Martineau martin...@zmanda.com
To: Jobst Schmalenbach jo...@barrett.com.au
Cc: amanda-users@amanda.org
Subject: Re: exclude list not working on clients.
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 10:03:21 -0500
Jobst,
What you do looks good, post the sendbackup.*.debug file.
Jean-Louis
Jobst Schmalenbach
Jobst,
What you do looks good, post the sendbackup.*.debug file.
Jean-Louis
Jobst Schmalenbach wrote:
Hi.
I have one client host that refuses to listen to the exclude list option in the dumptype.
I know it works, for example I backup a 120GB /amanda directory/parition on the tape
host
). Bugger. Need to do some research.
Jobst
-Original Message-
From: Jean-Louis Martineau martin...@zmanda.com
To: Jobst Schmalenbach jo...@barrett.com.au
Cc: amanda-users@amanda.org
Subject: Re: exclude list not working on clients.
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 10:03:21 -0500
Jobst,
What you do
).
They should be in /tmp/amanda but they are not (except on the
tape host itslef). Bugger. Need to do some research.
Jobst
-Original Message-
From: Jean-Louis Martineau martin...@zmanda.com
To: Jobst Schmalenbach jo...@barrett.com.au
Cc: amanda-users@amanda.org
Subject: Re: exclude list
Gee, can we be sure of anything with gnutar ;)
I have that small project in my mind that would do a tar cv and a tar
cv --exclude-from and compare both output.
I will do that when I have a day free :)
Olivier
Thanks for your replies.
I could have phrased my question slightly better.
I want to know what the exclude list should look like to make sure I exclude
all files with these extensions in any directory/subdirectory contained
under the disklist entries:
.ora
.dbf
.dmp
.dmp.gz.xx
If I
I want to know what the exclude list should look like to make sure I exclude
all files with these extensions in any directory/subdirectory contained
under the disklist entries:
.ora
.dbf
.dmp
.dmp.gz.xx
It seems that the safest way is:
*.ora
*.dbf
*.dmp
*.dmp.gz.*
without the initial
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 04:41:37PM +0700, Olivier Nicole wrote:
I want to know what the exclude list should look like to make sure I exclude
all files with these extensions in any directory/subdirectory contained
under the disklist entries:
.ora
.dbf
.dmp
.dmp.gz.xx
It seems
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 10:54:07AM +0700, Olivier Nicole wrote:
No there really is a difference between excluding /foo, ./foo, and foo.
As you are backing up ., /foo will not match anything.
Of course
./foo will match any foo in the top level directory .
foo will match any foo in any
When AMANDA attempts to exclude a file or directory it does so relative to
the area being archived. For example if /var is in your disklist and you
want to exclude /var/log/somefile, then your exclude file would contain
./log/somefile
I understand that rather as a warning not to use /var in
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 09:47:22AM +0700, Olivier Nicole wrote:
When AMANDA attempts to exclude a file or directory it does so relative to
the area being archived. For example if /var is in your disklist and you
want to exclude /var/log/somefile, then your exclude file would contain
You did put the exclude file on the
client, didn't you ?
http://www.amanda.org/docs/exclude.html#id2533384
Regards,
Bert De Ridder
PeopleWare NV - Head Office
Cdt.Weynsstraat 85
B-2660 Hoboken
Tel: +32 3 448.33.38
Fax: +32 3 448.32.66
PeopleWare NV - Branch Office Geel
Bert,
You did put the exclude file on the client, didn't you ?
http://www.amanda.org/docs/exclude.html#id2533384
Thanks, but yes.
Owen.
--
Owen Williams
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Work0116 2506349
Home0116 2259109
Mobile 0771 5790631
Senior Computing Officer | Software Engineer
Consultant
Graeme Humphries wrote:
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 18:34 +0200, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
After reading all that thread I have to ask:
Do you all agree with me editing the man-page as Jon suggested?
It seems reasonable to me.
Edited and committed to the xml-docs-cvs.
--
Stefan G.
Jon LaBadie wrote:
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 11:14:19PM +0200, Paul Bijnens wrote:
Amanda will not complain
- if the exclude file on the client is not there at all
In this case amanda can construct a gtar argument list that does
not contain the exclude list of a non-existing file.
- or if the
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 10:06:07AM +0200, Paul Bijnens wrote:
Jon LaBadie wrote:
Paul,
I probably should look it up myself, but I'm feeling lazy.
