Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Bacula\-users\]\s+Using\s+bextract\s+of\s+windows\s+backup\s+without\s+portable\=yes\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Bacula\-users\]\s+Using\s+bextract\s+of\s+windows\s+backup\s+without\s+portable\=yes\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [Bacula-users] Using bextract of windows backup without portable=yes (score: 1): Author: Javier Gomez <gomez AT dynamicquest DOT com>; Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 07:42:14 -0400; I am in the process of performing backups (mostly Windows servers). Then using bextract to extract those backups to the "bacula server" which is a Fedora server. Then pulling individual files off of; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Bacula-users/2008-06/msg00658.html (12,376 bytes)
2. Re: [Bacula-users] Using bextract of windows backup without portable=yes (score: 1): Author: Arno Lehmann <al AT its-lehmann DOT de>; Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 01:06:11 +0200; Hi, I won't ask why you're doing this... Yes. As the portable flag in the file set causes Bacula to store a different set of data - some windows' generated stream of data containing the file itself p; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Bacula-users/2008-06/msg00665.html (14,285 bytes)
3. Re: [Bacula-users] Using bextract of windows backup without portable=yes (score: 1): Author: ebollengier <eric AT eb.homelinux DOT org>; Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 00:58:25 -0700 (PDT); Hello, Yes, or you can decide to use only the bextract binary from the 2.5 version, it works very well. Bye -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Using-bextract-of-windows-backup-wit; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/Bacula-users/2008-06/msg00675.html (12,142 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]