Amanda-Users

Re: amcheck not saying "expecting tapeno. or a new tape"

2004-11-05 16:20:43
Subject: Re: amcheck not saying "expecting tapeno. or a new tape"
From: Gavin Henry <ghenry AT suretecsystems DOT com>
To: amanda-users AT amanda DOT org
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 21:14:46 +0000
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 05 Nov 2004 20:24, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> It is really best to post to only ONE of the -users or -hackers
> lists.  Decide if it is about the code of amanda, then submit
> to -hackers.  For the overwhelming majority of posts, they
> concern usage of amanda and should go to -users.

OK, sorry, sorry. I am bad.

>
> On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 08:05:48PM +0000, Gavin Henry wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > After compiling by hand and patching amcheck.c to include our signature,
> > all tests ran fine, backup work to tape etc, but a strange problem with
> > amcheck:
> >
> > <quote>
> > Appserv Tape Server Host Check
> > - ---------------------------------
> > Holding disk /var/cache/amanda: 7515340 KB disk space available, that's
> > plenty ERROR: /dev/nst0: rewinding tape: No medium found
> >        (expecting a new tape)
>
> ...
>
> > You can see that a new DLE was added, hence the curinfo and index. There
> > was no tape in the drive, but it should off asked for tape2, as I dumped
> > a backup to tape 1.
> >
> > If I run amadmin config tape, it gives the right tape, which is also
> > indicate in tapelist, tapelist.yesterday etc.
>
> I suspect you have only done one backup, thus only previously used one
> tape.

Is this because it's not been overwritten before?

> You think there is an order to the tapes, 2 follows 1 etc.  Amanda could
> care less what "new tape" it writes to next.  If you put in tape3 next,
> amanda's order will have 3 following 1 in the future.  If you labelstr
> allows it (tape.*) amanda will happily use tape-gavin next and tape-henry
> after that.
>
> There seems to be no problem (from what I see anyway).
>
> > Could I have messed something up in amcheck.c ???
>
> That is a separate question with an unknown answer.
> But it is any mess-up is probably unrelated to this situation.

- -- 
Kind Regards,

Gavin Henry.
Managing Director.

T +44 (0) 1467 624141
M +44 (0) 7930 323266
F +44 (0) 1224 742001
E ghenry AT suretecsystems DOT com

Open Source. Open Solutions(tm).

http://www.suretecsystems.com/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBi+1GeWseh9tzvqgRAuCQAJ92SPDjqIy3G1qhPU8LERPpLJ/0qwCeOBoW
xTZKEux4q5FJ7YTiqoPxKAQ=
=Osat
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----