15 PM, Martin Simmons wrote: >> On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 07:50:48 -0600, Erich Prinz said: >> >> >> >> running a status in bconsole (even with -dnn) doesn't yield the >> output you suggest below. Likely a nuance with BSD. > > Older versions of Bacula only report the sizes for debug>0, so try > doing this > first: > > setdebug client level=1 > > __Martin > > >> >>> >>> You can check if a particular client has large file support despite >>> what the >>> configure output says by doing a: >>> >>> status client=xxx >>> >>> in the console. If you get a line such as: >>> >>> Sizeof: off_t=8 size_t=4 debug=0 trace=0 >>> >>> in the output, you have large file support. If it says: >>> >>> Sizeof: off_t=4 size_t=4 debug=0 trace=0 >>> >>> you do not have large file support. >>> >>> On Ubuntu the value for "Large File Support:" was "yes". Furthermore, when I tried to re-configure on Mac OS X (being sure to run configure a second time after a "make distclean" to clear any configure cache), I then explicitly added this configure option: --enable-largefile But the end result was the same: Large file support: no What should I do? I will most definitely need to back up and restore files that are in excess of 2 GB in size. In Bacula, is Large File Support limited to certain file systems or operating systems? The Mac I tried configuring for is one of the quite new Intel iMacs (with Intel Core 2 Dueo "Merom" chip inside and apparently Merom is a 64-bit chip and apparently Mac OS X 10.4.x "Tiger" has some 64-bit capability but I'm not clear on exactly where the lines are drawn between 32-bit and 64-bit in Tiger and on these new iMacs). Would CPU architecture in any way affect the outcome of Bacula? Might I be in new territory if I am understanding this [1] document about Large File System support correctly. Any further suggestions or comparisons (Erich?) from people who are running Bacula on Mac OS X (Apple Intel and PowerPC)? Cheers, -H [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_file_support >>> >>> >>> -- >>> --- >>> 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 >> > > -- > --- > 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
Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula and Large File Support (LFS) on Mac OS X 10.4.8 Intel
Thanks Martin, that got it. So yes, running 1.36.x on OS X 10.4.x shows that large file support is enabled. Erich On Nov 27, 2006, at 2:15 PM, Martin Simmons wrote: >> On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 07:50:48 -0600, Erich Prinz said: >> >> >> >> running a status in bconsole (even with -dnn) doesn't yield the >> output you suggest below. Likely a nuance with BSD. > > Older versions of Bacula only report the sizes for debug>0, so try > doing this > first: > > setdebug client level=1 > > __Martin > > >> >>> >>> You can check if a particular client has large file support despite >>> what the >>> configure output says by doing a: >>> >>> status client=xxx >>> >>> in the console. If you get a line such as: >>> >>> Sizeof: off_t=8 size_t=4 debug=0 trace=0 >>> >>> in the output, you have large file support. If it says: >>> >>> Sizeof: off_t=4 size_t=4 debug=0 trace=0 >>> >>> you do not have large file support. >>> >>> On Ubuntu the value for "Large File Support:" was "yes". Furthermore, when I tried to re-configure on Mac OS X (being sure to run configure a second time after a "make distclean" to clear any configure cache), I then explicitly added this configure option: --enable-largefile But the end result was the same: Large file support: no What should I do? I will most definitely need to back up and restore files that are in excess of 2 GB in size. In Bacula, is Large File Support limited to certain file systems or operating systems? The Mac I tried configuring for is one of the quite new Intel iMacs (with Intel Core 2 Dueo "Merom" chip inside and apparently Merom is a 64-bit chip and apparently Mac OS X 10.4.x "Tiger" has some 64-bit capability but I'm not clear on exactly where the lines are drawn between 32-bit and 64-bit in Tiger and on these new iMacs). Would CPU architecture in any way affect the outcome of Bacula? Might I be in new territory if I am understanding this [1] document about Large File System support correctly. Any further suggestions or comparisons (Erich?) from people who are running Bacula on Mac OS X (Apple Intel and PowerPC)? Cheers, -H [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_file_support >>> >>> >>> -- >>> --- >>> 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 >> > > -- > --- > 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
Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula and Large File Support (LFS) on Mac OS X 10.4.8 Intel
