On 04/12/2014 05:59 PM, Phil Stracchino wrote: > On 04/12/14 04:29, Kern Sibbald wrote: >> The >> problem with bat is that it relies on Qt, which is forever changing and >> if you build it with the wrong version as most packagers do, it does not >> work well. In addition, despite the current difficulties of >> installation, I am convinced that Web interfaces are the long term >> solution. > I hope BAT remains part of the distribution, though. Yes, Bat remains part of the distribution and will remain in the distribution for quite some time. It is the tool I use for managing my home backup. It is quite OK up to about 50 clients, but after that it is not as convenient as the web interfaces.
Best regards, Kern > I consider a > standalone tool a much better option than a web interface, and I am very > skeptical of the "everything in your browser" school of thought. Purely > aside from the issue of making the browser a single point of failure, I > have never bought into the idea that the web is a one-size-fits-all tool > for everything. If my only administration tool for a service runs only > in my browser, then I need to run a webserver for it, whether I want to > expose that large of an attack surface or not. It's like GUI DB tools > for MySQL - the attack surface of MySQL Workbench is tiny (one secured > port); the attack surface of phpMyAdmin is huge. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Put Bad Developers to Shame Dominate Development with Jenkins Continuous Integration Continuously Automate Build, Test & Deployment Start a new project now. Try Jenkins in the cloud. http://p.sf.net/sfu/13600_Cloudbees _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list Bacula-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
