Bacula-users

Re: [Bacula-users] VSS on Vista/Win2008 x64

2009-08-05 14:18:09
Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] VSS on Vista/Win2008 x64
From: Shawn <shawn AT artemide DOT us>
To: Steve Ellis <ellis AT brouhaha DOT com>
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:16:57 -0400



On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 10:48 -0700, Steve Ellis wrote:
On 8/5/2009 9:34 AM, Shawn wrote:
Yes, the problem is the "Hello command" which was introduced in 3.x

On a 2.x director, it will simply state "Hello command rejected" as the failure in connecting to the FD from the director, I've tested this before and go the same results regardless of the platform (Mac OS X PPC/Intel, Fedora 6 i386, Fedora 10 i386, Vista x64, Win2k8 x64, Win2k3 x64 / 32-bit) - so, no, it seems I'm stuck either praying I can install a properly updated Bacula director on my amd64 Ubuntu server, or hope that someone moves the packages on Ubuntu/Fedora's repository to something more than 2.4.4


I haven't tried to install it, but Fedora rawhide has bacula 3.0.2--so it seems that F12 is going to get 3.0.2, at least.  If the RPMs that Scott (?) builds include one for your release, they work quite well, but even if the binary RPMs aren't available for your release, it isn't that hard to build from the source RPM--I've been doing that for various reasons over the last couple of years--but you may have to lie to rpmbuild about what version you are building for (I tell rpmbuild I'm building for f10, when I'm actually running f11, for example).

Hope this helps,

-se


This is great news!  I also heard they are working on an up to date Ubuntu repo version, as well.

    If there's one thing we've learned, it is Patience :)

    I'm not against building from source, I actually was doing that at first - and that's when I stumbled upon the "Hello command rejected" issue since the director was at version 2.4.4 and the source builds were at 3.0.1 (at the time).

    I also spoke to Dan Langille in Canada briefly, and according to legend, the director is the meat and potatoes when concerning Bacula, so you can have a Bacula Director version 3.0.2, and still run ancient FD's against it with no problem, because by design - the director is always backward compatible with FD's of lower versions, for administrative purposes. 

    This helps when dealing with overhead, since you only have to upgrade the Director, and you don't have to upgrade a pile of FD's at the same time, and worry about them later.

- Shawn Q

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with 
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users