I found the reason for this mystery:

   /home/Backup4U/.ssh:
   -rwxrwx---  1014/544        415 2008-12-14 14:12:10  
/home/Backup4U/.ssh/authorized_keys (e86ae4879765b4579bb3deee0626e88b)
   bpc_attrib_dirRead: can't open 
/var/lib/backuppc/pool/74/fa/74faf6dde97ccc2439ee042541197853
   /home/Backup4U/OBS:
   -rwxrwx---  1014/544          5 2008-12-22 23:29:12  
/home/Backup4U/OBS/.bash_history (f4b524261fce06c1fbd10b4681ad0b97)

It is covering the /fhome/attrib_74faf6dde97ccc2439ee042541197853 file which is 
not in pool.
Properly because of a failed migration because of my too small open file limits.
Maybe BackupPC_ls could print this information 🤭️

Br
Matthias

Am Mittwoch, dem 20.08.2025 um 17:34 +0200 schrieb matth...@gmx.at:
> Hello again :)
> 
>  * Patch https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/issues/541
>     - My patch is in github as Issue 541. I'm sure I missunderstand your "If 
> no Github issue yet
>       exists, you could for example add your suggestion to
>       https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/issues/5";
>     - I don't implement a "YetAnotherDumpPreUserCmd" because than I've to 
> implement it in the GUI
> and
>       in the Documentation too. On the other hand "DumpPreUserCmd" is just 
> called sometime
> earlier. I
>       believe it can affect other users only if they expect a limited time 
> between
> "DumpPreUserCmd" and
>       "DumpPreShareCmd". 
>     - But if there would be a chance to get this patch into normal BackuPC 
> source, I'd implement
> it as
>       you asked for and add it to above Issue 541
> 
> The others just for giving you an answer. I know what I have to do next:
>  * I'll provide my script to 
> https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki/How-to-find-which-backups-
>    reference-a-particular-pool-file, as soon as testing is finished.
>  * Patches: What you propose is (similar) what I'm done. 2 directories and 
> running:
>     - diff -ruN ...
>     - patch -p0 ...
>  * 
>  * "bpc_attrib_dirRead: can't open" for existing file:
>     - I have no 1014 in my /etc/passwd and no 544 in my /etc/group. But there 
> are a lot of files,
>       readable by BackupPC_ls, with 1014/513 or 544/513. I don't know where 
> this uid/gid are
> coming
>       from. Before migration the files are owned by backuppc:backuppc 
> (106/106)
>     - 
>     - What I'm wondering about:
>        + /home/Backup4U/.ssh/authorized_keys has digest 
> e86ae4879765b4579bb3deee0626e88b
>        + bpc_attrib_dirRead: can't open
> /var/lib/backuppc/pool/74/fa/74faf6dde97ccc2439ee042541197853
>        + That's another digest, probably another file or directory what have 
> not been outlined?
>     - But don't worry about. I have a V3 backup from the already migrated V4 
> backup. I'll migrate
> it to
>       V4 using ulimit -n 10000. I'm very sure the migrate job will not have 
> any problems than. If
> not -
>       it is a really old backup and I'll just remove it 🤭️
>  * 11,000 out of 30,000,000:
>     - No I don't asked for your opinion. I find out that this missing files 
> are from 2009 till
> 2023. So
>       no relevant backup is affected. Just historical data.
>  * e2fsck: Me too. I don't have issues with ext4 since several years. Thanks 
> to journaling🙏️. I
>    probably lost files several years ago. e2fsck repaired something and I 
> removed the files from
>    Lost+Found because I'm not able to restore files from there🤣️
> 
> Have a great day
> Matthias
> 
> Am Dienstag, dem 19.08.2025 um 18:42 +0100 schrieb G.W. Haywood:
> > Hi there,
> > 
> > On Sun, 17 Aug 2025, matth...@gmx.at wrote:
> > 
> > > ...
> > > ...
> > > BTW1:
> > >  * is there a place where I could provide this (bash) script?
> > 
> > The scripts section at https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki
> > 
> > >  * sometimes I'm developing patches to BackupPC perl scripts (applyable 
> > > with patch -p0 --dry-
> > > run
> > > --
> > >    reject-file=oops.rej <file.patch) and better documented than below. Is 
> > > there a place where
> > > I
> > >    could provide them?
> > 
> > Github is the place.
> > 
> > Being an Old School greybeard I'm very comfortable with patches, but I
> > guess most people never use 'patch' any more.  The latest thing is
> > 'pull requests' on Github.  Unfortunately more or less every time I
> > try to use Github's User Interface it breaks in some new and to be
> > frank very uninteresting way, so I tend to use git from the command
> > line to do any code changes on Github (and gitk to look at history).
> > I'm not above downloading two different versions of the whole thing as
> > an archive, extracting them to a temporary directory, and then running
> > 'diff -r -U3 ...' on the two subdirectories.
> > 
> > The point buried beneath all this is that if you can recruit a few
> > people to test your patches that will help enormously.  Despite my own
> > reservations about and dreadful experiences of Github I think you will
> > get better traction if (1) you use Github's facilities to publish your
> > changes for testing and (2) after you've made the changes available on
> > Github you send a message to this mailing list announcing them.  In my
> > view it's much better to keep discussion on this mailing list than to
> > try to use Github as some kind of forum.
> > 