On Monday 27 November 2006 14:50, Erich Prinz wrote: > > > > running a status in bconsole (even with -dnn) doesn't yield the > output you suggest below. Likely a nuance with BSD. No all daemons use the same code. Most likely on pre 1.39 you must set a debug level on the FD of say 10. > > > > > You can check if a particular client has large file support despite > > what the > > configure output says by doing a: > > > > status client=xxx > > > > in the console. If you get a line such as: > > > > Sizeof: off_t=8 size_t=4 debug=0 trace=0 > > > > in the output, you have large file support. If it says: > > > > Sizeof: off_t=4 size_t=4 debug=0 trace=0 > > > > you do not have large file support. > > > > > >> > >> On Ubuntu the value for "Large File Support:" was "yes". > >> > >> Furthermore, when I tried to re-configure on Mac OS X (being sure > >> to run > >> configure a second time after a "make distclean" to clear any > >> configure > >> cache), I then explicitly added this configure option: > >> > >> --enable-largefile > >> > >> But the end result was the same: > >> > >> Large file support: no > >> > >> What should I do? I will most definitely need to back up and > >> restore files > >> that are in excess of 2 GB in size. > >> > >> In Bacula, is Large File Support limited to certain file systems or > >> operating systems? The Mac I tried configuring for is one of the > >> quite new > >> Intel iMacs (with Intel Core 2 Dueo "Merom" chip inside and > >> apparently Merom > >> is a 64-bit chip and apparently Mac OS X 10.4.x "Tiger" has some > >> 64-bit > >> capability but I'm not clear on exactly where the lines are drawn > >> between > >> 32-bit and 64-bit in Tiger and on these new iMacs). Would CPU > >> architecture > >> in any way affect the outcome of Bacula? > >> > >> Might I be in new territory if I am understanding this [1] > >> document about > >> Large File System support correctly. Any further suggestions or > >> comparisons > >> (Erich?) from people who are running Bacula on Mac OS X (Apple > >> Intel and > >> PowerPC)? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> > >> -H > >> > >> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_file_support > >> > > > > -- > > --- > > 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 > - 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
Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula and Large File Support (LFS) on Mac OS X 10.4.8 Intel
On 11/27/06, Erich Prinz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Running 10.4.8 on this end. What I can do is run a job with a large file and let you know the results. The configure options in the previous post don't included that option and per Kern's post on the subject, it appears it is on by default (which would make sense for Apple to do given the heavy use of video on the platform.) Erich, thank you for running a controlled test of a large file. I will do the same but am not quite there yet (am still reading through the manual and meticulously documenting my own installations -- both Ubuntu Linux and Mac OS X -- in parallel). It does make sense that large files are supported by Apple since OS X is notoriously used by media companies and Hollywood producers operating on large files easily over 2 GB in size. But, I think its good to test out in purely a Bacula context nonetheless (and ideally find out what can be done so that the next version of Bacula could, for example, detect the Mac OS X (Darwin) platform and output a "yes" for large file support. Cheers. Erich On Nov 27, 2006, at 12:11 AM, Hydro Meteor wrote: > > On 11/26/06, Erich Prinz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Can't help > on this one. PPC only on this end. > > Hi Erich, > > A Bacula News Bulletin just in ... I just moments ago tried on Mac > OS X Server 10.4.8 running on a PowerPC Mac, the exact same > configure options on the same original source of Bacula ( 1.38.11) > and thus explicitly requiring the large file system. The result > output by configure was exactly the same (Large file system: no). > > > Odd that it was explicit in the configure options but not found when > running. > > Agreed. Maybe this is a bug in the configure script that manifests > only on Mac OS X? > > Erich, what version of Mac OS X are you running on your PowerPC Mac > (s)? I am wondering if you you have a moment if you could also try > to run configure (in an isolated directory so as not to mess up > your environment) and to see if you also do not receive the option > to enable Large file support? If its not a major hassle to you? > > Have you attempted to run a backup on a single file over 2 GB just to > see what would happen? Just curious. > > Not yet but I am surely going to try this -- will be one of the > first things I do is not only try to backup a file over 2 GB but > also restore. Will update the mailing list with the results when I > find them. > > -H > > Erich > > > On Nov 26, 2006, at 10:30 PM, Hydro Meteor wrote: > > > As a followup I have copied and pasted what