[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bacula-devel] [Bacula-users] [Fwd: Re: bacula : about the bacula.spec form rpms]

On Monday 03 March 2008 22.00:23 Frank Sweetser wrote:
> Kern Sibbald wrote:
> >> If you do it by reinstalling the OS from normal distro media, then you
> >> can also reinstall Bacula from rpms on a CD.
> >
> > As mentioned above, the binaries are not necessarily the most critical
> > part unless perhaps you have applied a number of critical patches.  The
> > most important parts are your Director's conf file, your catalog, and
> > shortly any special plugins, but as time goes by, there are more and more
> > little pieces that are important.  By saving everything in one wack, you
> > are sure you did not miss anything.
> Perhaps a reasonable compromise might be to ensure that, as part of the
> packaging process, a "bootstrap" job is created?  For example, this might
> be as simple as a separate config file (call it "bootstrap.inc", for
> example), containing just a fileset definition.  The default director
> config could then ship with a pre-canned job that includes that file for
> the fileset definition. As other files are added to the list of what's
> required to bootstrap, the package maintainer just has to add the
> appropriate directories and files to the bootstrap.inc file.
> That way, the admin can simply use the bootstrap job, and know that the
> installation package will ensure it's always backing up the correct set up
> files without keeping them in one FHS-unfriendly directory.

Good idea. That is 99.9% better than the current situation.

This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
Bacula-devel mailing list

This mailing list archive is a service of Copilotco.