On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 15:43:10 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> I consider recreating that holding disk array (currently RAID1 of 2
> disks) as RAID0 ..
Just focusing on this one aspect of your question: assuming the
filesystem in question doesn't have anything other than the Amanda
holding-
Am 03.12.19 um 15:43 schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:
>
> Another naive question:
>
> Does the holdingdisk have to be bigger than the size of one tape?
As there were multiple replies to my original posting and as I am way
too busy right now: a quick "thanks" to all the people who replied.
So far t
On Thursday 05 December 2019 10:50:34 Charles Curley wrote:
And I replied back on the list where this belongs, even if some of it is
me blowing my own horn.
> On Thu, 5 Dec 2019 00:00:24 -0500
>
> Gene Heskett wrote:
> > Lesson #2, I just learned today that the raspbian AND debian buster
> > 10.
On Thu, 5 Dec 2019 04:43:15 -0500
Gene Heskett wrote:
> > # systemctl status amanda.socket
> pi@rpi4:/etc $ sudo systemctl status amanda.socket
> Unit amanda.socket could not be found.
Same on Debian 10.2. Also, it appears that no Debian 10.2 package
provides amanda.service:
charles@hawk:~$ a
On Thu, 5 Dec 2019 00:00:24 -0500
Gene Heskett wrote:
> Lesson #2, I just learned today that the raspbian AND debian buster
> 10.2 versions have NO inetd or xinetd. Ditto for RH.
I don't know where you get that idea, as far as Debian goes.
root@jhegaala:~# cat /etc/debian_version
10.2
root@jhe
On Thursday 05 December 2019 02:12:52 Uwe Menges wrote:
> On 2019-12-05 06:00, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > Lesson #2, I just learned today that the raspbian AND debian buster
> > 10.2 versions have NO inetd or xinetd. Ditto for RH.
>
> I think that's along with other stuff moving to systemd.
> On Fedo
