On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:33:12PM -0500, Dustin J. Mitchell wrote: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:06 PM, stan <[email protected]> wrote: > > When we upgraded from 2.5.1p2 to 2.5.2p1, we had to copy the chg-multi > > script > > from the 2.5.1p1 release into the new tree, as the newer script did not > > work correctly. > > Interesting -- did you submit patches?
No, we never had the time to figure out what problem had been introduced. But, I suspose we must do this now, as we cannot make 2/`.6.1 work at all, the old script does not work with it. > > > 2.5.1p2 chg-multi does not work with 2.6.1. We have observed a couple of > > things. First it seems that the tape handler that we were using, ammt from > > the earlier amanda release is depricated. Since this mahcine is a Linux > > machine we are back to the bad old days of trying to figure out wheter to > > use mt-st or > > gnu-mt, and I honestly cannot remember which one of those used to work. > > I'm curious - what do you need mt for? I thought that chg-multi used it, no? > > > In addition, we seem to be having problems with some syntax in chg-multi. > > There are lines that look like this: > > > > echo `_ '$var'` >> $logfile > > > > I (nor my sh interperter) understand these. Looks to me like we are trying > > to execute something called + which does not exist. > > It's a rather ill-advised attempt at internationalization. It's not > pretty, especially in shell. It's a syntax erro in any Bourne relate shell I am aware of the back ticks say run this command, and substiture the output of it into the coammand line. Thus we are trying to excute a command called _ which does not exist. I have checked my bash, and korn shell books, and niether has any reference to a construct like this. What is it "supposed" to do? > > > So since we are no longer going to be able to use ammt, what commands can > > we expect mt to be involed with & what are the expected returns. Cause both > > versions of the Linux mt commands (gnu-mt & mt-st) available for Ubuntu > > return something different for an, mt -f /dev/nst0 status than ammt -f > > /dev/nst0 status (none of the three match results). > > Amanda does not use mt at all at this point. I do notice that > chg-multi still begins with: > > 51 if ! error=try_find_mt; then > 52 echo <none> $error > 53 exit 2 > 54 fi > > but the result ($MT) is never used. I'd rip that out if I weren't > about to delete the whole file :) I had looked at that. > > > We got past the syntax > > problem after getting rid of all the '_ ' in chg-multi & then amcheck which > > calls the changer script fails to be able to find a valid slot. We suspect > > that this is because chg-multi expects different behavior from mt than > > it used to get from ammt. We tried forcing the existing, working 2.5.2p1, > > that normally uses chg-multi from 2.5.1p2 and ammt to not find ammt & so > > use the system mt. It reproduces the same error just described (confirmed > > suspicion that Ubuntu gnu-mt & mt-st are incompatible with the changer > > code) > > OK, a few pieces of Amanda history may be relevant to your investigations > here. > I'll comment on this ina seperate message. -- One of the main causes of the fall of the roman empire was that, lacking zero, they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs.
