Hello,
bacula-bat-5.0.3-2.src.rpm is being uploaded to sourceforge now to address
this bug. Binaries to follow.
On Tuesday 28 September 2010 10:25:07 am you wrote:
The following issue has been SUBMITTED.
==
Bacula-5.0 RPM Release Notes
06 Sep 2010
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
Release 5.0.3-1
This release incorporates a number of significant changes since 3.0.
These release notes refer to the rpm packaging only.
Please refer to the release notes and changelog
Bacula-5.0 RPM Release Notes
02 May 2010
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
Release 5.0.2-1
This release incorporates a number of significant changes since 3.0.
These release notes refer to the rpm packaging only.
Please refer to the release notes and changelog
Good Afternoon,
Kern has developed a patch to address the problems compiling bacula with
openssl version 1.x. I have successfully applied this patch to the released
5.0.1 code and created rpms for Fedora 12 (server and client packages only).
Unfortunately I'm still unable to build bat on
Hello all,
This is a minor bug in the 5.0.0 and 5.0.1 bat rpm packages which will be
fixed in the next release. It is safe to install using --nodeps until fixed.
---BeginMessage---
The following issue has been ASSIGNED.
==
Hello all,
I installed Fedora 12 recently and tried to build for this release. This was
the result:
Compiling guid_to_name.c
crypto.c: In function 'ASN1_OCTET_STRING* openssl_cert_keyid(X509*)':
crypto.c:333: error: invalid conversion from 'const X509V3_EXT_METHOD*'
to 'X509V3_EXT_METHOD*'
Hello,
Please note there was a bug in the client rpm packages I released the other
day. I've withdrawn them and will repost them shortly to sourceforge.
Scott
--
Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new
Thanks. Fixed in git repo. There was a naming convention change that caused
that. How odd that the published packages did not break and SL did.
On Friday 26 February 2010 09:38:58 am Richard Frewin wrote:
On Thu 25 Feb 2010 at 18:04, Scott Barninger
(barnin...@fairfieldcomputers.com) wrote
On Sunday 07 February 2010 02:13:29 pm Timo Neuvonen wrote:
Output of the above attached. What came into my mind... is the test in line
100 in the attachment (similar to the one I highlighted above with ***)
wrong way:
elif [ $DB_VER -lt 11 ]; then
echo This release requires an
to work from if it really
mattered.
Example from the changelog:
* Sat May 16 2009 D. Scott Barninger barnin...@fairfieldcomputers.com
- fix libxml dependency for rh7 per Pasi Kärkkäinen pa...@iki.fi
- I haven't yet had time to actually test the binaries to see if they
install and run correctly
Rpm packages released today.
Bacula-3.0 RPM Release Notes
26 July 2009
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
Release 3.0.2-1
This release incorporates a number of significant changes since 2.0.
These release notes refer to the rpm packaging only.
Please refer
I'm not sure why Felix didn't upload them, however I've just become aware that
the packages we did release do not work. There was a structural change in the
source code that has caused a packaging problem which I will have fixed by
the next release. In the meantime you can continue to use
Bacula-3.0 RPM Release Notes
02 May 2009
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
Release 3.0.1-1
This release incorporates a number of significant changes since 2.0.
These release notes refer to the rpm packaging only.
Please refer to the release notes and changelog
Bacula-2.4 RPM Release Notes
10 January 2009
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
Release 2.4.4-1
This release incorporates a number of significant changes since 1.38.
These release notes refer to the rpm packaging only.
Please refer to the release notes and changelog
Bacula-2.4 RPM Release Notes
11 Octover 2008
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
Release 2.4.3-1
This release incorporates a number of significant changes since 1.38.
These release notes refer to the rpm packaging only.
Please refer to the release notes and changelog
On Mon, 2008-03-03 at 09:35 -0500, David Boyes wrote:
There are standards such as FHS, and these are good and useful for
most
programs, but they really do a big disservice to Bacula users when we
are
dealing with recovery. If you spread the Bacula installation all
around
your
OK, so what would you all like me to do? Yes there are standards for
things like /usr/local/... but that would I think introduce some path
problems? Personally I think the official rpms should be FHS compliant
for reasons that David Boyes articulated. He is quite correct about
large enterprise IT
which experienced this problem.
