Hi!

Am Di, 2003-11-04 um 00.20 schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:
> GJ> Jason Lavigne wrote:
> 
> >>For configuration, testing and restore purposes for newbies like me.
> >>Thanks to the nice folks on this list I have been pointed to a ton of
> >>documentation and now I will read it and hopefully understand Amanda
> >>enough to understand if a GUI makes sense. If it does I will take a stab
> >>at maybe a Webmin module or something similar.
> 
> I will have a close look to it.
> 
> Personally I don´t think a GUI has anything to do in a field like
> filesystem-backup.
> 
> Understanding at least the basic principles of filesystems and
> according backup-schemes and -mechanisms seems necessary to me to
> assure the backup is worth something.
> 
> What would you use the GUI for?

You're completely right, the GUI shouldn't make things to simple. An 
administrator should understand how things work.

IMHO, a GUI would be nice for the not-so-skilles _users_. I regularly
hear about the nice GUI of Tivoli (the system formerly known as 
ADSM ;) ). To be honest, I never used that GUI and I know it's not
nearly as capable in configuring your backup as writing your dsm.sys
(that's one of the client configuration files) manually, but people are
capable to do their backup with it.

And more important, they are able to restore files.

Personally I think this would be an use for an amanda-GUI. To allow
users browsing their directory and selecting files for a restore. These
selections could be saved in a queue or someting. An administrator 
could simply read this queue and restore the files personally (you
don't want your users to touch your tapes) or when having a tape library
(or all needed files on your holding disk), the system could restore the
files. So the GUI would only be used on a backup client, not the 
server box.

Perhaps I find the time to implement something like this in the next 
weeks...but to be honest before having a GUI for amanda I would prefer 
seeing a windows client *duck* :)

Regards,
Martin Öhler