On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 02:36:46PM +0100, JC Simonetti wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 04:52:33 -0800
> David Wolfskill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > I wasn't aware that the Win32 environment was sufficiently "special"
> > that tar archives were unportable between that and normal (UNIX)
> > environments.

> It's the reason of the existence of the WinTar software :)

Oh.  I had (perhaps naively) thought that it was merely a win32/NT/...?
port of a more standard tar....  

> > Well, I suppose it might be, if it were small enough to fit in the
> > available space on the Windows box, and if someone who had a clue about
> > the Windows environment (i.e., not me) did it.  But it's a (Win32) tar
> > archive for the entire "C:" drive.

> Whoops... Try a smaller tar to make your tests...

Well, I suppose any sub-tree would be somewhat smaller, but I have no
idea how Microsoft spells "du".

> I did not use amrecover for my restorations, but just amrestore. Why? Because in my 
> backup architecture, I d not want to restore to data directly on the client but I 
> restore them on the backup server then push them on the client.
> And as WinTar and GnuTar are different, I was just able to extract the dd image from 
> the tape with amrestore and push these data on the Win32 server, and over there 
> untar them.
> But I was backing up small data, something les than 5 Gb, so I was able to have on 
> my Windows box the tar and the untar data simultaneously, right :)

Ah.  Well, nearly anything that is done around here involving a
Microsoft platform will need to be done by someone other than me:  they
seem to be remarkably unreliable around me.  (They probably know what I
think of them....)


> Concerning development on Win32 architectures, you have Dev-C++ 
> (http://sourceforge.net/projects/dev-cpp/) : a free software IDE compiler under 
> Windows.

Well, for whoever does the development, that might be useful; thanks.

> Personally I don't like the Win32 client since it is based on a CVS snapshot of 
> Amanda from august 2001 : so old isn't it?!

Understood.  I believe that my employer would be willing to pay someone
to re-do that work, with a more recent version of the source.

> Maybe a future development of this client should only be libraries to interface the 
> *nix version of Amanda under Win32, maybe real libraries or patches to apply on the 
> sources, but something that would be generic and not applied on a particular version 
> and just on this version.

Maybe in the longer term; for now, we just want something that actually
works.

> The 2 other solutions are :
> 1. Samba backup using  "smbclient" on the Linux Amanda server: simple but you do not 
> backup NT file rights (well... see some messages above in the mailing-list, someone 
> sent a little script to backup the rights)

Yes, I know of this.  However, in our environment, it is not an
acceptable approach.

> 2. Cygwin and the Amanda source code: very functional but you have to install a 
> Linux emulator on your Windows box... I don't like the idea (what would you say if I 
> told you that you have to install a Windows emulator on your BSD to backup your BSD?)

Right; I expect that Cygwin will be involved, but only for development.
We are trying to minimize the impact on clients' machines.

Thanks again,
david
-- 
David H. Wolfskill                                 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to