Hi folks,
I'm abusing rdiff-backup as a "write from one" + "read from many"
solution.
Only one host backs up to the central server, as the user with
permission to write files.
Many hosts will restore from that central server, as a user who does not
have access to write the files.
I touch up
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> However, the restores exception out on "Operation not permitted", as per
> the attached trace.
could you do this with -v5? i'm always skeptical of the traces that are
reported when remote is involved...
-dean
__
On Monday 18 July 2005 22:49, dean gaudet wrote:
> > However, the restores exception out on "Operation not permitted",
> > as per the attached trace.
>
> could you do this with -v5? i'm always skeptical of the traces that
> are reported when remote is involved...
Sure, thanks for taking an intere
Well, I think that exactly matters. Try again permitting writing to the log
and report again...
Am Dienstag 19 Juli 2005 17:15 schrieb Sheldon Hearn:
> On Monday 18 July 2005 22:49, dean gaudet wrote:
> > > However, the restores exception out on "Operation not permitted",
> > > as per the attache
that sure looks like it's trying to chmod something on the mirror doesn't
it:
Sending back exception [Errno 1] Operation not permitted:
'portage-rdiff-backup/packages' of type exceptions.OSError:
File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/connection.py", line 329,
in answer_request
Why do you think the failure to modify the restore log makes a
difference?
As you requested, I made it writable, and still get "Operation not
permitted" on an unrelated object (currently the packages
subdirectory).
Fresh trace included.
Anyone actually know what rdiff-backup thinks its doing
On Wednesday 20 July 2005 11:39, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> Anyone actually know what rdiff-backup thinks its doing here? If I
> could find the wayward chmod/chown in the source, I'd just hack it
> out, since it's bogus for my application, and probably bogus in any
> restore.
I've taken a look at the
Hi,
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> As you requested, I made it writable, and still get "Operation not
> permitted" on an unrelated object (currently the packages
> subdirectory).
Without looking at the trace or at the source, I'd say it may make sense
in some situations. Like: hav
On Wednesday 20 July 2005 13:26, Maarten Bezemer wrote:
> Without looking at the trace or at the source, I'd say it may make
> sense in some situations. Like: having stuff below a 'closed'
> directory. When backing up, permissions are temporarily changed to
> allow writes, and my guess is that the
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> If we're not root on the server during a restore operation, we try to
> change permissions to ensure readability? Either we can read an object
> or we can't. If we can't, it's _highly_ unlikely that we'll be able to
> change permissions on it anyway
Hi,
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, dean gaudet wrote:
> > So I'll just carry this patch on my central server (it's not required on
> > restore clients), and we can all pretend this didn't happen until the
> > next person tries to use rdiff-backup to restore from a read-only
> > location. :-)
>
> i'm te
Well, I think that exactly matters. Try again permitting writing to the log
and report again...
Am Dienstag 19 Juli 2005 17:15 schrieb Sheldon Hearn:
> On Monday 18 July 2005 22:49, dean gaudet wrote:
> > > However, the restores exception out on "Operation not permitted",
> > > as per the attache
On Wednesday 20 July 2005 21:30, dean gaudet wrote:
> i'm tempted to change it so that a command line option is required to
> enable the mode futzing... by default i'd really prefer backup and
> restore sources be completely read-only.
Sounds good, although you might want to reverse the logic to m
On Sat, 6 Aug 2005, Ben Escoto wrote:
> > dean gaudet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote the following on Wed, 20 Jul 2005 12:30:59 -0700 (PDT)
>
> > i'm tempted to change it so that a command line option is required
> > to enable the mode futzing... by default i'd really prefer backup
> > and
> dean gaudet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote the following on Wed, 20 Jul 2005 12:30:59 -0700 (PDT)
> On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
>
> > If we're not root on the server during a restore operation, we try to
> > change permissions to ensure readability? Either we can read an ob
15 matches
Mail list logo
