Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*q\:\s+amrecover\,\s+directories\s+okay\s+but\s+no\s+files\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*q\:\s+amrecover\,\s+directories\s+okay\s+but\s+no\s+files\s*$/: 10 ]

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. Re: q: amrecover, directories okay but no files (score: 1): Author: gj <joueg AT tcd DOT ie>; Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 12:08:08 +0100; I finally have some more clarifying(?) details of my problem(s) that some of you were asking for! The amrecover error I am writing about in this email is slightly different from the problem in my ori; /lists/html/Amanda-Users/2005-05/msg00001.html (14,165 bytes)
2. Re: q: amrecover, directories okay but no files (score: 1): Author: Matt Hyclak <hyclak AT math.ohiou DOT edu>; Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 07:57:15 -0400; On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 12:08:08PM +0100, gj enlightened us: --< snip <--< snip <--< snip <-- Yes, 1.13.93 is known to (usually) create bad indexes. Go back to 1.13.25 and all should be well. Matt --; /lists/html/Amanda-Users/2005-05/msg00002.html (10,670 bytes)
3. q: amrecover, directories okay but no files (score: 1): Author: gj <joueg AT tcd DOT ie>; Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 14:13:34 +0100; Hi, I'm testing out my backup system and randomly selecting files from different hosts to recover (with amrecover). Even though I would not have an error message associated with the DLE I'm trying to; /lists/html/Amanda-Users/2005-04/msg00229.html (10,460 bytes)
4. Re: q: amrecover, directories okay but no files (score: 1): Author: Toomas Aas <toomas.aas AT raad.tartu DOT ee>; Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 16:00:37 +0300; In case this may be related, sometimes when I am successful in extracting/recovering a file, amrecover stalls. When I wait awhile, I see in a different terminal that the file has been recovered, but; /lists/html/Amanda-Users/2005-04/msg00240.html (10,585 bytes)
5. Re: q: amrecover, directories okay but no files (score: 1): Author: gj <joueg AT tcd DOT ie>; Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 16:57:13 +0100; Yes, I was hoping that was the case because I have been having this problem for quite a few FULL test runs of my setup (we're backing up about 200GB plus worth of data)! (Recovery is fine on the sma; /lists/html/Amanda-Users/2005-04/msg00244.html (11,154 bytes)
6. Re: q: amrecover, directories okay but no files (score: 1): Author: Jon LaBadie <jon AT jgcomp DOT com>; Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 13:19:25 -0400; How about the indexes for the questionable DLE's. Do they show the files you expect were in fact backed up? The indexes should show everything on the tape. One thing this can help us do is determine; /lists/html/Amanda-Users/2005-04/msg00245.html (12,150 bytes)
7. Re: q: amrecover, directories okay but no files (score: 1): Author: gj <joueg AT tcd DOT ie>; Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 07:17:02 +0100; If indexes are the listings you get when you "ls" in "amrecover", then the indexes seem to stop at certain subdirectories. That is, when I "ls" in the subdirectory (listed in the index) where the fi; /lists/html/Amanda-Users/2005-04/msg00246.html (10,006 bytes)
8. Re: q: amrecover, directories okay but no files (score: 1): Author: Alexander Jolk <alexj AT buf DOT com>; Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:13:58 +0200; Are you by any chance running into data timeout issues? Citing the relevant lines for a failed DLE from one of your amanda report mails would be helpful. That would essentially mean that your GNU tar; /lists/html/Amanda-Users/2005-04/msg00247.html (9,943 bytes)
9. Re: q: amrecover, directories okay but no files (score: 1): Author: Toomas Aas <toomas.aas AT raad.tartu DOT ee>; Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:10:54 +0300; If indexes are the listings you get when you "ls" in "amrecover", then the indexes seem to stop at certain subdirectories. That is, when I "ls" in the subdirectory (listed in the index) where the fi; /lists/html/Amanda-Users/2005-04/msg00248.html (10,699 bytes)
10. Re: q: amrecover, directories okay but no files (score: 1): Author: gj <joueg AT tcd DOT ie>; Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 21:23:59 +0100; Sorry for the delay...I could not get access to the backup machine last week... I think you are right -- a full dump of our machines takes over 20 hours! Here is an excerpt (I hope I have included th; /lists/html/Amanda-Users/2005-04/msg00380.html (12,656 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 10
Page: [1]