I believe the answer is no, but as a happy bacula user for 10 years I am
somewhat surprised at the lack of flexibility.
The scenarios is this: A fileserver (1 client) with dozens of large
(size-wise) filesystems (12 jobs), but a couple of those filesystems are
large (filecount-wise). We
Am 2018-04-05 um 16:50 schrieb Matthias Leopold:
Hi,
I'm absolutely new to Bacula and basically only want to package the
software for CentOS 7 so it can be used in my organization by others.
I'm compiling RPMs from the spec files in bacula-9.0.6.tar.gz. I chose
"%define postgresql 1" so i
On 06/04/2018 18:40, Daniel Heitepriem wrote:
Hi Gary,
I just tried to compile 9.0.6 on a Solaris 11.3 box (but using GCC 5.4.0
and MySQL) with these options:
CFLAGS="-g -m64" LDFLAGS="-m64" CXXFLAGS="-m64" ./configure \
--prefix=/opt/bacula \
--with-dir-user=bacula \
--with-dir-group=bacula \
Hello Ralf,
> Only for cosmetic issues.
>
> After an update of a bacula file daemon bat still will show the old
> Version in the client list.
>
> As long as you click in the list for each client "Status Client" and
> then "Refresh Client List".
I think this is the exepcted behaviour. Running a
Hi Gary,
I just tried to compile 9.0.6 on a Solaris 11.3 box (but using GCC 5.4.0
and MySQL) with these options:
CFLAGS="-g -m64" LDFLAGS="-m64" CXXFLAGS="-m64" ./configure \
--prefix=/opt/bacula \
--with-dir-user=bacula \
--with-dir-group=bacula \
--with-sd-user=bacula \
--with-sd-group=bacula
Only for cosmetic issues.
After an update of a bacula file daemon bat still will show the old
Version in the client list.
As long as you click in the list for each client "Status Client" and
then "Refresh Client List".
--
Ralf Brinkmann
...Or, Bacula is getting about as portable as the Great Wall of China.
Trying to build Bacula on Solaris 11.3 x64, attempted using both the
Solaris Compiler Suite (now known as Developer Studio) and GCC 7.3.0.
TL;DR - it doesn't build, because of stupidity(TM).
So, I have a chance to upgrade
