Bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula in Ubuntu 8.04 without TLS?

2008-08-20 12:44:30
Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula in Ubuntu 8.04 without TLS?
From: "Lukasz Szybalski" <szybalski AT gmail DOT com>
To: "Ryan Novosielski" <novosirj AT umdnj DOT edu>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:36:59 -0500
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Ryan Novosielski <novosirj AT umdnj DOT edu> 
wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Lukasz Szybalski wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Ryan Novosielski <novosirj AT umdnj DOT 
>> edu> wrote:
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> Lukasz Szybalski wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 6:38 PM, Dan Langille <dan AT langille DOT org> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Landon Fuller wrote:
>>>>>> On Aug 18, 2008, at 9:32 AM, Philipp Geschke wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi List,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can somebody confirm that Ubuntu seriously compiled Bacula in 8.04
>>>>>>> without TLS after having it enabled in 7.10?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Or am I just being dumb?
>>>>>> Debian upstream disabled it:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> README.Debian:
>>>>>>     bacula (2.2.0-1) unstable; urgency=low
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     * SSL/TLS has been disabled in this version of Bacula due to 
>>>>>> licensing
>>>>>>      concerns.  See README.Debian and the thread at
>>>>>>      http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/07/msg00144.html for more
>>>>>>      details.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> NEWS.Debian
>>>>>>     Due to licensing concerns (see NEWS.Debian), SSL/TLS is disabled in
>>>>>> current
>>>>>>     Debian builds.  This disables both encryption for the on-the-wire
>>>>>>     protocol as well as encryption of the backed-up data.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kern specifically allows linking against OpenSSL in the Bacula, and has
>>>>>> removed any GPL code that can not contain this exception:
>>>>>>     As a special exception to the GPLv2, the Bacula Project gives
>>>>>>     permission to link the code of its release of Bacula with the OpenSSL
>>>>>>     project's "OpenSSL" library (or with modified versions of it that use
>>>>>>     the same license as the "OpenSSL" library), and distribute the linked
>>>>>>     executables.  You must obey the GNU General Public License in all
>>>>>>     respects for all of the code used other than "OpenSSL".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess Debian considers the OpenSSL license and the GPL license
>>>>>> incompatible, and removed support prior to Kern's changes.
>>>>>> The whole issue is a bit droll.
>>>>> This is why I like packaging systems which allow you to compile from 
>>>>> source.
>>>> Why don't you recompile it from source then.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> apt-get build-dep bacula
>>>> aptitude install libssl-dev openssl
>>>> aptitude source bacula
>>>> cd bacula-2....
>>>> vim debian/rules
>>>>     # (change the options to enable ssl tls)
>>>> debian/rules binary
>>>>    #it should now compile and pack all bacula packages
>>>> cd ..
>>>> dpkg -i bacula*.deb
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Done.
>>> Yes, this is what I was talking about, not getting the source and
>>> compiling/installing from source alone.
>>>
>>> The only issue you may run into here is the distribution's affinity for
>>> the repository over locally installed packages. I ran into that when
>>> building tOra with Oracle support. I don't recall how I solved it, but I
>>> believe there's another step that fixes the changelog so that your
>>> version is a little newer than the repository but not so new that you
>>> miss updates.
>>
>> Well, the commands I sent earlier get the source code of the version
>> you have installed currently.
>>
>> So if ubuntu has 2.2.0 the source code for that deb file will be
>> downloaded. The goal of this is to just recreate the bacula.deb
>> package with tls support. Not newer code will be downloaded.
>
> Exactly, but apparently software that exists in a Debian repository
> receives a higher priority than locally installed updates for whatever
> reason, meaning if there are two equal installs of say 2.2.0,
> Ubuntu/Debian will prefer to go out and install the version from the
> repository and will try to "upgrade" you to it constantly. Someone is
> free to correct me if I'm wrong, but this is how I remember it working.

I think you are correct.
If you don't want to upgrade run:
aptitude hold bacula

"Fix a package at its current version and don't upgrade it automatically"

Lucas

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users