[Bacula-users] I need to reuse volume1 inmediately

[Denis Morejón]

Hello:
I have built a bacula 11 successfuly. I am testing saving a few files to a
file type device, using a little Pool of up to 3 volumes of 100Mb each one.
I need to see how bacula creates the three volumes automatically as I
repeat a job some times in order to fill up the three volumes. And It
happens indeed. The three volumes get full. But then, a new job execution
remains running for a long time and need to be stopped. It seems that the
first volume can not be rewriten. Even when directive volume retention = 0
is set on the pool. File and Job retention = 0 is set on the client
resource. What else should I do ? I mean, to rewrite the first volume
automatically.
___
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] [Bacula-devel] Release 11.0.5

[Sven Hartge]

On 04.06.21 17:18, Dan Langille wrote:

On Fri, Jun 4, 2021, at 8:19 AM, Sven Hartge wrote:

On 04.06.21 08:46, Eric Bollengier via Bacula-users wrote:



If something is wrong, a new release is made and tagged as well.



Same goes for the provided archives. Please don't remove existing ones
and replace them with other archives with the same version.



A project should never do this.

As a packager, you have now made my job much bigger than it needs to be.
This is a non-trivial situation. If there is a problem with the release,
create another release. Your downstream will have much more respect for you
than if you do otherwise.

Please, never do this.


You *can* remove releases, if there are broken or dangerous, I have no 
problems with that.


But please, please, please, do not reuse the version when you create the 
next unbroken release.


Also please tag the exact point that the released archives where made in 
GIT immediately. There may be a time where we need to examine the 
contents of the archives and compare them to the code in GIT.


Grüße,
Sven.



___
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] [Bacula-devel] Release 11.0.5

[Dan Langille]

On Fri, Jun 4, 2021, at 8:19 AM, Sven Hartge wrote:
> On 04.06.21 08:46, Eric Bollengier via Bacula-users wrote:
> 
> > It seems that the release process is very attractive these days,
> > the tags are usually pushed at the end of the procedure (after
> > few days or when preparing the next release. It's better to
> > be sure that everything is ok because we cannot overwrite tags
> > once they are cloned on other git repositories.
> > 
> > Of course, I can push them now, it seems that the release
> > is correct this time.
> 
> I am sorry to say, but that is really strange. Of all the projects I 
> follow, Bacula is the only with that interpretation of tag usage.
> 
> Everyone else tags a release as soon as it is released and then the 
> release it not changed afterwards.
> 
> If something is wrong, a new release is made and tagged as well.
> 
> Same goes for the provided archives. Please don't remove existing ones 
> and replace them with other archives with the same version.

A project should never do this. 

As a packager, you have now made my job much bigger than it needs to be.
This is a non-trivial situation. If there is a problem with the release,
create another release. Your downstream will have much more respect for you
than if you do otherwise.

Please, never do this.

Archives are archives, never to be modified. By definition.

> This makes life really difficult for distributions when you add a new 
> version and then suddenly it is revoked and replaces by a new release 
> with the same version number.
> 
> If you for example release 11.0.5 and we upload this to Debian and two 
> days later you remove the release and replace it, we would then need to 
> "invent" a version number like 11.0.5.1 to be able to upload the new 
> version.
> 
> Yes, it looks bad when you have to release several minor version over a 
> few days, but please think of the people downstream of you.

It should not be about the project. It should be about your consumers.

-- 
  Dan Langille
  d...@langille.org


___
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] [Bacula-devel] Release 11.0.5

[Sven Hartge]

On 04.06.21 14:27, Radosław Korzeniewski wrote:
pt., 4 cze 2021 o 14:20 Sven Hartge > napisał(a):


Yes, it looks bad when you have to release several minor version over a
few days,


I think it is more "patch level" and not "minor version". IMVHO, YMMV.


Yes, of course. My points still remain.

Grüße,
Sven.


___
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] [Bacula-devel] Release 11.0.5

[Radosław Korzeniewski]

Hello Sven,

pt., 4 cze 2021 o 14:20 Sven Hartge  napisał(a):

> Yes, it looks bad when you have to release several minor version over a
> few days,


I think it is more "patch level" and not "minor version". IMVHO, YMMV.

best regards
-- 
Radosław Korzeniewski
rados...@korzeniewski.net
___
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] [Bacula-devel] Release 11.0.5

[Sven Hartge]

On 04.06.21 08:46, Eric Bollengier via Bacula-users wrote:


It seems that the release process is very attractive these days,
the tags are usually pushed at the end of the procedure (after
few days or when preparing the next release. It's better to
be sure that everything is ok because we cannot overwrite tags
once they are cloned on other git repositories.

Of course, I can push them now, it seems that the release
is correct this time.


I am sorry to say, but that is really strange. Of all the projects I 
follow, Bacula is the only with that interpretation of tag usage.


Everyone else tags a release as soon as it is released and then the 
release it not changed afterwards.


If something is wrong, a new release is made and tagged as well.

Same goes for the provided archives. Please don't remove existing ones 
and replace them with other archives with the same version.


This makes life really difficult for distributions when you add a new 
version and then suddenly it is revoked and replaces by a new release 
with the same version number.


If you for example release 11.0.5 and we upload this to Debian and two 
days later you remove the release and replace it, we would then need to 
"invent" a version number like 11.0.5.1 to be able to upload the new 
version.


Yes, it looks bad when you have to release several minor version over a 
few days, but please think of the people downstream of you.


Grüße.
Sven.


___
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] Fatal error: MD5 digest not same FileIndex

[Eric Bollengier via Bacula-users]

Hello Elias,

On 04.06.21 00:39, Elias Pereira wrote:

Hello,

I am having this error Fatalerror: MD5 digest not same FileIndexin a backup to 
aws S3. This backup is of files from a fileserver.

Is there any way to disable this check or something like that?


Your issue is not very precise, but I have seen this problem with 
Copy/Migration jobs trying to work with jobs that have a cycle in their volume 
list (not a very common situation, and rather easy to avoid). Maybe you can 
give us some more details.

Best Regards,

Eric



___
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users