On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 at 2:56pm, Lengyel, Florian wrote
Yes, it seems to have difficulty recognizing the second SCSI tape drive if
you have two. So one of my Spectralogic 2K tape drives is languishing,
while the other has all the fun.
Err, I have a 2 drive library on centos-4 with no problems.
On Friday 10 February 2006 15:16, Salvatore Enrico Indiogine wrote:
>2006/2/10, Lengyel, Florian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Yes, it seems to have difficulty recognizing the second SCSI tape
>> drive if you have two. So one of my Spectralogic 2K tape drives is
>> languishing, while the other has all th
Title: RE: Migrating to Amanda, question 2
CentOS does work for me, but I had to add the following to /etc/rc.d/rc.local
# create sg devices and turn hardware spectralogic hardware compression off
modprobe sg
ln -s /dev/sg0 /dev/changer
mt -f /dev/nst0 compression 0
mt -f /dev/nst1
2006/2/10, Lengyel, Florian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Yes, it seems to have difficulty recognizing the second SCSI tape drive if
> you have two. So one of my Spectralogic 2K tape drives is languishing,
> while the other has all the fun.
I have 1 tape drive + 6 tape slots, but they still advised me
On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 01:40:38PM -0500, Joshua Baker-LePain enlightened us:
> >On Friday 10 February 2006 11:42, Salvatore Enrico Indiogine wrote:
> >>tar:
> >>CentSO tar-1.14-8.RHEL4 FC4 tar-1.15.1-11.FC4
> >
> >CentOS tar-1.14.* is known bad, I'm using 1.15-1 myself, with 1.13-25
> >
Title: RE: Migrating to Amanda, question 2
Yes, it seems to have difficulty recognizing the second SCSI tape drive if
you have two. So one of my Spectralogic 2K tape drives is languishing,
while the other has all the fun.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of
Thanks for all the good feedback. I just remembered reading that the
2.6.9 Linux kernel provided by CentOS/RHEL4 has problems with SCSI.
That was on a communication from BRU:
http://www.bru.com/Server-Linux-Require.html
So, it is Fedora4 after all.
Enrico
On Friday 10 February 2006 13:40, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
>On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 at 1:22pm, Gene Heskett wrote
>
>> On Friday 10 February 2006 11:42, Salvatore Enrico Indiogine wrote:
>>> tar:
>>> CentSO tar-1.14-8.RHEL4 FC4 tar-1.15.1-11.FC4
>>
>> CentOS tar-1.14.* is known bad, I'm us
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 at 1:22pm, Gene Heskett wrote
On Friday 10 February 2006 11:42, Salvatore Enrico Indiogine wrote:
tar:
CentSO tar-1.14-8.RHEL4 FC4 tar-1.15.1-11.FC4
CentOS tar-1.14.* is known bad, I'm using 1.15-1 myself, with 1.13-25
installed as a fallback available with a r
On Friday 10 February 2006 11:42, Salvatore Enrico Indiogine wrote:
>At this point my situation is pretty hopeless and I need to
>accellerate the BRU -> Amanda migration, so question 2:
>
>CentOS 4.2 or Fedora4?
Essentially this doesn't matter, but see below.
>Kernel:
>CentOS 2.6.9-22
2006/2/10, Ian Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I recommend Fedora for Amanda, and Debian in general, but you're opening a can
> of worms by asking people's opinion on the best distro. :-)
Thanks for the advise. I was leaning towards FC4 myself because of
the latest tar version. I read that tar 1.1
11 matches
Mail list logo