Bacula-2.2 RPM Release Notes
09 February 2008
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
Release 2.2.8-2
These release notes refer to the rpm packaging only.
Please refer to the release notes and changelog in the
tarball or on sourceforge
Bacula-2.2 RPM Release Notes
27 January 2008
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
Release 2.2.8-1
This release incorporates a number of significant changes since 1.38.
These release notes refer to the rpm packaging only.
Please refer to the release notes and changelog
Hello,
Please note that I committed a typographical error in the release notes
published previously. When restoring your catalog database I indicated
the command:
/usr/lib/bacula/sqlite3 $* bacula.db bacula_backup.sql
which should have been:
/usr/lib/bacula/sqlite/sqlite3 $* bacula.db
?
I couldn't get it to work. I had various problems around finding qt4
and/or qwt.Even building without rpmbuild it couldn't find qmake
until I tweaked the path and then it didn't install the bat binary.
If you want I can clean up and try it again and send you a log.
Scott Barninger
build_client_only 1
**
* Current binary package support *
**
D. Scott Barninger barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
el3 i386
fc8 i386
su102 i586
su103 i586
Felix Schwarz felix dot schwarz at web dot de
fc5 i386
fc5 x86_64
fc6 i386
fc6 x86_64
Hello All,
I see from SF stats that there have been 92 downloads since I re-posted
the SRPM last Friday. Can I assume all of the issues noted have been
addressed? I ask because later this week I intend to post a special
2.2.6 to the beta-rpm section for upgrade from sqlite to sqlite3 for
testing.
What command string are you using to build?
On Fri, 2007-11-16 at 07:35 +0200, Timo Neuvonen wrote:
Scott Barninger [EMAIL PROTECTED] kirjoitti viestissä
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sorry for the delay but I have been out of town until this evening. Not
sure what went wrong with the release
On Fri, 2007-11-16 at 07:35 +0200, Timo Neuvonen wrote:
Scott Barninger [EMAIL PROTECTED] kirjoitti viestissä
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sorry for the delay but I have been out of town until this evening. Not
sure what went wrong with the release but I have re-uploaded the srpm
now
Hello,
Sorry for the delay but I have been out of town until this evening. Not
sure what went wrong with the release but I have re-uploaded the srpm
now. It should be available now and the file size looks correct.
On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 14:10 +0100, Kern Sibbald wrote:
Hello Scott,
Just to
this will be done with the next major release.
On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 17:24 -0500, Jeff Dickens wrote:
Thanks.
Scott Barninger wrote:
Hello,
Sorry for the delay but I have been out of town until this evening. Not
sure what went wrong with the release but I have re-uploaded the srpm
now
-2.2 RPM Release Notes
11 November 2007
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
Release 2.2.6-1
This release incorporates a number of significant changes since 1.38.
These release notes refer to the rpm packaging only.
Please refer to the release notes and changelog
I have released the rpm package for 2.2.4 to sourceforge. One item of
note is that I did not release a bacula-mysql package for rhel3 due to a
problem with the current code and mysql-3.23.x.
Bacula-2.2 RPM Release Notes
15 September 2007
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
Release Notes
03 September 2007
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
Release 2.2.1-1
This release incorporates a number of significant changes since 1.38.
These release notes refer to the rpm packaging only.
Please refer to the release notes and changelog in the
tarball
On Tue, 2007-09-04 at 12:28 +0300, Timo Neuvonen wrote:
Bacula-2.2 RPM Release Notes
03 September 2007
The spec file currently supports building on the following platforms:
# Whitebox Enterprise build
--define build_wb3 1
# RedHat Enterprise builds
--define build_rhel3 1
.
Bacula-2.2 RPM Release Notes
10 September 2007
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
Release 2.2.3-1
This release incorporates a number of significant changes since 1.38.
These release notes refer to the rpm packaging only.