appears to be a > > relevant section of my config.log output on the same iMac which I > > tried to enable large file support for. If anyone who is more > > familiar with the inner workings of Bacula (Kern?) could shed some > > additional light on what would be a good next step to take (in > > order to make sure Bacula can operate on large files on Mac OS X), > > that would be greatly appreciated! > > > > configure:17157: checking for CFLAGS value to request large file > > support > > configure:17222: result: no > > configure:17224: checking for LDFLAGS value to request large file > > support > > configure:17234: result: no > > configure:17236: checking for LIBS value to request large file > support > > configure:17246: result: no > > configure:17291: checking for _FILE_OFFSET_BITS > > configure:17308: result: 64 > > configure:17317: checking for _LARGEFILE_SOURCE > > configure:17334: result: 1 > > configure:17343: checking for _LARGE_FILES > > configure:17360: result: 1 > > > > > > On 11/26/06, Hydro Meteor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello, > > > > I was able to ./configure Bacula 1.38.11 on a Mac running Mac OS X > > 10.4.8 without any problems today (in a manner almost exactly the > > same as my Ubuntu Linux configuration). In both cases, I did not > > explicitly provide configure with the option of disabling large > > file support, and I also did not explicitly provide configure with > > he option of enabling large file system support (but according to > > the current manual, --enable-largefile is the default). > > > > Despite accepting the default (enabled), I noticed that my output > > was different after running configure. On the Mac, configure > > reported a value of "no" assigned as in: > > > > Large file support: no > > > > On Ubuntu the value for "Large File Support:" was "yes". > > > > Furthermore, when I tried to re-configure on Mac OS X (being sure > > to run configure a second time after a "make distclean" to clear > > any configure cache), I then explicitly added this configure option: > > > > --enable-largefile > > > > But the end result was the same: > > > > Large file support: no > > > > What should I do? I will most definitely need to back up and > > restore files that are in excess of 2 GB in size. > > > > In Bacula, is Large File Support limited to certain file systems or > > operating systems? The Mac I tried configuring for is one of the > > quite new Intel
Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula and Large File Support (LFS) on Mac OS X 10.4.8 Intel
On 11/26/06, Kern Sibbald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Monday 27 November 2006 05:16, Hydro Meteor wrote: SNIP On the Mac, configure reported a value of "no" assigned as in: > > Large file support: no If MacOS X is derived from FreeBSD, as I believe it is, this is "normal" in the sense that FreeBSD does not follow typical Unix/Linux conventions for large file support because it is always turned on. Kern, From my understanding as illustrated by Amit Singh's Mac OS X Internals [2], Mac OS X does inherit some of Free BSD 5 but I don't have my copy of Singh's book handy and in front of me to confirm this (but if memory serves me right, its not a simple cut-and-dry derivation because Mac OS X also has part of its ancestry based on NeXTSTEP and OpenSTEP which itself was based on good ol' BSD. Best regards, -H [2] http://osxbook.com/book/bonus/chapter1/ You can check if a particular client has large file support despite what the configure output says by doing a: status client=xxx in the console. If you get a line such as: Sizeof: off_t=8 size_t=4 debug=0 trace=0 in the output, you have large file support. If it says: Sizeof: off_t=4 size_t=4 debug=0 trace=0 you do not have large file support. SNIP - 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
Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula and Large File Support (LFS) on Mac OS X 10.4.8 Intel
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 07:50:48 -0600, Erich Prinz said: > > > > running a status in bconsole (even with -dnn) doesn't yield the > output you suggest below. Likely a nuance with BSD. Older versions of Bacula only report the sizes for debug>0, so try doing this first: setdebug client level=1 __Martin > > > > > You can check if a particular client has large file support despite > > what the > > configure output says by doing a: > > > > status client=xxx > > > > in the console. If you get a line such as: > > > > Sizeof: off_t=8 size_t=4 debug=0 trace=0 > > > > in the output, you have large file support. If it says: > > > > Sizeof: off_t=4 size_t=4 debug=0 trace=0 > > > > you do not have large file support. > > > > > >> > >> On Ubuntu the value for "Large File Support:" was "yes". > >> > >> Furthermore, when I tried to re-configure on Mac OS X (being sure > >> to run > >> configure a second time after