On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Rob Poe wrote:
> I'm using RSYNC to do backups of 2 BPC servers. It works swimmingly, you
> plug the USB drive into the BPC server, it auto-mounts, emails that it's
> starting, does an RSYNC dump (with delete), flushes the buffers, dismounts
> and emails.
Sou
I'm using RSYNC to do backups of 2 BPC servers. It works swimmingly,
you plug the USB drive into the BPC server, it auto-mounts, emails that
it's starting, does an RSYNC dump (with delete), flushes the buffers,
dismounts and emails.
On 3/10/2011 8:35 PM, hans...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Fri, Ma
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky
wrote:
> I wrote a script BackupPC_copyPcPool that I posted to the list that should be
> a bit more efficient & faster than BackupPC_tarPCCopy
Noted, and thanks
--
hans...@gmail.com wrote at about 09:35:49 +0700 on Friday, March 11, 2011:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 3:46 AM, Michael Conner wrote:
> > That is good to know. Actually things are a little better than I thought,
> > the spare machine is Dell Dimension 2400 with a Pentium 4, max 2 gb
> > memor
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 3:46 AM, Michael Conner wrote:
> That is good to know. Actually things are a little better than I thought, the
> spare machine is Dell Dimension 2400 with a Pentium 4, max 2 gb memory. So I
> guess I could slap a new bigger drive into it and use it. My basic plan is to
Tyler J. Wagner wrote at about 23:00:47 + on Thursday, March 10, 2011:
> On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 20:10 +0100, Cesar Kawar wrote:
> > El 10/03/2011, a las 19:55, Michael Conner escribió:
> > > One additional question: are there any advantages to any particular
> > > flavor of Linux for BPC?
Tyler J. Wagner wrote at about 23:05:34 + on Thursday, March 10, 2011:
> On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 16:32 -0500, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote:
> > Debian does have one potentially MAJOR downside -- that is that since
> > dpkg (and hence also apt) makes it hard to override package
> > dependencies,
On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 16:32 -0500, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote:
> Debian does have one potentially MAJOR downside -- that is that since
> dpkg (and hence also apt) makes it hard to override package
> dependencies, you are stuck with all the other packages that the
> Debian BackupPC package draws in,
On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 20:10 +0100, Cesar Kawar wrote:
> El 10/03/2011, a las 19:55, Michael Conner escribió:
> > One additional question: are there any advantages to any particular flavor
> > of Linux for BPC?
> I prefer Debian, all BackupPC installations I've done I've used Debian and
> never h
Michael Conner wrote at about 14:46:21 -0600 on Thursday, March 10, 2011:
> That is good to know. Actually things are a little better than I thought,
> the spare machine is Dell Dimension 2400 with a Pentium 4, max 2 gb memory.
> So I guess I could slap a new bigger drive into it and use it. M
Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom wrote at about 13:35:31 -0600 on Thursday, March 10,
2011:
> On 03/10 12:55 , Michael Conner wrote:
> > One additional question: are there any advantages to any particular flavor
> > of Linux for BPC?
>
>
> Debian.
> Just because it's the best distro ever of all
That is good to know. Actually things are a little better than I thought, the
spare machine is Dell Dimension 2400 with a Pentium 4, max 2 gb memory. So I
guess I could slap a new bigger drive into it and use it. My basic plan is to
get backups going to one machine and then dupe those to an NAS
On 03/10 12:55 , Michael Conner wrote:
> One additional question: are there any advantages to any particular flavor of
> Linux for BPC?
Debian.
Just because it's the best distro ever of all time and nothing else comes
close.
(note, the above was sarcasm; but it really does have a very nice bac
Michael Conner wrote at about 12:55:58 -0600 on Thursday, March 10, 2011:
> Thanks to all who replied. You all basically confirmed my feeling that using
> our web server as the backup server was not best practice. I just hoped we
> might get by without buying another computer, even though it w
On 3/10/2011 12:55 PM, Michael Conner wrote:
> Thanks to all who replied. You all basically confirmed my feeling that using
> our web server as the backup server was not best practice. I just hoped we
> might get by without buying another computer, even though it wouldn't need to
> be a very exp
El 10/03/2011, a las 19:55, Michael Conner escribió:
> Thanks to all who replied. You all basically confirmed my feeling that using
> our web server as the backup server was not best practice. I just hoped we
> might get by without buying another computer, even though it wouldn't need to
> be
Thanks to all who replied. You all basically confirmed my feeling that using
our web server as the backup server was not best practice. I just hoped we
might get by without buying another computer, even though it wouldn't need to
be a very expensive one. The only spare computer we have now is an
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 9:59 PM, Michael Conner wrote:
> and a NAS (and may be adding another). Note that my Linux knowledge is still
> limited but growing as I look at more open source stuff.
So here's another reason to set up that second NAS.
What I've done is set up a separate (bigger) NAS t
It is possible, but I don't think it's a good idea.
If the hardware dies or it is stolen, you'll end up having your backup stolen
too. You will loose both copies, the original and the backed up one.
And, of course, care should be taken to prevent people from outside to access
the backuppc cgi.
On 03/10 08:59 , Michael Conner wrote:
> I've been reading the documentation and various other things on the web, and
> one basic question I'm unsure about is whether it is possible or advisable to
> run BPC on the web server.
It's not adviseable, for the reasons you mentioned elsewhere in your
> I'm looking at BackupPC and other options for a network-wide backup system
> in the museum where I work. We have about 10 Windows computers, one OS X,
> one web server running CENTOS 5.5, and an NAS (and may be adding another).
> Note that my Linux knowledge is still limited but growing as I look
I'm looking at BackupPC and other options for a network-wide backup system in
the museum where I work. We have about 10 Windows computers, one OS X, one web
server running CENTOS 5.5, and an NAS (and may be adding another). Note that my
Linux knowledge is still limited but growing as I look at m
Running Backuppc 3.1.0 on Ubuntu 10.10.
I'm backup up the /etc on localhost and /etc, /usr on a FreeBSD 5.2.1 machine.
The backup works and completes with zero errors. It does not however back up
any files in /etc or /usr on the FreeBSD host. It only backs up the directories
and the files contai
On 10/03/2011 10:14, Tyler J. Wagner wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 10:04 +, Tyler J. Wagner wrote:
>> On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 09:16 +, Wayne Trevena wrote:
>>> Now, on the main home page for a host, I get a message line saying, Last
>>> email sent to was at 3/10 09:09, subject "".
>> I see
On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 10:04 +, Tyler J. Wagner wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 09:16 +, Wayne Trevena wrote:
> > Now, on the main home page for a host, I get a message line saying, Last
> > email sent to was at 3/10 09:09, subject "".
>
> I see that for hosts for whom an email address (us
On 10/03/2011 10:04, Tyler J. Wagner wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 09:16 +, Wayne Trevena wrote:
>> Now, on the main home page for a host, I get a message line saying, Last
>> email sent to was at 3/10 09:09, subject "".
> I see that for hosts for whom an email address (user) has been set, bu
On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 09:16 +, Wayne Trevena wrote:
> Now, on the main home page for a host, I get a message line saying, Last
> email sent to was at 3/10 09:09, subject "".
I see that for hosts for whom an email address (user) has been set, but
no email has ever been sent. The date is alway
Hey all,
A strange one this...
First off, I've tested email delivery as per the documentation,
".../bin/BackupPC_sendEmail -u " and I receive the email.
Now, on the main home page for a host, I get a message line saying, Last
email sent to was at 3/10 09:09, subject "".
What is that all abou
28 matches
Mail list logo
