Gene Heskett wrote:
> The majority opinion of those on this list is that any rpm's for
> amanda probably should be subjected to an intentional rm -f, they
> rarely, very rarely, will fit the individual users individual
> system, leaving out many vital steps such as adding a user "amanda"
> and makeing her a member of group "disk" for instance.
Incorrect. Where did you get that idea?
From the amanda specfile for Red Hat 7.3:
useradd -M -n -g disk -o -r -d /var/lib/amanda -s /bin/bash \
-c "Amanda user" -u 33 amanda >/dev/null 2>&1 || :
A little research does wonders, you'll find.
> Generally speaking, making an rpm installation work is going to be
> 10x more difficult than making a home built install work. There
> isn't enough docs to describe the rpm's default configuration so
> you can either make your system match the one the rpm was built on,
> or give up in a morass of error messages.
I'd dispute that most strongly. It's all there in the spec file, if
you'd care to look.
Package management exists for a reason. I've noticed a lot of frankly
uninformed criticism of packaged amanda installs, and it's beyond time
for that to end.
--
Rob Kearey Website: http://apac.redhat.com
Red Hat Asia-Pacific Legal: http://apac.redhat.com/disclaimer
+61 7 3872 4803 Stuff: http://people.redhat.com/rkearey