a "make distclean" to clear any > >> configure > >> cache), I then explicitly added this configure option: > >> > >> --enable-largefile > >> > >> But the end result was the same: > >> > >> Large file support: no > >> > >> What should I do? I will most definitely need to back up and > >> restore files > >> that are in excess of 2 GB in size. > >> > >> In Bacula, is Large File Support limited to certain file systems or > >> operating systems? The Mac I tried configuring for is one of the > >> quite new > >> Intel iMacs (with Intel Core 2 Dueo "Merom" chip inside and > >> apparently Merom > >> is a 64-bit chip and apparently Mac OS X 10.4.x "Tiger" has some > >> 64-bit > >> capability but I'm not clear on exactly where the lines are drawn > >> between > >> 32-bit and 64-bit in Tiger and on these new iMacs). Would CPU > >> architecture > >> in any way affect the outcome of Bacula? > >> > >> Might I be in new territory if I am understanding this [1] > >> document about > >> Large File System support correctly. Any further suggestions or > >> comparisons > >> (Erich?) from people who are running Bacula on Mac OS X (Apple > >> Intel and > >> PowerPC)? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> > >> -H > >> > >> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_file_support > >> > > > > -- > > --- > > 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 > - 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
Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula and Large File Support (LFS) on Mac OS X 10.4.8 Intel
Running 10.4.8 on this end. What I can do is run a job with a large file and let you know the results. The configure options in the previous post don't included that option and per Kern's post on the subject, it appears it is on by default (which would make sense for Apple to do given the heavy use of video on the platform.) Erich On Nov 27, 2006, at 12:11 AM, Hydro Meteor wrote: > > On 11/26/06, Erich Prinz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Can't help > on this one. PPC only on this end. > > Hi Erich, > > A Bacula News Bulletin just in ... I just moments ago tried on Mac > OS X Server 10.4.8 running on a PowerPC Mac, the exact same > configure options on the same original source of Bacula ( 1.38.11) > and thus explicitly requiring the large file system. The result > output by configure was exactly the same (Large file system: no). > > > Odd that it was explicit in the configure options but not found when > running. > > Agreed. Maybe this is a bug in the configure script that manifests > only on Mac OS X? > > Erich, what version of Mac OS X are you running on your PowerPC Mac > (s)? I am wondering if you you have a moment if you could also try > to run configure (in an isolated directory so as not to mess up > your environment) and to see if you also do not receive the option > to enable Large file support? If its not a major hassle to you? > > Have you attempted to run a backup on a single file over 2 GB just to > see what would happen? Just curious. > > Not yet but I am surely going to try this -- will be one of the > first things I do is not only try to backup a file over 2 GB but > also restore. Will update the mailing list with the results when I > find them. > > -H > > Erich > > > On Nov 26, 2006, at 10:30 PM, Hydro Meteor wrote: > > > As a followup I have copied and pasted what appears to be a > > relevant section of my config.log output on the same iMac which I > > tried to enable large file support for. If anyone who is more > > familiar with the inner workings of Bacula (Kern?) could shed some > > additional light on what would be a good next step to take (in > > order to make sure Bacula can operate on large files on Mac OS X), > > that would be greatly appreciated! > > > > configure:17157: checking for CFLAGS value to request large file > > support > > configure:17222: result: no > > configure:17224: checking for LDFLAGS value to request large file > > support > > configure:17234: result: no > > configure:17236: checking for LIBS value to request large file > support > > configure:17246: result: no > > configure:17291: checking for _FILE_OFFSET_BITS > > configure:17308: result: 64 > > configure:17317: checking for _LARGEFILE_SOURCE > > configure:17334: result: 1 > > configure:17343: checking for _LARGE_FILES > > configure:17360: result: 1 > > > > > > On 11/26/06, Hydro Meteor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello, > > > > I was able to ./configure Bacula 1.38.11 on a Mac running Mac OS X > > 10.4.8 without any problems today (in a manner almost exactly the > > same as my Ubuntu Linux configuration). In both cases, I did not > > explicitly provide configure with the option of disabling large > > file support, and I also did not explicitly provide configure with > > he option of enabling large file system support (but according to > > the current