Please refer to the release notes and changelog
Hello All,
For those on the lists who do not know me, I am the primary packaging
manager for bacula linux binaries. I am the primary commit person on the
rpm spec file as well as building *many* release files and managing
contributions from other folks for platforms I don't build directly. I
have
Good Afternoon,
As I sat here earlier watching the 39 MB SRPM (30 MB of which is the
docs tarball) for 2.1.18 crawl it's way up to sourceforge I began to
wonder if it is not time for a change. The documentation package has
grown substantially since the change to latex and I'm only packaging the
On Sun, 2007-06-17 at 12:32 -0400, Dan Langille wrote:
On 17 Jun 2007 at 12:28, Scott Barninger wrote:
But the entire doc source tarball is still a source in the packages. So
I'm thinking about changing that and making only the pdf manuals (user
and developer) actual sources in the RPM
On Sun, 2007-06-17 at 12:56 -0400, Dan Langille wrote:
On 17 Jun 2007 at 12:42, Scott Barninger wrote:
On Sun, 2007-06-17 at 12:32 -0400, Dan Langille wrote:
On 17 Jun 2007 at 12:28, Scott Barninger wrote:
But the entire doc source tarball is still a source in the
packages. So
On Sun, 2007-06-17 at 12:56 -0400, Dan Langille wrote:
On 17 Jun 2007 at 12:42, Scott Barninger wrote:
On Sun, 2007-06-17 at 12:32 -0400, Dan Langille wrote:
On 17 Jun 2007 at 12:28, Scott Barninger wrote:
But the entire doc source tarball is still a source in the
packages. So
On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 08:23 +0200, Kern Sibbald wrote:
The told me to upload it to the shell area then to ftp it from there. I
consider that a total waste of time for the docs, but I'll let you decide if
you want to use it for the srpms.
I've given you access to the shell area, but
Hello,
Thanks for the suggestion. Michael K. Johnson and I had this discussion
some years ago. His position, with which I agreed, was that it was bad
practice to prompt for information in rpm post-install scripts because
rpm was designed to run unattended. That is to say, tools like yum and
I'm at a loss on that one. His command as shown, if that is truly what
he typed, should work. It is the minimum necessary, no python support,
no wxconsole, but should build. Perhaps a misplaced quote mark in
reality vs what is shown in the email? It seems to think a define string
is a file name.
No, he has installed the SuSE distro package which I have set to
conflict with our official project packages for various previously
discussed reasons. He should uninstall that and then install our
packages.
On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 13:57 +0100, Kern Sibbald wrote:
Hello Scott,
Is this problem
, but still will be
availabel under gmail account.
Inside dmg package you can find static linked client and console with
configs and my compilation directives and of course marks of my
system after uname -as command. is is standard mac book 13 '' with
1gb ram.
regards,
darek
2007/1/27, Scott
Hello,
I would like a bit of feedback. There are still a few apparent users of
RedHat 9 based upon sourceforge download statistics. It would seem to me
that the time has come to discontinue those packages (no panic, I am
building 2.0.2 right now). Only the basic command line programs will
still
My rpms are out, Felix and Patti should follow soon.
On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 23:09 +0100, Kern Sibbald wrote:
Hello,
I have just uploaded the source tar files and Win32 binaries for Bacula
version 2.0.2 to the Bacula release area of Source Forge. Most of the rpms
will be following this
Hello,
Source rpm package released also. Felix, note that you now have a
build_fc6 tag.
On Sat, 2007-01-13 at 17:25 +0100, Kern Sibbald wrote:
Hello,
I'm pleased to announce that you can now find Bacula version 2.0.1 on Source
Forge. This afternoon, I released the following files:
FYI all,
I made an error on the new fc6 build tag, so anyone rebuilding should
continue to use fc5. I'll fix it directly for the next release.
Forwarded Message
From: Felix Schwarz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Scott Barninger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Bacula-devel] Bacula 2.0.1
Hello Charles,
The bug you reference has been corrected in the cvs copy. And yes, the
spec file is getting rather noisy. Why do I do all of that? We could
simplify the spec substantially by removing all the platform stuff and
just let rpm itself do the dependency requirements to the libs
suspect this appraoch would also make the spec file simpler while
making building them easier for the user at the same time.
hth
charles
On Jan 21, 2007, at 6:57 PM, Scott Barninger wrote:
The reason I go to the effort is for the users who download the
package.
If you don't take
about the 2.0 series, as
well?
Well, I may be listed as the maintainer, but Scott Barninger is the guy who
does the work.
