Amanda-Users

Re: is excluding /usr/local/var/amanda a bad idea ?

2005-11-15 14:45:02
Subject: Re: is excluding /usr/local/var/amanda a bad idea ?
From: "Stefan G. Weichinger" <sgw AT amanda DOT org>
To: amanda-users AT amanda DOT org
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 20:34:44 +0100
Gene Heskett wrote:

My method simply waits till amdump is done and has returned to the
script that launched it, at which point the script then launches a
second script that tars up all this stuff and appends it to the tape.  It
could be all in one script I guess, but I tend to scratch individual
itches with seperate scripts. :)  To me, this is the best option.  And
anyone who wants to weed the trash stuff out of my scripts is welcome to
do so as eventually I'd like to see this added to the amanda
distribution, a super-wrapper for amdump if you will.

As already mentioned I think it would be preferable to get that into amdump itself.
amanda-hackers-topic, I assume.

Whats missing in the overall function is a method of communicating back
to amdump, how much of a space cushion is needed in order to have room on
an otherwise full tape for these tarballs.

If amdump does that job, it might talk to itself ;-)

What they do now is autoconfigure how it runs according to what it was
called at invocation time, all the names are links to one (or more)
scripts depending on what it needs to do, dump or flush.  Beyond that,
everything else is hard coded, but could be put into cli arguments or a
.config file to make it a bit more universal.  But once I had it
working, I have this tendency to let something thats working alone so I
don't break it again. :)

I also have some scripts that make the automatic generation of a vtape
setup quite easily done if anyone is interested in those.  They aren't
"pretty" either, but they worked for me. :)

*sigh*
I read this ashamed, as I already had started cleaning up those scripts back then.
One more todo to do.

Greets, Stefan.