Lazy, but you're correct!
I thought that the various exclude features were generalized so that
amanda would make up its own exclude file
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 22:02 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
amanda cannot do an suid root if it was built as root, no way around
it due to the failure of the suid command if its already owned by
root.
Certainly, but I don't think the Debian packages were built as root. I
just choose to run amdump
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 11:01 -0400, Jon LaBadie wrote:
BTW, is it just amcheck, or amdump as well,
that does or does not complain?
In my experience it's only been amcheck that complains, amdump is still
happy to do the backups, so this confusion hasn't been critical. ;)
--
Graeme Humphries
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 09:32:13AM -0600, Graeme Humphries wrote:
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 11:01 -0400, Jon LaBadie wrote:
BTW, is it just amcheck, or amdump as well,
that does or does not complain?
In my experience it's only been amcheck that complains, amdump is still
happy to do the
Jon LaBadie wrote:
Seems to me the only thing that needs changing is the
amanda.conf man page. Currently it says:
... With exclude list, the string is a file name on the
client containing GNU-tar exclude expressions.
...
If optional is specified for exclude list, then amcheck
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 18:34 +0200, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
After reading all that thread I have to ask:
Do you all agree with me editing the man-page as Jon suggested?
It seems reasonable to me.
On Wednesday 06 July 2005 11:31, Graeme Humphries wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 22:02 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
amanda cannot do an suid root if it was built as root, no way
around it due to the failure of the suid command if its already
owned by root.
Certainly, but I don't think the Debian
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 13:59 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
I think this is going to be problematic, Graeme. But I'll defer to
someone who is a bit more cognizant of the actual code. I do know
that I cannot run either amcheck or amdump here as root, the exit,
complaining about it, is instant
Graeme Humphries wrote:
I've just added exclude lists as per the examples in the online
documentation, with the following configuration:
exclude list optional .amanda.excludes
However, amcheck now complains on every item in the disklist for a
*single* host, that it [Can't open exclude file
--On Tuesday, July 05, 2005 09:51:36 -0600 Graeme Humphries [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I've just added exclude lists as per the examples in the online
documentation, with the following configuration:
exclude list optional .amanda.excludes
However, amcheck now complains on every item in the
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 11:41 -0500, Frank Smith wrote:
amcheck runs as your Amanda user and may not have permissions to the
directory where your exclude file lives.
I *thought* I had amanda running as root on the client, but I may be
wrong. It doesn't complain that it can't access any of those
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 18:07 +0200, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
As you have read the docs, this file should be specified relative to the
DLE on the client.
Yep. I want it to, like shown in the docs, just look for
a .amanda.excludes file in the root of every share I'm backing up.
I'd suggest
--On Tuesday, July 05, 2005 10:47:59 -0600 Graeme Humphries [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 11:41 -0500, Frank Smith wrote:
amcheck runs as your Amanda user and may not have permissions to the
directory where your exclude file lives.
I *thought* I had amanda running as root
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 12:07 -0500, Frank Smith wrote:
You really shouldn't be running Amanda as root, but as a separate
user. When you run 'make install' as root it installs the executables
that need root access suid root. Then when your backups run it can
access everything necessary.
I've
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 11:19:09AM -0600, Graeme Humphries wrote:
In my experience the error occurs if Amanda can't access the directory
to see if the file is there. Perhaps the docs need to be rephrased.
I'd rather just have any permission related error ignored if the
optional keyword
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 16:50 -0500, Frank Smith wrote:
You can do what I do, just ignore the errors from amcheck that you
know are bogus.
That's probably what I'll end up doing, but I know that for me it's
generally bad practice, because it means that eventually I'll just stop
paying attention
Title: Re: exclude list optional not working?
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 23:14 +0200, Paul Bijnens wrote:
- or if the file is not readable: in that case amanda trusts the
suid-root runtar executable so that gnutar can read the contents of
the file, never mind the permissions.
But Amanda does
Title: Re: exclude list optional not working?
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 15:34 -0400, Jon LaBadie wrote:
If there were no exclude file, then the admin can reasonably
feel that it is not contributing to the list of excluded file.
Thus no error on setting optional is reasonable.
