On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky
wrote:
> Just a piece of friendly advice... you seem to have posted dozens of
> posts in the past 24 hours or so... you keep making multiple, often
> non-standard or nonsensical changes to a standard
> configuration... and are asking multiple qu
hans...@gmail.com wrote at about 14:18:41 +0700 on Saturday, September 3, 2011:
> On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Timothy J Massey wrote:
>
> > But would probably be a very good idea. What would be an even better idea
> > would be to grab a spare PC (or a virtual guest) and test it from a
>
Hi,
Arnold Krille wrote on 2011-09-04 01:11:12 +0200 [Re: [BackupPC-users] Backing
up slash partition]:
> On Sunday 04 September 2011 00:08:38 Holger Parplies wrote:
> > Arnold Krille wrote on 2011-09-03 01:32:15 +0200 [Re: [BackupPC-users]
> Backing up slash partition]:
> > > You should make su
Hi,
Timothy J Massey wrote on 2011-09-02 10:43:37 -0400 [Re: [BackupPC-users] Linux
backups with rsync vs tar]:
> charlesboyo wrote on 08/31/2011 05:53:43
> AM:
> [...]
> > Thus I have reason to suspect the rsync overhead as being guilty.
for the record, I've just (finally!) switched from tar
Hi,
On Sunday 04 September 2011 00:08:38 Holger Parplies wrote:
> Arnold Krille wrote on 2011-09-03 01:32:15 +0200 [Re: [BackupPC-users]
Backing up slash partition]:
> > On Saturday 03 September 2011 00:57:48 Timothy Murphy wrote:
> > You should make sure you don't cross mount-points though. Othe
Hi,
Dan Johansson wrote on 2011-09-03 11:04:22 +0200 [[BackupPC-users] Upgrade
BackupPC 2.1.2 to 3.2.1]:
> In Gentoo BackupPC 3.2.1 has just gone stable and I want to upgrade from
> 2.1.2, and have some questions.
> Will 3.2.1 use the same configfiles as 2.1.2 (do I have to rewrite all my
> con
Tim, what OS is your BackupPC running on?
Robert Wooden
Nashville, TN. USA
Computer Freedom? . . . Linux
On 09/03/2011 04:33 PM, Tim Fletcher wrote:
On Sat, 2011-09-03 at 16:09 -0500, Robert E. Wooden wrote:
I have worked on this issue in the past for myself. Never really got it
completed. H
Well, your development on this is way over my head but, I sure do like
your wakeup script.
In my case, I worked on this last January or so and forgot where I left
off. I am embarrassed to say that I cannot find my notes from then and
so I do not know want other related commands (within BackupP
Hi,
Arnold Krille wrote on 2011-09-03 01:32:15 +0200 [Re: [BackupPC-users] Backing
up slash partition]:
> On Saturday 03 September 2011 00:57:48 Timothy Murphy wrote:
> > Can one sensibly back up / with BackupPC?
the confusing thing about that question is that it is probably not what you
want to
On Sat, 2011-09-03 at 16:09 -0500, Robert E. Wooden wrote:
> I have worked on this issue in the past for myself. Never really got it
> completed. However, your email has me interested again and this is good
> weekend to work on this.
I've had it working for a year or so with the following setup:
I have worked on this issue in the past for myself. Never really got it
completed. However, your email has me interested again and this is good
weekend to work on this.
So, last night I Googled "BackupPC wol" got some more info.
This is the article that started me off last January:
> http://www
Hi,
hans...@gmail.com wrote on 2011-09-03 02:10:55 +0700 [Re: [BackupPC-users]
first "full" never completes]:
> [...]
> I haven't been able to find in the docs a listing of what the permissions
> are supposed to be, and as a *nix noob, I may very well have screwed things
> up in that area messing
Hi,
Les Mikesell wrote on 2011-09-03 07:55:29 -0500 [Re: [BackupPC-users] first
"full" never completes]:
> On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 2:18 AM, wrote:
> Keep in mind that if you get a virtual machine working, [...]
and before keeping that in mind, keep in mind to get your system working
before rai
Hi,
hans...@gmail.com wrote on 2011-09-03 05:03:30 +0700 [Re: [BackupPC-users]
first "full" never completes]:
> On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 4:38 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> > In general, backuppc needs rw permission on everything, and apache
> > (www-data on debian/ubuntu) needs read access to some
Hi,
Les Mikesell wrote on 2011-09-02 16:46:34 -0500 [Re: [BackupPC-users] first
"full" never completes]:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 4:38 PM, wrote:
> >
> > Or is the message "link host-name" in my log when running "_dump
> > -v" manually indicate a hardlinkng problem kicking in **after** the pc
>
On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 2:18 AM, wrote:
[SNIP]
>> Since I want to use the BackupPC 3.1 package (eventual production system
>> will be on CentOS5), while I'm at it I'll use the Ubuntu version it's
>> designed for, Lucid 10.04, rather than the
On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 2:18 AM, wrote:
>>
>> But would probably be a very good idea. What would be an even better idea
>> would be to grab a spare PC (or a virtual guest) and test it from a
>> completely clean installation. And document the *heck* out of what you do:
>> you *will* be doing it
Hi Jesper,
After removing backuppc v3.2.1 and supporting packages and reinstalling the
latest versions everything is now working.
Thanks for your assistance.
Regards,
Paul
--
Hi Jesper,
Thanks again for your response
Hi,
In Gentoo BackupPC 3.2.1 has just gone stable and I want to upgrade from
2.1.2, and have some questions.
Will 3.2.1 use the same configfiles as 2.1.2 (do I have to rewrite all my
configfiles)?
Will 3.2.1 use the same filesystem structure as 2.1.2 (can I restor a file
backed up with 2.1.2 wi
Hi there,
On Fri, 2 Sep 2011 Pavel Hofman wrote:
> I guess the main problem is tar cannot resume after a network glitch,
Can you simply tweak the TCP settings in /proc/sys/net/ so that the
connection can cope with a ~one-minute break and tar doesn't notice?
--
73,
Ged.
---
Will a BackupPC 3.2 system "just work" with a conf/log/pool/pc filesystem
moved over from 3.1, or is there an upgrade process run on the data?
If the latter, I imagine that would make it difficult to move that data back
to 3.1?
Just thinking of disaster recovery scenarios, maybe building a custom
On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Timothy J Massey wrote:
> But would probably be a very good idea. What would be an even better idea
> would be to grab a spare PC (or a virtual guest) and test it from a
> completely clean installation. And document the *heck* out of what you do:
> you *will* be
22 matches
Mail list logo
