Re: [Bacula-users] Help with file retention please

2010-09-15 Thread Timo Neuvonen
Hi all, Can someone please help me figure why my catalog file retention only seems to be 14 days. What I am hoping for, is that the weekly backup jobs should auto-prune after 15 days, and the file retention to also be 15 days. Monthly jobs should auto-prune after 65 days, likewise their

Re: [Bacula-users] bacula 5.0.3 backport for debian lenny?

2010-09-15 Thread Rory Campbell-Lange
On 14/09/10, Tobias Brink (tobias.br...@gmail.com) wrote: You should also be careful with the 5.0.2-1 version if you use Postgres: it broke my database on upgrade. This is fixed in 5.0.2-2 which is not (yet?) in the backports. See also http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=591293

[Bacula-users] W2008r2 Backup causing issues

2010-09-15 Thread Joseph L. Casale
I have a W2008r2 server w/ 5.0.3x64 at has recently been nearly impossible to backup. Its running on HP hardware and I have tried updating the NIC firmware and drivers w/o success. What's getting more frustrating is that the 5.0.3 director on CentOSx64 takes forever to cancel the job when

[Bacula-users] RPM on CentOS

2010-09-15 Thread Hugo Letemplier
Hi I am trying to find some RPM's for Bacula on CentOS 5. i found only for RedHat 7 can i use theses ones or do I need absolutelly to use CentOS RPMs? I know that mostly it works between RH and CentOS rpm's but i want to be sure to not have problems in the future. Could you tell me you

Re: [Bacula-users] RPM on CentOS

2010-09-15 Thread Machiel van Veen
On Wednesday 15 September 2010 01:31:04 pm Hugo Letemplier wrote: Hi I am trying to find some RPM's for Bacula on CentOS 5. i found only for RedHat 7 can i use theses ones or do I need absolutelly to use CentOS RPMs? I know that mostly it works between RH and CentOS rpm's but i want to be

Re: [Bacula-users] backup upgraded to FULL for no apparent reason

2010-09-15 Thread Silver Salonen
On Wednesday 15 September 2010 08:53:07 Silver Salonen wrote: On Tuesday 14 September 2010 21:54:21 Silver Salonen wrote: On 14.09.2010 18:48, Martin Simmons wrote: On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 15:54:11 +0300, Silver Salonen said: On Tuesday 14 September 2010 15:16:47 Martin Simmons wrote:

Re: [Bacula-users] backup upgraded to FULL for no apparent reason

2010-09-15 Thread Martin Simmons
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 08:53:07 +0300, Silver Salonen said: On Tuesday 14 September 2010 21:54:21 Silver Salonen wrote: On 14.09.2010 18:48, Martin Simmons wrote: On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 15:54:11 +0300, Silver Salonen said: On Tuesday 14 September 2010 15:16:47 Martin Simmons wrote: On

Re: [Bacula-users] backup upgraded to FULL for no apparent reason

2010-09-15 Thread Martin Simmons
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 20:08:17 +0200, Bruno Friedmann said: Martin didn't A status for Accurate ( as shown in the extract log ) ? No, there is no special status for Accurate. __Martin -- Start uncovering the many

Re: [Bacula-users] RPM on CentOS

2010-09-15 Thread Joseph L. Casale
sudo rpmbuild -bb --define build_postgresql=1 --define build_centos5 1 -- define rhel_version=501 bacula.spec Not only do you not need to unpack the srpm to get the the spec to build from But you shouldn't at all build as root? Use a buidroot [1]: $ rpmbuild --rebuild --define build_centos5=1

Re: [Bacula-users] backup upgraded to FULL for no apparent reason

2010-09-15 Thread Silver Salonen
On Wednesday 15 September 2010 16:49:18 Martin Simmons wrote: On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 08:53:07 +0300, Silver Salonen said: On Tuesday 14 September 2010 21:54:21 Silver Salonen wrote: On 14.09.2010 18:48, Martin Simmons wrote: On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 15:54:11 +0300, Silver Salonen said:

Re: [Bacula-users] RPM on CentOS

2010-09-15 Thread Machiel van Veen
On Wednesday 15 September 2010 04:05:29 pm Joseph L. Casale wrote: sudo rpmbuild -bb --define build_postgresql=1 --define build_centos5 1 -- define rhel_version=501 bacula.spec Not only do you not need to unpack the srpm to get the the spec to build from But you shouldn't at all build as