manual, --enable-largefile is the default). > > > > Despite accepting the default (enabled), I noticed that my output > > was different after running configure. On the Mac, configure > > reported a value of "no" assigned as in: > > > > Large file support: no > > > > On Ubuntu the value for "Large File Support:" was "yes". > > > > Furthermore, when I tried to re-configure on Mac OS X (being sure > > to run configure a second time after a "make distclean" to clear > > any configure cache), I then explicitly added this configure option: > > > > --enable-largefile > > > > But the end result was the same: > > > > Large file support: no > > > > What should I do? I will most definitely need to back up and > > restore files that are in excess of 2 GB in size. > > > > In Bacula, is Large File Support limited to certain file systems or > > operating systems? The Mac I tried configuring for is one of the > > quite new Intel iMacs (with Intel Core 2 Dueo "Merom" chip inside > > and apparently Merom is a 64-bit chip and apparently Mac OS X > > 10.4.x "Tiger" has some 64-bit capability but I'm not clear on > > exactly where the lines are drawn between 32-bit and 64-bit in > > Tiger and on these new iMacs). Would CPU architecture in any way > > affect the outcome of Bacula? > > > > Might I be in new territory if I am understanding this [1] document > > about Large File System support correctly. Any further suggestions > > or comparisons (Erich?) from people who are running Bacula on Mac > > OS X (Apple Intel and PowerPC)? > > > > Cheers, > > > > -H > > > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_file_support > > > > >
Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula and Large File Support (LFS) on Mac OS X 10.4.8 Intel
running a status in bconsole (even with -dnn) doesn't yield the output you suggest below. Likely a nuance with BSD. > > You can check if a particular client has large file support despite > what the > configure output says by doing a: > > status client=xxx > > in the console. If you get a line such as: > > Sizeof: off_t=8 size_t=4 debug=0 trace=0 > > in the output, you have large file support. If it says: > > Sizeof: off_t=4 size_t=4 debug=0 trace=0 > > you do not have large file support. > > >> >> On Ubuntu the value for "Large File Support:" was "yes". >> >> Furthermore, when I tried to re-configure on Mac OS X (being sure >> to run >> configure a second time after a "make distclean" to clear any >> configure >> cache), I then explicitly added this configure option: >> >> --enable-largefile >> >> But the end result was the same: >> >> Large file support: no >> >> What should I do? I will most definitely need to back up and >> restore files >> that are in excess of 2 GB in size. >> >> In Bacula, is Large File Support limited to certain file systems or >> operating systems? The Mac I tried configuring for is one of the >> quite new >> Intel iMacs (with Intel Core 2 Dueo "Merom" chip inside and >> apparently Merom >> is a 64-bit chip and apparently Mac OS X 10.4.x "Tiger" has some >> 64-bit >> capability but I'm not clear on exactly where the lines are drawn >> between >> 32-bit and 64-bit in Tiger and on these new iMacs). Would CPU >> architecture >> in any way affect the outcome of Bacula? >> >> Might I be in new territory if I am understanding this [1] >> document about >> Large File System support correctly. Any further suggestions or >> comparisons >> (Erich?) from people who are running Bacula on Mac OS X (Apple >> Intel and >> PowerPC)? >> >> Cheers, >> >> -H >> >> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_file_support >> > > -- > --- > 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
Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula and Large File Support (LFS) on Mac OS X 10.4.8 Intel
On Monday 27 November 2006 05:16, Hydro Meteor wrote: > Hello, > > I was able to ./configure Bacula 1.38.11 on a Mac running Mac OS X > 10.4.8without any problems today (in a manner almost exactly the same > as my Ubuntu > Linux configuration). In both cases, I did not explicitly provide configure > with the option of disabling large file support, and I also did not > explicitly provide configure with he option of enabling large file system > support (but according to the current manual, --enable-largefile is the > default). > > Despite accepting the default (enabled), I noticed that my output was > different after running configure. On the Mac, configure reported a value of > "no" assigned as in: > > Large file support: no If MacOS X is derived from FreeBSD, as I believe it is, this is "normal" in the sense that FreeBSD does not follow typical Unix/Linux conventions for large file support because it is always turned on. You can check if a particular client has large file support despite what the configure output says by doing a: status client=xxx in the console. If you get a line