I guess what I'm getting at is, I'm sure there are a few people who are
plenty eager to find a nice SRPM for the 2.0 series, because we use RPMs
a lot more
be listed as the maintainer, but Scott Barninger is the guy who
does the work.
I guess what I'm getting at is, I'm sure there are a few people who are
plenty eager to find a nice SRPM for the 2.0 series, because we use RPMs
a lot more frequently than we use tarballs
appreciated.
If you would like additional testing, please do let me know. I'd be
happy to spend a short while over the weekend. Most of my testing will
be done under RHEL4/CentOS4.
Thanks
-dant
Scott Barninger wrote:
I hope to publish the rpm packages this weekend. For the impatient
Hello,
The source rpm for bacula-2.0.0 has been released to sourceforge.
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT
.
Bacula-2.0 RPM Release Notes
06 January 2007
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
Release 2.0.0-1
This release incorporates a number of significant changes since 1.38.
These release notes refer to the rpm packaging only.
Please refer to the release notes and changelog
, if that is the one you have
Steen
Søndag 10 december 2006 19:08 skrev Scott Barninger:
Hello,
I'm looking for some assistance from anyone who regularly uses
Mandriva-2007. I installed in on a partition on my build host last
weekend in order to continue my rpm build support
On Thu, 2006-12-14 at 07:32 +0100, Luca Berra wrote:
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 05:48:48PM -0500, Scott Barninger wrote:
I certainly meant no offense. My only mission with bacula is
contributing to the community. If you feel my Mandriva packages are
redundant I'll be happy to not spend time
Hello,
I'm looking for some assistance from anyone who regularly uses
Mandriva-2007. I installed in on a partition on my build host last
weekend in order to continue my rpm build support for that platform, but
I must admit I'm less than impressed.
Logging into a gnome session gets me a desktop
On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 16:53 +0100, piero wrote:
Scott Barninger ha scritto:
On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 10:44 +0100, piero wrote:
Scott Barninger ha scritto:
On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 17:07 +0100, piero wrote:
Scott Barninger ha scritto:
Piero
, Scott Barninger wrote:
On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 16:53 +0100, piero wrote:
Scott Barninger ha scritto:
On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 10:44 +0100, piero wrote:
Scott Barninger ha scritto:
On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 17:07 +0100, piero wrote:
Scott Barninger ha
I wasn't able to open the attachment, somehow came through corrupted.
Here is a link:
http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/fla/FLA-1.0.en.pdf
On Sat, 2006-11-04 at 13:46 +0100, Kern Sibbald wrote:
Hello, 1 November 2006
This contents of this email is for
I've posted a source rpm for this for anyone wishing to do some test
builds. Personally I built SuSE only with no issues although I did
commit a change in the spec file from the tarball due to changes in the
sqlite scripts. The docs are still a placeholder at 1.38.11.
On Sat, 2006-10-14 at 15:36
Hello all,
I read an article this week about using gnome's zenity utility to
display gui dialogs and input information into shell scripts. I did some
fooling around today and the result has been placed in cvs as
platforms/contrib-rpm/rpm_wizard.sh. This handy little script will query
your build
Hello,
For those who have expressed and interest in contributing additional
platform builds for bacula, I placed in cvs today a set of tools and
instructions. They can be found in the directory platforms/contrib-rpm.
Any 64-bit builders out there should note that I did not address that
build
Hello,
Rpm packages for the 1.38.11 release for FC5 have been provided by Felix
and posted to sourceforge. Thanks Felix.
-
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly
Hello All,
For those running SuSE 10.1 I have created a repomd repository which you
can add to your YaST installation sources to get the bacula rpm
packages. After adding the installation source the latest package
releases will be available for installation via YaST.
Details can be found at
On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 11:30 +0200, Kern Sibbald wrote:
Hello,
At least one user has reported that he is unable to send email to the list.
Well, Source Forge recently put up a new version of Mailman, which is much
more strict in what it lets through, probably in an effort to avoid spam.
Hello All,
Rpm packages have been released to sf including today's doc changes.
Bacula-1.38 RPM Release Notes
01 July 2006
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
Release 1.38.11-3
Patches included:
bacula-1.38.9-gnome2console.patch
1.38.11-docs.patch
This release
I've just released a modified spec file to bacula-beta to add python
support.
