I can't believe what i've read.
Go but whatever you like, and make sure it is a comercial software.
Please, don't forget to pay for the support, this is quite important
in your case. You need some you can call on the phone and tell them
they don't know what they're doing.
Please, go now,
Jon Craig cannedspam.cant at gmail.com writes:
Maybe you better explain what you know and what you've tried so we are
not forced to
go over ground you may already have covered.
Your very first post calls BackupPC's methods fragile and complains about a
documented requirement of the login
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 19:01, RC cool...@gmail.com wrote:
Jon Craig cannedspam.cant at gmail.com writes:
as for attitudes yours isn't one that inspires people to spend time trying to
support a marginal OS from a company that has a poor track record with the
open
source world.
My first
On 9/18/10 6:40 AM, Jon Craig wrote:
You're welcome to point out how I have, in any way, demonstrated any lack of
technical competence, other than the mere fact I'm not a major Perl hacker
who
can instantly jump into and fix bugs in an unfamiliar project.
Your very first post calls
I know companies still have it around. Our company has 100's of these
systems and I am still happy I no longer need to deal with them. The reason
your .hushlogin doesn't work is because your system is in enhanced security
mode (which forces all that security mumbo jumbo to display). I think your
Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com writes:
If you are poking around in the guts of rsyncP, maybe you could
experiment with removing the --ignore-times option
I tried that early on. Your full backup will have the full directory
structure, but NO FILES AT ALL.
Jon Craig cannedspam.cant at gmail.com writes:
as for attitudes yours isn't one that inspires people to spend time trying to
support a marginal OS from a company that has a poor track record with the open
source world.
My first (perfectly polite) post got completely ignored. Nothing has
On 9/17/2010 5:32 PM, RC wrote:
Les Mikeselllesmikesellat gmail.com writes:
If you are poking around in the guts of rsyncP, maybe you could
experiment with removing the --ignore-times option
I tried that early on. Your full backup will have the full directory
structure, but NO FILES AT
Allen allen.stowe at rogers.com writes:
Try touch .hushlogin in the users home to suppress MOTD and other stuff.
I appreciate the suggestion, but the banner poping up isn't the actual motd,
though I put that in the subject to quickly give peope the right idea. I did
try creating a .hushlogin
Jon Craig cannedspam.cant at gmail.com writes:
If you want the benefits of rsync then you must live with its limitations.
This is not a limitation of rsync. I specifically said rsync (C binary) works
just fine. The Perl::File::RSyncP doesn't seem to be ignoring the junk, and
waiting for the
RC wrote at about 21:08:32 + on Thursday, September 16, 2010:
Jon Craig cannedspam.cant at gmail.com writes:
I mean your living with SCO (SCO really, are you serious??!).
Plenty of large companies have legacy SCO systems they need to keep around.
An
attitude like yours is a
RC wrote at about 20:51:24 + on Monday, September 13, 2010:
RC cooleyr at gmail.com writes:
BackupPC_dump's method of using rsync seems fragile, and seriously falls
down
if the system throws any junk into the SSH login session. With multiple
SCO
systems that throw
On Monday 13 Sep 2010 21:51:24 RC wrote:
So, have we established that this list is useless, or what? Do non-trivial
issues need to go to -dev instead, where someone capable might see them?
Whatever this list is good for, I certainly don't feel compelled to assist you
now.
Regards,
Tyler
--
Tyler J. Wagner tyler at tolaris.com writes:
Whatever this list is good for, I certainly don't feel compelled to assist
you
now.
Neither you, nor anyone else had offered any assistance before, so I'm not
seeing the downside.
You seem to be acting a twit, but I guess even twits deserve a little help.
If you want the benefits of rsync then you must live with its limitations.
I mean your living with SCO (SCO really, are you serious??!). If you can't
manage to get SCO to behave then simply configure rsync in daemon mode
On 10-09-14 09:18 PM, Jon Craig wrote:
You seem to be acting a twit, but I guess even twits deserve a little
help. If you want the benefits of rsync then you must live with its
limitations. I mean your living with SCO (SCO really, are you
serious??!). If you can't manage to get SCO to
RC cooleyr at gmail.com writes:
BackupPC_dump's method of using rsync seems fragile, and seriously falls down
if the system throws any junk into the SSH login session. With multiple SCO
systems that throw in the registration* banner below, BackupPC_dump will hang,
forever in
On 9/13/2010 3:51 PM, RC wrote:
RCcooleyrat gmail.com writes:
BackupPC_dump's method of using rsync seems fragile, and seriously falls down
if the system throws any junk into the SSH login session. With multiple
SCO
systems that throw in the registration* banner below, BackupPC_dump
BackupPC_dump's method of using rsync seems fragile, and seriously falls down if
the system throws any junk into the SSH login session. With multiple SCO
systems that throw in the registration* banner below, BackupPC_dump will hang,
forever in fileListReceive(). On a SCO system that does NOT
19 matches
Mail list logo
