On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 01:40:38PM -0500, Joshua Baker-LePain enlightened us:
> >On Friday 10 February 2006 11:42, Salvatore Enrico Indiogine wrote:
> >>tar:
> >>CentSO  tar-1.14-8.RHEL4         FC4   tar-1.15.1-11.FC4
> >
> >CentOS tar-1.14.* is known bad, I'm using 1.15-1 myself, with 1.13-25
> >installed as a fallback available with a rebuild/reinstall of amanda, a
> >6 minute job typically...
> 
> Actually, centos-4's tar seems to work just fine.  They recently fixed a 
> sparse files bug in it, and it seems quite happy.  I've recently done a 
> few multi-TB backup/restores with it with no problem.
> 
> Or is there something I'm missing?
> 
> As to centos vs. FC, I prefer centos if only for the longer life cycle and 
> the feeling that it's a bit more tested than FC.  That being said, I've 
> never run FC, so take that all with a grain of salt.

I'll second Joshua here and point you to
http://www.math.ohiou.edu/~hyclak/casit/amanda/ 

I recommend getting the lastest 2.4.5pX source RPM from Fedora and
rebuilding it on your CentOS machine. That way you can specify tape servers
and default configurations with options to rpmbuild.

Matt

-- 
Matt Hyclak
Department of Mathematics 
Department of Social Work
Ohio University
(740) 593-1263