such as: Sizeof: off_t=8 size_t=4 debug=0 trace=0 in the output, you have large file support. If it says: Sizeof: off_t=4 size_t=4 debug=0 trace=0 you do not have large file support. > > On Ubuntu the value for "Large File Support:" was "yes". > > Furthermore, when I tried to re-configure on Mac OS X (being sure to run > configure a second time after a "make distclean" to clear any configure > cache), I then explicitly added this configure option: > > --enable-largefile > > But the end result was the same: > > Large file support: no > > What should I do? I will most definitely need to back up and restore files > that are in excess of 2 GB in size. > > In Bacula, is Large File Support limited to certain file systems or > operating systems? The Mac I tried configuring for is one of the quite new > Intel iMacs (with Intel Core 2 Dueo "Merom" chip inside and apparently Merom > is a 64-bit chip and apparently Mac OS X 10.4.x "Tiger" has some 64-bit > capability but I'm not clear on exactly where the lines are drawn between > 32-bit and 64-bit in Tiger and on these new iMacs). Would CPU architecture > in any way affect the outcome of Bacula? > > Might I be in new territory if I am understanding this [1] document about > Large File System support correctly. Any further suggestions or comparisons > (Erich?) from people who are running Bacula on Mac OS X (Apple Intel and > PowerPC)? > > Cheers, > > -H > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_file_support > - 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
Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula and Large File Support (LFS) on Mac OS X 10.4.8 Intel
On 11/26/06, Erich Prinz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Can't help on this one. PPC only on this end. Hi Erich, A Bacula News Bulletin just in ... I just moments ago tried on Mac OS X Server 10.4.8 running on a PowerPC Mac, the exact same configure options on the same original source of Bacula (1.38.11) and thus explicitly requiring the large file system. The result output by configure was exactly the same (Large file system: no). Odd that it was explicit in the configure options but not found when running. Agreed. Maybe this is a bug in the configure script that manifests only on Mac OS X? Erich, what version of Mac OS X are you running on your PowerPC Mac(s)? I am wondering if you you have a moment if you could also try to run configure (in an isolated directory so as not to mess up your environment) and to see if you also do not receive the option to enable Large file support? If its not a major hassle to you? Have you attempted to run a backup on a single file over 2 GB just to see what would happen? Just curious. Not yet but I am surely going to try this -- will be one of the first things I do is not only try to backup a file over 2 GB but also restore. Will update the mailing list with the results when I find them. -H Erich On Nov 26, 2006, at 10:30 PM, Hydro Meteor wrote: > As a followup I have copied and pasted what appears to be a > relevant section of my config.log output on the same iMac which I > tried to enable large file support for. If anyone who is more > familiar with the inner workings of Bacula (Kern?) could shed some > additional light on what would be a good next step to take (in > order to make sure Bacula can operate on large files on Mac OS X), > that would be greatly appreciated! > > configure:17157: checking for CFLAGS value to request large file > support > configure:17222: result: no > configure:17224: checking for LDFLAGS value to request large file > support > configure:17234: result: no > configure:17236: checking for LIBS value to request large file support > configure:17246: result: no > configure:17291: checking for _FILE_OFFSET_BITS > configure:17308: result: 64 > configure:17317: checking for _LARGEFILE_SOURCE > configure:17334: result: 1 > configure:17343: checking for _LARGE_FILES > configure:17360: result: 1 > > > On 11/26/06, Hydro Meteor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello, > > I was able to ./configure Bacula 1.38.11 on a Mac running Mac OS X > 10.4.8 without any problems today (in a manner almost exactly the > same as my Ubuntu Linux configuration). In both cases, I did not > explicitly provide configure with the option of disabling large > file support, and I also did not explicitly provide configure with > he option of enabling large file system support (but according to > the current manual, --enable-largefile is the default). > > Despite accepting the default (enabled), I noticed that my output > was different after running configure. On the Mac, configure > reported a value of "no" assigned as in: > > Large file support: no > > On Ubuntu the value for "Large File Support:" was "yes". > > Furthermore, when I tried to re-configure on Mac OS X (being sure > to run configure a second time after a "make