This release carries an updated spec file for the 1.38.11-3 srpm
released to add python support. Currently there is not a lot of useful
python functionality in 1.38 but it is expected to be present when 1.40
is
Rpm packages for 1.38.10 have been released to sourceforge.
Bacula-gui-13.8 Release Notes
12 June 2006
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
This release includes bacula-gui-bimagemgr only. There is no change to
bacula-gui-web since 1.38.9.
Configuration information has
Hello All,
I've released bacula-gui-CVS20060514 to sourceforge to hopefully get
some testing on a couple new features in the bimagemgr utility. Anyone
using an SQLite catalog and backing up to volume files is encouraged to
try it out. All the usual beta caveats apply, don't use it in
production,
Bacula-1.38 RPM Release Notes
06 May 2006
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
The Gnome2 console currently will not build on older
versions of Gtk2 ( 2.4) so you will see some missing gconsole
packages. You _should_ be able to keep your gconsole
package at 1.38.8 without
Bacula-1.38 RPM Release Notes
14 Apr 2006
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
Release 1.38.8-1
This release incorporates a number of significant changes.
These release notes refer to the rpm packaging only.
Please refer to the release notes and changelog in the
tarball
I've released bacula-1.38.8-2.src.rpm and an SuSE 10 binary to
sourceforge which adds a bacula-wxconsole package in the rpm-beta
section. Note that you need wxGTK = 2.6 to build it, currently
available from official sources on SuSE 10.0 and Fedora Core 4 AFAIK.
To build it add the switch
On Fri, 2006-03-03 at 19:33 -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
AFAIK, cygwin is no longer used. Everything is native Windows now.
If you want to build the Win32 binaries, you will need a Microsoft
Visual C++ compiler (or Visual Studio).
Does that help?
I am getting ready to start building
On Fri, 2006-03-03 at 19:33 -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
AFAIK, cygwin is no longer used. Everything is native Windows now.
If you want to build the Win32 binaries, you will need a Microsoft
Visual C++ compiler (or Visual Studio).
Does that help?
See also README.win32 in src/win32
On Wed, 2006-02-22 at 13:10 +0200, Mindaugas wrote:
Hello,
Attached patch for bacula.spec file to be able to build without
gconsole (build_gconsole define). Then server/client build requires
much fewer gnome and other needed RPMs installed.
Questions and notices:
- I think
Bacula-1.38 RPM Release Notes
21 Jan 2006
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
Release 1.38.5-2
This release incorporates a number of significant changes.
These release notes refer to the rpm packaging only.
Please refer to the release notes and changelog in the
tarball
Bacula-1.38 RPM Release Notes
05 Nov 2005
D. Scott Barninger
barninger at fairfieldcomputers dot com
Release 1.38.0-1
This release incorporates a number of significant changes.
These release notes refer to the rpm packaging only.
Please refer to the release notes and changelog in the
tarball
need RHEL2.1, RHEL3, RHEL4 and RH9.
You might ask Scott Barninger who is our packager.
As i said the packages compiled without major problems after some
tweaking but you are sure they are broken right ? Had some test-systems
run backups over the weekend and the director crashed twice
On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 16:34 +0200, Kern Sibbald wrote:
On Monday 11 July 2005 16:25, Alexander Bergolth wrote:
Hi!
The current bacula-sqlite RPM has a conflicts-tag for sqlite:
$ rpm -q --conflicts -p bacula-sqlite-1.36.3-1.fc3.i386.rpm
bacula-client
sqlite
sqlite-tools
Hello,
The problem seems to me that you modified your release file to
masquerade as RHEL, so the attempt to extract a Whitebox distribution
release fails. Try:
--define build_rhel3 1
You also need to tell it you are x86_64 with:
--define build_x86_64 1
On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 14:37 +0200, Kern
McCune wrote:
D. Scott Barninger wrote:
Hello,
To build for RHEL4 and MySQL-4 do:
rpmbuild --rebuild \
--define build_rhel3 1 \
--define build_mysql 1 \
--define build_mysql4 1 \
bacula-1.36.2-1.src.rpm
Let me know if this works for you.
Sure doesn't
81 matches
Mail list logo
