Re: [BackupPC-users] OT: udev rule for persistent removable device naming

2012-04-03 Thread Jim Kyle
On Tuesday, April 3, 2012, at 7:01:58 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: > That doesn't eliminate the chicken/egg problem on a new drive. > Whatever tool you use to write the label or uuid will itself have to > be told the device to access. True. but the OP has said that his script detects that situation an

Re: [BackupPC-users] OT: udev rule for persistent removable device naming

2012-04-03 Thread Les Mikesell
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Jim Kyle wrote: > On Tuesday, April 3, 2012, at 4:48:34 PM, Timothy J Massey wrote: > >> And how exactly does the script know what device name that drive will use >> *before* I put that "standard" label on it? > > I don't mean the device name such as /dev/sdd but ra

Re: [BackupPC-users] OT: udev rule for persistent removable device naming

2012-04-03 Thread Adam Goryachev
On 04/04/12 07:48, Timothy J Massey wrote: > Jim Kyle wrote on 04/03/2012 05:21:29 PM: > > > On Tuesday, April 3, 2012, at 3:49:12 PM, Timothy J Massey wrote: > > > > > And because sometimes the drive that I insert will be perfectly blank (a > > > new drive), I can't use something like a drive lab

Re: [BackupPC-users] OT: udev rule for persistent removable device naming

2012-04-03 Thread Jim Kyle
On Tuesday, April 3, 2012, at 4:48:34 PM, Timothy J Massey wrote: > And how exactly does the script know what device name that drive will use > *before* I put that "standard" label on it? I don't mean the device name such as /dev/sdd but rather the drive label, such as BAKUPDSK. They're pretty mu

Re: [BackupPC-users] OT: udev rule for persistent removable device naming

2012-04-03 Thread Christian Völker
Hi, how about using the fdisk information about the disk size to identify? Should be different from the USB stick. Greetings Christian -- Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to monitoring Big Data

Re: [BackupPC-users] OT: udev rule for persistent removable device naming

2012-04-03 Thread Les Mikesell
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Timothy J Massey wrote: > > Thank you for that.  That may be a perfectly logical option:  but it's not > what I've chosen.  (This is a solution that has been in production for 6 or > more years, and in the direct hands of a couple dozen clients.  Number of > init

Re: [BackupPC-users] OT: udev rule for persistent removable device naming

2012-04-03 Thread Timothy J Massey
Les Mikesell wrote on 04/03/2012 05:56:54 PM: > Personally, I'd never trust a script to automatically format a disk > just because it is inserted in a certain carrier. Thank you for that. That may be a perfectly logical option: but it's not what I've chosen. (This is a solution that has bee

Re: [BackupPC-users] OT: udev rule for persistent removable device naming

2012-04-03 Thread Timothy J Massey
Jim Kyle wrote on 04/03/2012 05:21:29 PM: > On Tuesday, April 3, 2012, at 3:49:12 PM, Timothy J Massey wrote: > > > And because sometimes the drive that I insert will be perfectly blank (a > > new drive), I can't use something like a drive label: it might not have > > one! > > Don't you have

Re: [BackupPC-users] OT: udev rule for persistent removable device naming

2012-04-03 Thread Les Mikesell
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Timothy J Massey wrote: > > My backup servers have a SATA removable drive tray installed in them. Its > purpose is to be a target for BackupPC archvies (among other things) that > allows the user to easily swap these. It is simply a physical tray: the > system se

Re: [BackupPC-users] OT: udev rule for persistent removable device naming

2012-04-03 Thread Jim Kyle
On Tuesday, April 3, 2012, at 3:49:12 PM, Timothy J Massey wrote: > And because sometimes the drive that I insert will be perfectly blank (a > new drive), I can't use something like a drive label: it might not have > one! Don't you have to partition and format the new drive before it can be used?

[BackupPC-users] OT: udev rule for persistent removable device naming

2012-04-03 Thread Timothy J Massey
Hello! My backup servers have a SATA removable drive tray installed in them. Its purpose is to be a target for BackupPC archvies (among other things) that allows the user to easily swap these. It is simply a physical tray: the system sees the drive inside of the tray exactly the same as any

[BackupPC-users] REGRESSION WITH FIX: parity command runs when parity is set to 0

2012-04-03 Thread Timothy J Massey
Hello! In BackupPC 3.1.0, if I were to set the parity of an archive ($parfile) to 0, the parity would not run. That meets what the documentation says. However, in 3.2.0, the parity still runs, even when set to 0. Here is the relevant code for 3.1.0 (BackupPC_archiveHost line 148): if ( $parfi

[BackupPC-users] Patch to fork parity generation to allow alarm to be refreshed (Was: Re: Parity (par2) command running on archives even though set to 0)

2012-04-03 Thread Timothy J Massey
Timothy J Massey wrote on 03/20/2012 05:25:30 PM: > One thought would be to fork the parity (and tar) command and open > the output of the command from the parent, and let the parent both > add the output to the log file as well as update the alarm. I have > some tiny experience with this (ma

Re: [BackupPC-users] $hostIP does not seem to be taken into account

2012-04-03 Thread Les Mikesell
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Moritz Lennert wrote: > Hello, > > I have a Debian GNU/Linux Squeeze server running backuppc 3.1.0. I have > a client machine (vdm) also running Debian GNU/Linux Squeeze which > receives its IP address from a DHCP server. > > I can find the client's IP address by c

[BackupPC-users] $hostIP does not seem to be taken into account

2012-04-03 Thread Moritz Lennert
Hello, I have a Debian GNU/Linux Squeeze server running backuppc 3.1.0. I have a client machine (vdm) also running Debian GNU/Linux Squeeze which receives its IP address from a DHCP server. I can find the client's IP address by calling nmblookup vdm. I have the following host file entry: vdm