distclean" to clear > any configure cache), I then explicitly added this configure option: > > --enable-largefile > > But the end result was the same: > > Large file support: no > > What should I do? I will most definitely need to back up and > restore files that are in excess of 2 GB in size. > > In Bacula, is Large File Support limited to certain file systems or > operating systems? The Mac I tried configuring for is one of the > quite new Intel iMacs (with Intel Core 2 Dueo "Merom" chip inside > and apparently Merom is a 64-bit chip and apparently Mac OS X > 10.4.x "Tiger" has some 64-bit capability but I'm not clear on > exactly where the lines are drawn between 32-bit and 64-bit in > Tiger and on these new iMacs). Would CPU architecture in any way > affect the outcome of Bacula? > > Might I be in new territory if I am understanding this [1] document > about Large File System support correctly. Any further suggestions > or comparisons (Erich?) from people who are running Bacula on Mac > OS X (Apple Intel and PowerPC)? > > Cheers, > > -H > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_file_support > > -- > --- > 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. Influe
Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula and Large File Support (LFS) on Mac OS X 10.4.8 Intel
Can't help on this one. PPC only on this end. Odd that it was explicit in the configure options but not found when running. Have you attempted to run a backup on a single file over 2 GB just to see what would happen? Just curious. Erich On Nov 26, 2006, at 10:30 PM, Hydro Meteor wrote: > As a followup I have copied and pasted what appears to be a > relevant section of my config.log output on the same iMac which I > tried to enable large file support for. If anyone who is more > familiar with the inner workings of Bacula (Kern?) could shed some > additional light on what would be a good next step to take (in > order to make sure Bacula can operate on large files on Mac OS X), > that would be greatly appreciated! > > configure:17157: checking for CFLAGS value to request large file > support > configure:17222: result: no > configure:17224: checking for LDFLAGS value to request large file > support > configure:17234: result: no > configure:17236: checking for LIBS value to request large file support > configure:17246: result: no > configure:17291: checking for _FILE_OFFSET_BITS > configure:17308: result: 64 > configure:17317: checking for _LARGEFILE_SOURCE > configure:17334: result: 1 > configure:17343: checking for _LARGE_FILES > configure:17360: result: 1 > > > On 11/26/06, Hydro Meteor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello, > > I was able to ./configure Bacula 1.38.11 on a Mac running Mac OS X > 10.4.8 without any problems today (in a manner almost exactly the > same as my Ubuntu Linux configuration). In both cases, I did not > explicitly provide configure with the option of disabling large > file support, and I also did not explicitly provide configure with > he option of enabling large file system support (but according to > the current manual, --enable-largefile is the default). > > Despite accepting the default (enabled), I noticed that my output > was different after running configure. On the Mac, configure > reported a value of "no" assigned as in: > > Large file support: no > > On Ubuntu the value for "Large File Support:" was "yes". > > Furthermore, when I tried to re-configure on Mac OS X (being sure > to run configure a second time after a "make distclean" to clear > any configure cache), I then explicitly added this configure option: > > --enable-largefile > > But the end result was the same: > > Large file support: no > > What should I do? I will most definitely need to back up and > restore files that are in excess of 2 GB in size. > > In Bacula, is Large File Support limited to certain file systems or > operating systems? The Mac I tried configuring for is one of the > quite new Intel iMacs (with Intel Core 2 Dueo "Merom" chip inside > and apparently Merom is a 64-bit chip and apparently Mac OS X > 10.4.x "Tiger" has some 64-bit capability but I'm not clear on > exactly where the lines are drawn between 32-bit and 64-bit in > Tiger and on these new iMacs). Would CPU architecture in any way > affect the outcome of Bacula? > > Might I be in new territory if I am understanding this [1] document > about Large File System support correctly. Any further suggestions > or comparisons (Erich?) from people who are running Bacula on Mac > OS X (Apple Intel and PowerPC)? > > Cheers, > > -H > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_file_support > > -- > --- > 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
Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula and Large File Support (LFS) on Mac OS X 10.4.8 Intel
