On Wed, 13 Jul 2005, Kern Sibbald wrote:
There is something on the tape which bacula doesn't like when it scans the
start of the tape. Writing an EOF solves the problem but it means tapes
need massaging and can't simply be unwrapped, labelled and stuck in
magazines.
Well, this is a function
Hello,
Paul Waldo wrote:
Hi all,
The multitape saga continues :-). I have the mutitape device set up (2
drives).
...
It appears that when I started the backup, bacula realized that it needed a
tape, there was a blank available and so bacula created a catalog entry, but
did not label the
On Wed, 13 Jul 2005, Paul Waldo wrote:
Hi Arno,
No the tape was not labeled--it was blank as can be.
I am seeing this behaviour with truely blank LTOs too.
Try writing 2 EOFs to the start of the tapes and try it again.
Nor was that volume
label in the catalog. I was under the impression
On Wednesday 13 July 2005 18:12, Alan Brown wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2005, Kern Sibbald wrote:
I am seeing this behaviour with truely blank LTOs too.
Try writing 2 EOFs to the start of the tapes and try it again.
No, but bacula needs to detect the tapes are blank, rather than
On Wednesday 13 July 2005 19:30, Alan Brown wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2005, Kern Sibbald wrote:
There is something on the tape which bacula doesn't like when it scans
the start of the tape. Writing an EOF solves the problem but it means
tapes need massaging and can't simply be unwrapped,
Hi all,
The multitape saga continues :-). I have the mutitape device set up (2
drives). I have a blank tape in each drive and started a backup. Here is my
pool definition:
# Default pool definition
Pool {
Name = Default
Pool Type = Backup
Recycle = yes # Bacula
