At 10:30 AM 11/7/2000, Eric Wadsworth wrote:
>[...]
>I have some questions:
>
>1. I generally avoid beta products when working with critical projects.
>The company's backup is considered critical. Just how risky is this beta?
>Worst case scenario: A machine crashes, and I can't restore the data. How
>unlikely might this be? Other risk: I spend extra time trying to get it to
>work right, but for some reason it's broken, and I have to revert back to
>the release version. I'm interested to hear from those using the beta on
>it's stability.
In general, I'd say I also tend to avoid beta products in production
environments. It just makes sense. When I originally setup Amanda for our
backups, I too used 2.4.1p1. I've (mostly) lurked on the mailing list
since, to get a better feel for Amanda. Time has shown there aren't really
any good reasons *not* to go with 2.4.2 (for me), as the "beta"
qualification is mostly a documentation issue. In September or October I
upgraded to a CVS snapshot of 2.4.2 with absolutely no problems.
>2. How do I get it? I ftp'd into ftp.amanda.org/pub/amanda and the latest
>there is amanda-2.4.1p1.tar.gz. There is a 'new' subdirectory, but access
>is denied.
I'd recommend checking out the latest CVS. Take a look at the Faq-O-Matic
at www.amanda.org for info on anonymous CVS.
>3. My FreeBSD lets me use the FreeBSD Ports system to install and manage
>software applications. By installing the beta, I suppose I must abandon
>using ports for this app?
I'm not specifically familiar with FreeBSD, but you probably shouldn't use
a port anyway. Way too many things are compiled into the Amanda binary
(this is planned to change in a future version).
>Thanks in advance for your comments.
>--- Eric
Darin Dugan
System Support Specialist
Iowa State University Extension
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.extension.iastate.edu