As a followup I have copied and pasted what appears to be a relevant section of my config.log output on the same iMac which I tried to enable large file support for. If anyone who is more familiar with the inner workings of Bacula (Kern?) could shed some additional light on what would be a good next step to take (in order to make sure Bacula can operate on large files on Mac OS X), that would be greatly appreciated! configure:17157: checking for CFLAGS value to request large file support configure:17222: result: no configure:17224: checking for LDFLAGS value to request large file support configure:17234: result: no configure:17236: checking for LIBS value to request large file support configure:17246: result: no configure:17291: checking for _FILE_OFFSET_BITS configure:17308: result: 64 configure:17317: checking for _LARGEFILE_SOURCE configure:17334: result: 1 configure:17343: checking for _LARGE_FILES configure:17360: result: 1 On 11/26/06, Hydro Meteor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello, I was able to ./configure Bacula 1.38.11 on a Mac running Mac OS X 10.4.8without any problems today (in a manner almost exactly the same as my Ubuntu Linux configuration). In both cases, I did not explicitly provide configure with the option of disabling large file support, and I also did not explicitly provide configure with he option of enabling large file system support (but according to the current manual, --enable-largefile is the default). Despite accepting the default (enabled), I noticed that my output was different after running configure. On the Mac, configure reported a value of "no" assigned as in: Large file support: no On Ubuntu the value for "Large File Support:" was "yes". Furthermore, when I tried to re-configure on Mac OS X (being sure to run configure a second time after a "make distclean" to clear any configure cache), I then explicitly added this configure option: --enable-largefile But the end result was the same: Large file support: no What should I do? I will most definitely need to back up and restore files that are in excess of 2 GB in size. In Bacula, is Large File Support limited to certain file systems or operating systems? The Mac I tried configuring for is one of the quite new Intel iMacs (with Intel Core 2 Dueo "Merom" chip inside and apparently Merom is a 64-bit chip and apparently Mac OS X 10.4.x "Tiger" has some 64-bit capability but I'm not clear on exactly where the lines are drawn between 32-bit and 64-bit in Tiger and on these new iMacs). Would CPU architecture in any way affect the outcome of Bacula? Might I be in new territory if I am understanding this [1] document about Large File System support correctly. Any further suggestions or comparisons (Erich?) from people who are running Bacula on Mac OS X (Apple Intel and PowerPC)? Cheers, -H [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_file_support - 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
[Bacula-users] Bacula and Large File Support (LFS) on Mac OS X 10.4.8 Intel
Hello, I was able to ./configure Bacula 1.38.11 on a Mac running Mac OS X 10.4.8without any problems today (in a manner almost exactly the same as my Ubuntu Linux configuration). In both cases, I did not explicitly provide configure with the option of disabling large file support, and I also did not explicitly provide configure with he option of enabling large file system support (but according to the current manual, --enable-largefile is the default). Despite accepting the default (enabled), I noticed that my output was different after running configure. On the Mac, configure reported a value of "no" assigned as in: Large file support: no On Ubuntu the value for "Large File Support:" was "yes". Furthermore, when I tried to re-configure on Mac OS X (being sure to run configure a second time after a "make distclean" to clear any configure cache), I then explicitly added this configure option: --enable-largefile But the end result was the same: Large file support: no What should I do? I will most definitely need to back up and restore files that are in excess of 2 GB in size. In Bacula, is Large File Support limited to certain file systems or operating systems? The Mac I tried configuring for is one of the quite new Intel iMacs (with Intel Core 2 Dueo "Merom" chip inside and apparently Merom is a 64-bit chip and apparently Mac OS X 10.4.x "Tiger" has some 64-bit capability but I'm not clear on exactly where the lines are drawn between 32-bit and 64-bit in Tiger and on these new iMacs). Would CPU architecture in any way affect the outcome of Bacula? Might I be in new territory if I am understanding this [1] document about Large File System support correctly. Any further suggestions or comparisons (Erich?) from people who are running Bacula on Mac OS X (Apple Intel and PowerPC)? Cheers, -H [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_file_support - 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
