Check to see if some problem has truncated your tapelist file. If a
problem (e.g., no space left on a device) prevents the tapelist from
being created or some other problem truncated the file, then you
could expect to see a problem like this. Check to see if there have
been any drive
Or looking at a file with the same name but not the one
as configured in amanda.conf?)
I can't tell how stupid I feel just now. The one above was the reason.
Thanks everybody.
Lucio.
On Thursday 23 October 2003 05:38, Lucio wrote:
Check to see if some problem has truncated your tapelist file.
If a problem (e.g., no space left on a device) prevents the
tapelist from being created or some other problem truncated the
file, then you could expect to see a problem like
: Thursday, October 23, 2003 4:38 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [UPDATE] How to control which tape is next?
Check to see if some problem has truncated your tapelist file. If a
problem (e.g., no space left on a device) prevents the tapelist from
being created or some other problem
On Thursday 23 October 2003 06:29, Lucio wrote:
Or looking at a file with the same name but not the one
as configured in amanda.conf?)
I can't tell how stupid I feel just now. The one above was the
reason. Thanks everybody.
Lucio.
You probably have lot of company in that, I think at one
Lucio:
Until all the tapes have been used at least once, Amanda had no idea of
which tape to use next.
All the tapes have already been used at least twice, and during the first two
cycles (more or less) Amanda had been telling me what tape number to put in
the unit. Then a cloudy day it
On Wednesday 22 October 2003 05:23, Lucio wrote:
Are you telling me that this is a known problem of 2.4.3?
It's a production system, I'm afraid it's quite a risk to update
a rpm by compiling from source (especially for an amanda newbie
like me). I'm going to do this only if I have no other
On Wednesday 22 October 2003 06:07, Lucio wrote:
Lucio:
Until all the tapes have been used at least once, Amanda had no
idea of which tape to use next.
All the tapes have already been used at least twice, and during the
first two cycles (more or less) Amanda had been telling me what
tape
On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 07:04:29AM -0400, Gene Heskett enlightened us:
We did at one time have someone subscribed here that was doing the
redhat rpm's, and he would speak up anytime we started to get down on
the rpm vs the tarballs, but he has not made any posts here in many
months now that
On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 08:56:10AM -0400, Matt Hyclak enlightened us:
If anyone is interested in this, you can get it from (sorry it wraps):
http://www.math.ohiou.edu/mirror/casit/contrib/9/SRPMS/amanda-2.4.4p1-2mrh3.src.rpm
Oops, that should be
]
Subject: Re: [UPDATE] How to control which tape is next?
Lucio:
Until all the tapes have been used at least once, Amanda had no idea of
which tape to use next.
All the tapes have already been used at least twice, and during the first
two
cycles (more or less) Amanda had been telling me what
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Check to see if some problem has truncated your tapelist file. If a
problem (e.g., no space left on a device) prevents the tapelist from
being created or some other problem truncated the file, then you
could expect to see a problem like this. Check to see if there
On Wednesday 22 October 2003 08:56, Matt Hyclak wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 07:04:29AM -0400, Gene Heskett enlightened
us:
We did at one time have someone subscribed here that was doing the
redhat rpm's, and he would speak up anytime we started to get down
on the rpm vs the tarballs, but he
Hi Paul,
I commited your patch with a small change. In write_tapelist, it return 1
instead of calling error(), all caller handle the return code correctly.
Jean-Louis
On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 04:04:19PM +0200, Paul Bijnens wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Check to see if some problem has
On Wednesday 22 October 2003 14:45, Matt Hyclak wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 11:07:17AM -0400, Gene Heskett enlightened
us:
FWIW, I have made packages of 2.4.4-p1 that are pretty much the
RH packages with a couple tweaks to the .spec file. Namely,
there are 2 variables at the top of the
On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 08:54:52PM -0400, Gene Heskett enlightened us:
Q: Does this automaticly set the ownerships and perms in the built
rpm? Amanda should be built by a non-priviledged user, then
installed by root. Otherwise the perms get fubared. I ask
because I've never done it this
On Wednesday 22 October 2003 21:19, Matt Hyclak wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 08:54:52PM -0400, Gene Heskett enlightened
us:
Q: Does this automaticly set the ownerships and perms in the
built rpm? Amanda should be built by a non-priviledged user,
then installed by root. Otherwise the
These dumps were to tape Daily006.
The next tape Amanda expects to use is: a new tape.
I've just the same problem, but my amanda.conf looks like this
cut here
dumpcycle 0 # the number of days in the normal dump cycle
runspercycle 5 days # the number of amdump runs in
When I wrote the last message I forgot to specify the following:
This morning Amanda reported the last backup on Tape2, and then asked for a
new tape only, instead of Tape3 or a new tape.
I put Tape3 in the unit anyway and amcheck stopped complaining for the wrong
tape. Amanda is going to use
BTW, it's Amanda 2.4.3 on RH9
What am I missing?
Possibly the upgrade to 2.4.4-p1?
Are you telling me that this is a known problem of 2.4.3?
It's a production system, I'm afraid it's quite a risk to update a rpm by
compiling from source (especially for an amanda newbie like me). I'm
once.
Don
-Original Message-
From: Lucio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 10:41 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [UPDATE] How to control which tape is next?
When I wrote the last message I forgot to specify the following:
This morning Amanda reported the last
Hi.
I have the following settings.
dumpcycle 3 days
runspercycle 3 days
tapecycle 8 tapes
runtapes 1
tapedev /dev/nst0
From the backup report that is sent to me every day everything seems to
be fine. However, there is one thing that bugs me. The report begins
like this
These dumps were to
Mads Pultz wrote:
I have the following settings.
dumpcycle 3 days
runspercycle 3 days
tapecycle 8 tapes
runtapes 1
tapedev /dev/nst0
From the backup report that is sent to me every day everything seems to
be fine. However, there is one thing that bugs me. The report begins
like this
These
--On Monday, October 20, 2003 20:39:45 +0200 Mads Pultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi.
I have the following settings.
dumpcycle 3 days
runspercycle 3 days
tapecycle 8 tapes
runtapes 1
tapedev /dev/nst0
From the backup report that is sent to me every day everything seems to
be
Hi.
Thanks for all your replies. I'm not through my tapecycle yet so that is
probably the reason.
Regards
Mads
On Mon, 2003-10-20 at 21:34, Frank Smith wrote:
--On Monday, October 20, 2003 20:39:45 +0200 Mads Pultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi.
I have the following settings.
25 matches
Mail list logo
