On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:06 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> Well, TBT Dustin, other than the rather terse ChangeLog, no one seems to be
> using much ink bragging about the newest bells and whistles. Some timely
> article submissions to the review sites might let them know that the old girl
> hasn't tu
On Tuesday 09 March 2010, Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
>On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Steve Wray wrote:
>> Can anyone suggest a distro that tracks Amanda upstream reasonably well?
>> Ie doesn't include bug-ridden versions in their stable releases...
>
>I'm a Gentoo user, and they're up to date:
>
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Steve Wray wrote:
> Can anyone suggest a distro that tracks Amanda upstream reasonably well? Ie
> doesn't include bug-ridden versions in their stable releases...
I'm a Gentoo user, and they're up to date:
http://packages.gentoo.org/package/app-backup/amanda
Stefa
On Tuesday 09 March 2010, Steve Wray wrote:
>Gene Heskett wrote:
>> On Tuesday 09 March 2010, Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 1:58 PM, Steve Wray wrote:
Right, so the LATEST most up-to-date version of Debian uses a 3 year
old version of amanda. Fantastic, thanks Debi
On Tuesday 09 March 2010, rory_f wrote:
>Gene Heskett wrote:
>> On Tuesday 09 March 2010, rory_f wrote:
>>
>> If the card is wide scsi, perhaps a cabling issue or termination issue
>> has caused it to fall back to scsi-II width and speeds? I have read that
>> some cards do this, and a reboot once
Hi there
I've been looking at the state of Amanda in a few distros.
Ubuntu and Centos so far seem to have pretty old versions of Amanda.
Can anyone suggest a distro that tracks Amanda upstream reasonably well? Ie
doesn't include bug-ridden versions in their stable releases...
Not that I'm ac
Gene Heskett wrote:
On Tuesday 09 March 2010, Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 1:58 PM, Steve Wray wrote:
Right, so the LATEST most up-to-date version of Debian uses a 3 year old
version of amanda. Fantastic, thanks Debian for keeping things so
'stable'.
To be fair, that's exa
Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 9:55 AM, rory_f
> backupcentral.com> wrote:
>
> > One question; i don't have to run amtapetype every time i do this do i? For
> > instance, say the speed problems are resolved, will amdump pick up on this
> > automatically or does it stick t
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 9:55 AM, rory_f wrote:
> One question; i don't have to run amtapetype every time i do this do i? For
> instance, say the speed problems are resolved, will amdump pick up on this
> automatically or does it stick to the tape speed given in amtapetype
> absolutely?
Amdump j
Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Tuesday 09 March 2010, rory_f wrote:
>
> If the card is wide scsi, perhaps a cabling issue or termination issue has
> caused it to fall back to scsi-II width and speeds? I have read that some
> cards do this, and a reboot once the problem is solved, might bring back t
On Tuesday 09 March 2010, rory_f wrote:
>Gene Heskett wrote:
>> On Monday 08 March 2010, rory_f wrote:
>>
>> Please do. It could be something I missed, or it could be a brand new
>> phenomenon to file away in my trivia file.
>
>gene,
>
>ama...@backup tor]$ amtapetype -o -f /dev/nst0 -e 400G
>Writi
Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Monday 08 March 2010, rory_f wrote:
>
> Please do. It could be something I missed, or it could be a brand new
> phenomenon to file away in my trivia file.
>
>
gene,
ama...@backup tor]$ amtapetype -o -f /dev/nst0 -e 400G
Writing 1024 Mbyte compresseable data: 31
12 matches
Mail list logo