> > >     - BackupPC_backupDuplicate can need some time and the client could go 
> > > to sleep in the
> > > meantime. A
> > >       patch to??BackupPC_dump move the call of DumpPreUserCmd before 
> > > execution of
> > >       BackupPC_backupDuplicate and a users DumpPreUserCmd can disable 
> > > hibernation on client
> > > side.
> > >     - BackupPC_restore could need some time between calculation of 
> > > $lastNum and using it for
> > >       RestoreInfo and RestoreLOG. A patch move the calculation behind the 
> > > call of the
> > >       RestorePostUserCmd and if someone, like me??, is 
> > > calling?BackupPC_restore from a
> > > programm
> > >       several times in parallel for different shares and dirs of a host, 
> > > each single call can
> > > use
> > >       another?$lastNum.
> > 
> > All good stuff. :)
> > 
> > Your patch for BackupPC_restore is on Github at
> > 
> > https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/issues/541
> > 
> > I know that at some point I've at least seen something describing the
> > rationale behind the BackupPC_backupDuplicate patch, but I have been
> > unable to find it (for my TODO list:).  Did you mention it on Github,
> > or this mailing list or somewhere...?
> > 
> > In general I'm much happier with changes which add functionality as an
> > *option* and which won't affect existing users in any way unless they
> > deliberately ask for the option.  In both patches I'd worry much less
> > if you added YetAnotherDumpPreUserCmd, so if YetAnotherDumpPreUserCmd
> > is undefined there would be no change to the current operation.  If no
> > Github issue yet exists, you could for example add your suggestion to
> > 
> > https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/issues/5
> > 
> > which I want to look into more carefully when I can get to it.
> > 
> > > BTW2:
> > > ...
> > > ...
> > > -rwxrwx--- 1014/544 415 2008-12-14 14:12:10 
> > > /home/Backup4U/.ssh/authorized_keys
> > > ...
> > > ... I don't understand the second one because 
> > > "/home/Backup4U/.ssh/authorized_keys" exists.
> > 
> > To be able to make a backup of a file, the user 'backuppc' (or
> > whatever you have set set in the variable $Conf{BackupPCUser} in
> > /etc/BackupPC/config.pl) needs to be able to read the file when it
> > tries to make the backup.  Can your $Conf{BackupPCUser} read a file
> > which has UID 1014 and GID 544, but no 'world' read permission?
> > 
> > > I think the main reason of this corruptions in my system was an
> > > insufficient maximum number of open file descriptors.  As soon as I
> > > recognized this and set "ulimit -n 10000" all remaining migrations
> > > went well.
> > 
> > Useful information.  It seems to me that it should be possible to add
> > a check in the conversion script to check ulimit, maybe warn about it.
> > I added it to my TODO, but don't hold your breath it's low priority.
> > 
> > > > It seems likely that your conversion of V3 backups to V4 backups did
> > > > not go very well.? You said that there were 'issues', and that now the
> > > > count of missing pool files is nearly two thousand.? (1.800 - is that
> > > > right? in the UK we use comma , not decimal point . as the thousands
> > > > separator).? You are right to want to investigate.? Are you able to
> > > > recover a few files successfully?? Perhaps choose some at random, and
> > > > some because they're big/small/valuable/new/old?
> > > 1,800 missing pool files found last night, in 1/16 of the pool. In total 
> > > it is more than
> > > 11,000
> > > out
> > > of 30,000,000. So only a few files are affected??.
> > 
> > I'm not sure if you're asking if I suggested that 11,000 files is only
> > "a few files".  For the avoidance of doubt, I did not.  I asked if you
> > were able to restore a few files but I suggested choosing the files in
> > a number of different ways to get a hopefully representative sample of
> > your success rate, as a way of checking that your backup recovery can
> > "sort of work" on a good day.  Obviously it isn't an exhaustive test,
> > but I'd probably try something like that before I tried something more
> > exhaustive.
> > 
> > > Probably because of filesystem corrections made by e2fsck in the
> > > past or because of some aborted migrations, mentioned above.
> > 
> > I have no idea what will happen to a V3 BackupPC pool if e2fsck was
> > obliged to make corrections to it, but I wouldn't feel that I could
> > trust it without making careful tests.  My personal view is that the
> > filesystem for your backup system must be completely beyond reproach,
> > and if it starts to need maintenance of that kind then it's probably
> > time to replace it unless there's some obvious explanation with an
> > equally obvious and easy fix.  There was a time, decades ago, when I
> > spent many hours every year fixing filesystems, but in general they
> > are all a lot more reliable nowadays and now I can't remember the last
> > time I had to run any kind of filesystem fixing tool - even on the USB
> > attached hard drives on the several Raspberry Pis which we use here.
> > 
> 

_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:    https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:    https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki
Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/

Reply via email to