>> I still like this behavior, but now it is Amanda's sendbackup (and
>> sendsize) that checkes for the existance of the exclude file, and
>> in its absence it doesn't pass it to the backup command.
Jon> I don't mind that, but I think a warning should be printed at
Jon> some point rather than have
On Mon, Jan 06, 2003 at 04:15:52PM -0600, Douglas K. Rand wrote:
>
> I really should just learn to test things before I go off spouting
> stuff. Why is it always the case that when what I write differs from
> what I mean, it always turns out that what I write is wrong. Sigh.
We both suffer in sh
Doug> ... . Amanda didn't care if the exclude file was there or not,
Doug> and actually gnu-tar didn't care very much either. Gnu-tar emits
Doug> a warning that the exclude file doesn't exist, and so it won't
Doug> use it.
Jon> gnutar on my system terminates with an error if the exclude file
Jon>
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 01:05:51AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Saturday 04 January 2003 18:42, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> >On Sat, Jan 04, 2003 at 04:35:48PM -0600, Douglas K. Rand wrote:
> >>
> >> ... . Amanda didn't care if the
> >> exclude file was there or not, and actually gnu-tar didn't care
>
On Saturday 04 January 2003 18:42, Jon LaBadie wrote:
>On Sat, Jan 04, 2003 at 04:35:48PM -0600, Douglas K. Rand wrote:
>> >> > > > And did you put a file "exclude.gtar" in there?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Yes, I did, and that got rid of the message. But if
>> >> > > amanda needs this file, why does
>> >> [Doug whining because he has to create those empty exlude files ...]
Jean-Louis> You can use the keyword 'optional' on your exclude
Jean-Louis> specification and amanda will not complain if the file
Jean-Louis> doesn't exist. You don't have to create empty files.
>> Cool! I don't see the pa
On Sat, Jan 04, 2003 at 05:38:43PM -0600, Douglas K. Rand wrote:
> >> [Doug whining because he has to create those empty exlude files ...]
>
> Jean-Louis> You can use the keyword 'optional' on your exclude
> Jean-Louis> specification and amanda will not complain if the file
> Jean-Louis> doesn't e
On Sat, Jan 04, 2003 at 04:35:48PM -0600, Douglas K. Rand wrote:
> >> > > > And did you put a file "exclude.gtar" in there?
> >> > >
> >> > > Yes, I did, and that got rid of the message. But if amanda needs this
> >> > > file, why doesn't it just create it?
> >> >
> >> > Because it is a file
>> [Doug whining because he has to create those empty exlude files ...]
Jean-Louis> You can use the keyword 'optional' on your exclude
Jean-Louis> specification and amanda will not complain if the file
Jean-Louis> doesn't exist. You don't have to create empty files.
Cool! I don't see the particul
On Sat, Jan 04, 2003 at 04:35:48PM -0600, Douglas K. Rand wrote:
>
> Jon> Perhaps it is an added extra check that that should have been in
> Jon> 2.4.2. Extra checking is not a bad thing.
> Jon> The file is not necessary.
>
> I really liked how it behaved in 2.4.2. You told Amanda to tell
> gn
>> > > > And did you put a file "exclude.gtar" in there?
>> > >
>> > > Yes, I did, and that got rid of the message. But if amanda needs this
>> > > file, why doesn't it just create it?
>> >
>> > Because it is a file you create specifying what you want to exclude.
>> > If you don't want to us
On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 07:57:23PM -0500, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 02:34:32PM -0800, John Oliver wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 05:03:21PM -0500, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 01:15:35PM -0800, John Oliver wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 02:27:30PM
On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 02:34:32PM -0800, John Oliver wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 05:03:21PM -0500, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 01:15:35PM -0800, John Oliver wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 02:27:30PM -0600, Deb Baddorf wrote:
> > >
> > > > And did you put a file "ex
On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 05:03:21PM -0500, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 01:15:35PM -0800, John Oliver wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 02:27:30PM -0600, Deb Baddorf wrote:
> >
> > > And did you put a file "exclude.gtar" in there?
> >
> > Yes, I did, and that got rid of the me
> And did you put a file "exclude.gtar" in there?
Yes, I did, and that got rid of the message. But if amanda needs this
file, why doesn't it just create it?
Amanda doesn't need it --- but you told her to look for it.
It's a file that YOU fill in, to say what to exclude from
the gnutar b
On Friday 03 January 2003 14:12, John Oliver wrote:
>[root@backup root]# su amanda -c "amcheck DailySet1"
>bash: /root/.bashrc: Permission denied
>Amanda Tape Server Host Check
>-
>Holding disk /var/tmp: 2330384 KB disk space available, that's
> plenty NOTE: skipping tap
On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 02:27:30PM -0600, Deb Baddorf wrote:
>
> >
> >Up until now, amanda has used /var/lib/amanda So I created
> >/usr/local/lib/amanda/ and chowned it to amanda, but I still get the
> >same message.
>
> On the client, right?
In this case, sure... I did this locally.
> And d
On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 11:12:18AM -0800, John Oliver wrote:
> [root@backup root]# su amanda -c "amcheck DailySet1"
> bash: /root/.bashrc: Permission denied
> Amanda Tape Server Host Check
> -
> Holding disk /var/tmp: 2330384 KB disk space available, that's plenty
> NOTE
[root@backup root]# su amanda -c "amcheck DailySet1"
bash: /root/.bashrc: Permission denied
Amanda Tape Server Host Check
-
Holding disk /var/tmp: 2330384 KB disk space available, that's plenty
NOTE: skipping tape-writable test
Tape Indyme001 label ok
Server check took 7
19 matches
Mail list logo
