On 11/28/2016 12:43 PM, Kern Sibbald wrote: > Hello Josip, > > Well for end users such as myself, I do consider having Bacula all over > your system a problem. First, if I want to bring up a new version, I > simply do: > > cp -a /opt/bacula /opt/old-bacula > save the database > > then install a new version. If something goes wrong, it is easy to roll > back to the previous version. In addition, when saving the database > dump every evening, I have Bacula backup the database dump plus > everything in /opt/bacula with the exclusion of a few directories such > as /opt/bacula/working, ...
I would add that the single directory approach is essential when running Bacula daemons in a high availability environment where all of the Bacula files must be on shared storage available to multiple cluster nodes. The cluster config is far simpler when there is only a single device and filesystem involved during a failover. When the files are scattered across the system, they are usually also scattered across multiple filesystems. In order to use Simone's RHEL RPMs, I have had to create numerous symlinks and force the files to live on a single shared storage device, (a DRBD device in this case). I, for one, welcome a RPM with everything in /opt/bacula. That said, Simone's work with RHEL RPMs has been greatly appreciated. > In case of an emergency, it is then easy to get back the database and > all of Bacula including the conf files very easily. The same can be > done when the Bacula files are sprayed all over your system, bit > generally, you either need to do a big backup or you need to know > exactly what files to backup and where they are. It is easy to forget > one, especially if you upgrade and we release a new file or you decide > to modify mtx-changer or something ... > > That said, you are free to do it your way :-) > > Best regards, > Kern > > On 11/28/2016 01:10 PM, Josip Deanovic wrote: >> On Monday 2016-11-28 11:56:25 Jaime Ferrer Hepp wrote: >>> Thanks Josip, I 'll take a look into it. Mainly what might be helpful is >>> to have bacula-fd binaries for the different linux distributions and >>> version. Regarding bacula-dir and bacula-sd I prefer to use Kern's >>> suggestion to have all files under /opt/bacula. Today I have it using >>> the "RedHat standard" and it is really cumbersome to maintain and >>> update. >> I don't know. It's all the same for me if all the paths are properly set. >> >> If all the libraries, binaries and manuals are at the correct locations >> they should already exist in the relevant path environment variable and >> you shouldn't experience any problems whether you are using /opt/bacula >> or /usr as your prefix during the configure and compile time. >> >> In case you want to check the content of the bacula rpm package you can >> simply issue the command rpm -ql <name of the package> and that's it. >> >> I understand that the bacula developers have additional things to care >> abut because they need to make it easier to support but for the end users >> it shouldn't be a problem or at least I am unable to see it. >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Bacula-users mailing list > Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
