On Wednesday 11 July 2007, Craig Dewick wrote:
>On Tue, 3 Jul 2007, Marc Muehlfeld wrote:
>> Yogesh Hasabnis schrieb:
>>> For that, when I use
>>> the amlabel command to change the tape label and
>>> configuration, I get a message as follows: "tape is in another amanda
>>> configuration
>>> rewinding tape not labeled"
>>
>> amlabel -f {Setname}
>
>In my case (just recently reconfigued my rack entirely and have set up the
>L9 array again), Amanda is reporting 'changer problem: no slots available
>(expecting a new tape).
>
>Last time that happened I actually got a fresh set of tapes since the old
>ones did need to be replaced anyway, but this time I'd like to use some of
>the old ones again so that the batch of tapes I keep aside is properly
>cycled (not just with the ones in the array itself).
>
>Is there a way to convince Amanda that it's ok to re-use tapes with
>existing labels written onto them or is the only way to get around this to
>either 'scramble' the data with something else writing to the tapes then
>re-labelling, or replace the old tapes with brand new ones (using
>different tape names when writing the labels?)?
>
>The other way might be to reconfigure Amanda so that the only tapes it
>knows about are the ones in the array without telling it there are other
>tapes stored off-array that I'd be manually putting in the carrier at
>regular intervals as a 'batch swap'. What's the general consensus on this
>theory?
>
>Regards,
>
>Craig.

Your email is defective, contains only the phrase 'keywords:;' in the return 
address line.

amrelabel can be forced with the --force option, but the data on the tape will 
probably be scrambled and un-recoverable.  So I wouldn't do it until the tape 
is the next one to be used.



-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
MIPS:
        Meaningless Indicator of Processor Speed