[OpenAFS] Commercial AFS backups

2006-10-09 Thread Kristen J. Webb
Teradactyl generally avoids chiming in on subjects such as these but since we were named specifically on this thread it seems justified to comment. It’s true, Teradactyl is a small company with a customer base that is virtually all large government and educational entities. We fully support

Re: [OpenAFS] OpenAFS on FC5 x86-64

2006-10-09 Thread Derek Atkins
Ron Croonenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hello all, Is there a set of rpm's available to install the OpenAFS client on FC5 x86-64 ? Or do I have to compile that myself ? We don't (yet) have an FC5 x86-64 build machine set up. Derrick and JeffreyA are working on one, so hopefully by 1.4.2

RE: [OpenAFS] Commercial AFS backups

2006-10-09 Thread ted creedon
Well said. tedc ___ OpenAFS-info mailing list OpenAFS-info@openafs.org https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info

[OpenAFS] Re: why afs backup is so poorly supported

2006-10-09 Thread Adam Megacz
chas williams - CONTRACTOR [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: afs's namei based filesystem could provide a more familiar layout of the files. however, i suspect the designers choose the current structure to avoid creating single directories with huge numbers of files. most filesystems dont handle

RE: [OpenAFS] Commercial AFS backups

2006-10-09 Thread seth vidal
Teradactyl generally avoids chiming in on subjects such as these but since we were named specifically on this thread it seems justified to comment. It’s true, Teradactyl is a small company with a customer base that is virtually all large government and educational entities. We fully

RE: [OpenAFS] Commercial AFS backups

2006-10-09 Thread Derrick J Brashear
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006, seth vidal wrote: TiBS doesnÿÿt require a license key for restores to ensure that our customers have access to their data at all times. [] We only license the backup function and our model is built on processing power to scale with your needs. Great. But that doesn't

RE: [OpenAFS] Commercial AFS backups

2006-10-09 Thread Derrick J Brashear
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006, seth vidal wrote: not needing licenses for restore means nothing about having the software be able to run on a current machine. ie: can you restore on a box 5-10 years from now when you can't find the software and can't get it to run on any modern os/hardware? no.

RE: [OpenAFS] Commercial AFS backups

2006-10-09 Thread ted creedon
One solution I have used for contracted military embedded firmware is to require that the sources and build tree be placed in escrow. BTW the archive timeframe is many decades, not years. tedc -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Derrick J

Re: [OpenAFS] Commercial AFS backups

2006-10-09 Thread John Hascall
not needing licenses for restore means nothing about having the software be able to run on a current machine. ie: can you restore on a box 5-10 years from now when you can't find the software and can't get it to run on any modern os/hardware? no. What kind of dipstick would wait 5-10 years

Re: [OpenAFS] Commercial AFS backups

2006-10-09 Thread Jerry McAllister
On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 01:55:17PM -0500, John Hascall wrote: not needing licenses for restore means nothing about having the software be able to run on a current machine. ie: can you restore on a box 5-10 years from now when you can't find the software and can't get it to run on any

Re: [OpenAFS] Commercial AFS backups

2006-10-09 Thread Robert Banz
don't feel the need to say anything here, so I won't. not needing licenses for restore means nothing about having the software be able to run on a current machine. ie: can you restore on a box 5-10 years from now when you can't find the software and can't get it to run on any modern

[OpenAFS] Re: why afs backup is so poorly supported

2006-10-09 Thread Adam Megacz
Derrick J Brashear [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 9 Oct 2006, Adam Megacz wrote: You're not the only one drooling over this possibility. But it won't help much with the current namei/AFSIDat layout. What problem do you have with it? It emulates open-by-inode-number with some metadata

Re: [OpenAFS] Re: why afs backup is so poorly supported

2006-10-09 Thread Jeffrey Hutzelman
On Monday, October 09, 2006 04:37:11 PM -0700 Adam Megacz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Derrick J Brashear [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 9 Oct 2006, Adam Megacz wrote: You're not the only one drooling over this possibility. But it won't help much with the current namei/AFSIDat layout.

Re: [OpenAFS] Re: why afs backup is so poorly supported

2006-10-09 Thread Derrick J Brashear
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006, Adam Megacz wrote: I'm starting to come around to the conclusion that the on-disk format exists primarily for obfuscational purposes -- that is, it is the most effective way to discourage people from locally modifying shared files. If you look at it that way, it makes a

Re: [OpenAFS] Re: why afs backup is so poorly supported

2006-10-09 Thread Marcus Watts
Adam Megacz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jeffrey Hutzelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: and many of its features depend on the fact that all file access is via the fileserver. I agree. I'm starting to come around to the conclusion that the on-disk format exists primarily for obfuscational