But what about
Graeme Humphries wrote:
I'd rather just have any permission related error ignored if the
optional keyword is used. Is there a situation where we *would* want it
to hard error out on an optional exclude list if it can't get into the
directory the exclude list is supposed to be in?
Amanda will
On Tuesday 05 July 2005 12:47, Graeme Humphries wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 11:41 -0500, Frank Smith wrote:
amcheck runs as your Amanda user and may not have permissions to
the directory where your exclude file lives.
I *thought* I had amanda running as root on the client, but I may be
wrong.
On Tuesday 05 July 2005 13:19, Graeme Humphries wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 12:07 -0500, Frank Smith wrote:
You really shouldn't be running Amanda as root, but as a separate
user. When you run 'make install' as root it installs the
executables that need root access suid root. Then when your
--On Tuesday, July 05, 2005 15:20:15 -0600 Graeme Humphries [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 23:14 +0200, Paul Bijnens wrote:
- or if the file is not readable: in that case amanda trusts the
suid-root runtar executable so that gnutar can read the contents of
the file,
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 at 12:39pm, Kuas wrote
I setup the back-up so that all excluded list are in
/var/lib/amanda/exclude.txt on each machine, so that I can use a general
dump-type. But I haven't been able to get it work. For example, I backed
up all the /var/spool/mail for every user (the
Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 at 12:39pm, Kuas wrote
I setup the back-up so that all excluded list are in
/var/lib/amanda/exclude.txt on each machine, so that I can use a general
dump-type. But I haven't been able to get it work. For example, I backed
up all the
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 at 3:58pm, Kuas wrote
Now, In a situation I want to give flexibility to users, that they are
the one that knows if a directory needs to be excluded or backup to be
more efficient in the backup process. From the howto and some trial I
can specify in the dumptype, instead of
On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 03:58:58PM -0400, Kuas enlightened us:
Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 at 12:39pm, Kuas wrote
I setup the back-up so that all excluded list are in
/var/lib/amanda/exclude.txt on each machine, so that I can use a general
dump-type. But I haven't
exclude list syntax depends on your dump/tar/smbtar...usually, no. All you
get is wildcards pretty much.
--On Tuesday, March 08, 2005 22:09 +0100 Erik P. Olsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Is it possible to use todays date as element in a filename in an exclude
list?
--
Regards,
Erik P. Olsen
On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 10:09:04PM +0100, Erik P. Olsen wrote:
Is it possible to use todays date as element in a filename in an exclude
list?
You can have multiple exclude statements, IIRC, at most one can omit the
append argument. Given that, you could have one exclude statement
read a file
On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 17:13 -0500, Jon LaBadie wrote:
On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 10:09:04PM +0100, Erik P. Olsen wrote:
Is it possible to use todays date as element in a filename in an exclude
list?
You can have multiple exclude statements, IIRC, at most one can omit the
append argument.
Josef Wolf wrote:
define dumptype my-global {
comp-user-tar
exclude list optional .amanda.exclude.gtar
include list optional .amanda.include.gtar
}
But unfortunately, with this definition all the backups just fail on _all_
filesystems. Even those which actually contain such an
--On Friday, October 11, 2002 10:26:58 -0500 pointer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've checked the docs/FAQ/google/archives and I must be missing
something really simple. :\
I have an amanda client that I'm backing having problems backing up.
We're using tar for /usr on this client:
On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 10:26:58AM -0500, pointer wrote:
I've checked the docs/FAQ/google/archives and I must be missing
something really simple. :\
I have an amanda client that I'm backing having problems backing up.
We're using tar for /usr on this client:
SNIP
/--
Frank,
On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 10:50, Frank Smith wrote:
Your config looks correct to me.
What does '/usr/local/bin/tar --version' show?
SNIP
$ /usr/local/bin/tar --version
tar (GNU tar) 1.13
Copyright (C) 1988, 92,93,94,95,96,97,98, 1999 Free Software Foundation,
Inc.
This is free
On 11 Oct 2002 at 11:58am, pointer wrote
On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 10:50, Frank Smith wrote:
Your config looks correct to me.
What does '/usr/local/bin/tar --version' show?
SNIP
$ /usr/local/bin/tar --version
tar (GNU tar) 1.13
Bad. Bad bad bad. If you're using indexing,
--On Friday, October 11, 2002 11:58:27 -0500 pointer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frank,
On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 10:50, Frank Smith wrote:
Your config looks correct to me.
