On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 11:27:11PM -0400, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 07:25:44PM -0700, Joe Rhett wrote:
> > Okay, last year I had observed that perfectly valid gnutar exclude lists
> > were being ignored by amanda on Windows machines.  The best answer anyone
> > could give me was to build my own tar program that does the excludes, and
> > replace "runtar".
> 
> I forget the discussion, but there must have been more than that,

A bit more, mostly telling me to use SMB instead, which is nonsense.

> backing up of windows boxes does not use gnutar but smbclient.
> Different cmd line syntax for excludes.
 
Every time I talk about Windows, you keep talking about smbclient.  Nobody,
flat nobody that I know of is stupid enough to run SMB on a public
webserver.  The windows machines in question are using amanda under cygwin.

However, having an identical problem on Linux proves that this isn't
related to Windows or Cygwin.  I know you've got your head wrapped around
smbclient, so let's drop the windows and focus on Linux.  Tar isn't
honoring the exclude files on Linux.

> > Well now I've enabled my first gnutar linux clients, and they are seeing
> > the exact same problem.  /tmp/amanda/sendsize.debug and runtar.debug both
> > show that the exclude list is being passed to tar, but they are ignored.

Just to clarify, the entire system (60gb+) is backed up every night.

> > And as I noted before, and someone tried to explain away, it appears that
> > the command line invocation for the exclude list is wrong (missing an 
> > equals)
> > runtar.20050601020202.debug:
> >     running: /bin/tar: gtar --create --file - --directory / 
> > --one-file-system --listed-incremental 
> > /var/lib/amanda/gnutar-lists/client-host3__0.new --sparse 
> > --ignore-failed-read --totals --exclude-from /etc/exclude.gtar . 
> > 
> 
> I don't know what equals sign you feel is missing.
> The man page I have for gnutar does not show an equal sign
> needed with the --exclude-from option:
 
Some versions of tar out there apparently don't work properly without the
equals sign.  Search for it, or trust me.  In any case, I agree that it
isn't affecting these linux boxes -- either syntax appears to work.

> > /etc/exclude.gtar
> >     $ cat /etc/exclude.gtar 
> >     ./*
> >     ,/
> >     *
> 
> If I recall the syntax correctly, each entry must begin "./"
> The first is valid and would exclude everything with the possible
> exception of "dot" files (eg  .profile).
> Second and third are invalid.
 
That's fine, I was trying everything possible.  Right now with those regexs
I'm backing up 60gb a night from that system.  Wouldn't that suggest
something is wrong?  I started with just the first regex and added others
when it didn't work, so it isn't due to the bad regexes...

-- 
Joe Rhett
senior geek
meer.net