We discussed briefly rolling fresher Amanda into etch and decided it was
not worth the risk. I would like to re-visit the idea for an etch point
release... moving etch to Amanda 2.5.1p3 would be a good move in my
opinion.
Bdale
--- Begin Message ---
On Tuesday, 15.05.2007 at 09:37 -0600, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-05-15 at 15:39 +0100, Dave Ewart wrote:
> > According to
> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.archivers.amanda.devel/1875 this
> > is a known problem and is fixed in version 2.5.1p2 (although 2.5.1p3
> > is now available).
>
> Any chance you could try the 2.5.1p3 packages currently in unstable?
> We had some 11th-hour discussion about the versions of tar and amanda
> that should be in etch, but frankly, the changes weren't clearly worth
> the risk of destabilizing the release. If we're going to consider
> rolling this in a point release, it would be good to know if the
> problem is definitely fixed.
Installing 2.5.1p3-2 does indeed fix this particular problem, yes. I
should have made that clear in my original report. I took the 2.5.1p3-2
packages from Lenny, today.
The 2.5.1p3-2/Lenny packages have the same non-AMANDA dependencies as
those in Etch, so this was a fairly easy change.
Dave.
--
Dave Ewart
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Computing Manager, Cancer Epidemiology Unit
Cancer Research UK / Oxford University
PGP: CC70 1883 BD92 E665 B840 118B 6E94 2CFD 694D E370
Get key from http://www.ceu.ox.ac.uk/~davee/davee-ceu-ox-ac-uk.asc
N 51.7518, W 1.2016
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
--- End Message ---
