On Saturday 10 December 2005 18:58, AltGrendel wrote:
> Timo Neuvonen wrote:
> >>So, in conclusion <grin> I guess what I'm saying is, that so long as
> >>nothing you do would break an existing installation then by all
> >>means, take the choice which requires the least amount of
> >>effort on your part and still makes some sense as
> >>far as version numbers are concerned.
> >>
> >>And, thanks for all that you do. Bacula is great!
> >
> >I vote for this option. Minimum-effort working solution.
> >
> >If there were any chances to get binary rpms, that would be veeery nice!
>
> Seconded on the Minimum-effort path.
>
Thanks to everyone for the responses. I'm not sure I took the minimum effort
path, but it is the one of least worry ...
--
Best regards,
Kern
(">
/\
V_V
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