What does '/usr/local/bin/tar --version' show?
SNIP
$ /usr/local/bin/tar --version
tar (GNU tar) 1.13
Joshua,
On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 11:50, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
Bad. Bad bad bad. If you're using indexing, they're broken. amrecover
won't work. Run, don't walk, to download 1.13.25 from
ftp://alpha.gnu.org.
Thanks for the heads-up. I'd seen this, but hadn't gotten around to
updating
On Friday 11 October 2002 12:58, Frank Smith wrote:
--On Friday, October 11, 2002 11:58:27 -0500 pointer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frank,
On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 10:50, Frank Smith wrote:
Your config looks correct to me.
What does '/usr/local/bin/tar --version' show?
SNIP
$
On Friday 11 October 2002 14:04, pointer wrote:
Joshua,
On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 11:50, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
Bad. Bad bad bad. If you're using indexing, they're broken.
amrecover won't work. Run, don't walk, to download 1.13.25 from
ftp://alpha.gnu.org.
Thanks for the heads-up. I'd
--On Friday, October 11, 2002 15:11:00 -0400 Gene Heskett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Friday 11 October 2002 12:58, Frank Smith wrote:
Possible unrelated problem for you: does anyone on the list
remember if tar 1.13 was one of the versions with the bad index
file problem (the infamous 'big
On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Jeffrey Auerbach wrote:
I have my exclude lists on the client systems but I am not sure that they are
being used. The total space that gets backed up is about 80MB or so.
According to amstatus it is trying to dump 633MB which is roughly half the
amount of space on
It was a spelling error in my amanda.conf file of the exclude list.
I will now accept a slap.
jeff
On Thursday 14 March 2002 01:31 pm, Doug Silver wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Jeffrey Auerbach wrote:
I have my exclude lists on the client systems but I am not sure that they
are being used.
On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 at 10:41am, Jeffrey S. Auerbach wrote
Does the exclude list file live on the server or client, or both?
The client, in the place specified in the amanda.conf file on the server.
--
Joshua Baker-LePain
Department of Biomedical Engineering
Duke University
On Tue, Mar 12, 2002 at 10:41:27AM -0500, Jeffrey S. Auerbach wrote:
Does the exclude list file live on the server or client, or both?
Always on the client.
Jean-Louis
--
Jean-Louis Martineau email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Departement IRO, Universite de Montreal
C.P. 6128, Succ.
On the client.
Does the exclude list file live on the server or client, or both?
Jeff
7:22 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: exclude list format
I understand you figured out the syntax (congratulations! -- it always
gives me a headache :-), so the following is just rambling.
The problem is that even though I am telling it to exclude
these files
We are trying to backup Microsoft clients and we want to exclude some of the
files and directories.
We tried putting the exclude file on the client and on the server and didn't
have any luck.
It did not matter what syntax we used, the files were always backed up.
Have you done anything like
I have a suggestion for you Andrew (of course it involves more work
for you).
A number of times I have seen on this list (and I have experienced it
myself) that exclusion problems are related to broken versions of
GNU tar.
At a minimum, you should have a "Broken GNU tar" section, and let
other
Thankyou. I will add it. Could the list members please provide me
details of this problem and the version of gnutar that have been known to
cause this error. Thank you in advance.
Andrew Hall
On Fri, 16 Mar 2001, Tom Schutter wrote:
I have a suggestion for you Andrew (of course it involves
I would be willing to write an EXCLUDE doc. ...
Great!
... Is there any start point yet?
I'd start with the GNU tar docs. A rough first cut would be to just take
them and make a single document that could be released as part of Amanda.
Then add more examples "typical" (whatever that means)
I understand you figured out the syntax (congratulations! -- it always
gives me a headache :-), so the following is just rambling.
The problem is that even though I am telling it to exclude these files AND
use tar it still creates the tarball with those directories which causes
the dump to fail.
On Jan 31, 2001, Mack Earnhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone know whether it is possible to have an exclude list when
backing up WinNT drives?
Nope. All sendbackup supports right now is a single exclude file
spec, in the case of Smbclient. And note that sendsize doesn't
support it
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jan 31, 2001, Mack Earnhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone know whether it is possible to have an exclude list when
backing up WinNT drives?
Nope. All sendbackup supports right now is a single exclude file
spec, in the case of Smbclient. And note
67 matches
Mail list logo
