Hi there, In my last request I have asked info about backuppc and other backup solutions. After some test I have choosen bacula. Many people said it's too complex and try to make it works is a challenge. I've tested backuppc and I don't like it for a stupid reason... I must install on centos external software, configure a web server with cgi with suid enabled (apache does not have mod_perl) I must exchange ssh key or configure smb shares. On backuppc site is reported that there is no database because it is another point of failure. But to make backup pc working I need different softwares to make it work. With bacula I need pgsql (installed with 3 step) install bacula with yum and configure bacula. Bacula is amazing in it's configurantion...you must spend time for studying it but it is solid and powerfull. This is my choice and this not mean that backuppc is bad.
Then after this...I'm new to bacula.
On different sites, on bacula docs and on sample files, there is specified a job related to database (catalog) backup. The catalog is used to restore a backup. What do you think about backupping catalog on the same backup server? If the backup server dies, how I can restore catalog(s)? If server dies, I can restore without reinstall bacula? What solution do you use?
On 5/11/2015 11:49 AM, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
I must install on centos external software, configure a web server with cgi with suid enabled (apache does not have mod_perl)
yum install httpd,mod_perl
its all in the base repo of centos 6 at least.
I must exchange ssh key or configure smb shares.
how does bacula connect and authenticate with the host being backed up ? do you not have to install a bacula file service on each host, configure authentication and run this as a daemon or service ? I found that considerably more complex than the ssh key exchange required by backuppc.
On c7 I can't find mod_perl. Configuring bacula client requires only few lines...with bacula you need only bacula pkgs and one database. With backuppc there are different services to install and configure...some external to centos base. In c7, without mod_perl I must run cgi with suid... Ok bacula is more complex (complexity I mean for its configuration) but It is better organized and less messy. To install backuppc perl is required, to install File::Rsync from cpan I must install gcc. Then installing bacula on server/client and configure them from base repo is less complex and more pratical then download, compile, configure. The complexity is not on ssh key exchange or smb share (sorry for this mistake) but for installation procedure of backuppc is less pratical for me.
Then when you learn how to use a software, like samba, for you (i think) samba is the simpliest software to use and configure...but when you use samba, you need only samba pkgs and they work. Il 11/mag/2015 21:05, "John R Pierce" pierce@hogranch.com ha scritto:
On 5/11/2015 11:49 AM, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
I must install on centos external software, configure a web server with cgi with suid enabled (apache does not have mod_perl)
yum install httpd,mod_perlits all in the base repo of centos 6 at least.
I must exchange ssh key or configure smb shares.
how does bacula connect and authenticate with the host being backed up ? do you not have to install a bacula file service on each host, configure authentication and run this as a daemon or service ? I found that considerably more complex than the ssh key exchange required by backuppc.
-- john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 5/11/2015 1:28 PM, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
To install backuppc perl is required, to install File::Rsync from cpan I must install gcc.
never met a unix that didn't come with Perl already installed, or as a base option
Using CPAN on a package-based distribution can lead to conflicts, rather, you should install cpan modules from a repository, for instance, perl-File-RsyncP is in EPEL, same as BackupPC, so when I yum --enablerepo=epel install BackupPC, it installs all prerequisites.
--On Monday, May 11, 2015 02:26:17 PM -0700 John R Pierce pierce@hogranch.com wrote:
never met a unix that didn't come with Perl already installed, or as a base option
SunOS-4 :)
Didn't have emacs, either, nor an ANSI-C compiler. And the OS came on QIC-150 tape (ie: 150 MB total capacity).
Not that that defeats the argument ...
Devin
Good times.
(Sent from iPhone, so please accept my apologies in advance for any spelling or grammatical errors.)
On May 11, 2015, at 5:11 PM, Devin Reade gdr@gno.org wrote:
--On Monday, May 11, 2015 02:26:17 PM -0700 John R Pierce pierce@hogranch.com wrote:
never met a unix that didn't come with Perl already installed, or as a base option
SunOS-4 :)
Didn't have emacs, either, nor an ANSI-C compiler. And the OS came on QIC-150 tape (ie: 150 MB total capacity).
Not that that defeats the argument ...
Devin
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
John, are you using c6? I have c7 and epel, nux repo and can't find this packages on these repo. Only backuppc on nux repo. Il 11/mag/2015 23:26, "John R Pierce" pierce@hogranch.com ha scritto:
On 5/11/2015 1:28 PM, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
To install backuppc perl is required, to install File::Rsync from cpan I must install gcc.
never met a unix that didn't come with Perl already installed, or as a base option
Using CPAN on a package-based distribution can lead to conflicts, rather, you should install cpan modules from a repository, for instance, perl-File-RsyncP is in EPEL, same as BackupPC, so when I yum --enablerepo=epel install BackupPC, it installs all prerequisites.
-- john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Am 11.05.2015 um 20:49 schrieb Alessandro Baggi alessandro.baggi@gmail.com:
Hi there, In my last request I have asked info about backuppc and other backup solutions. After some test I have choosen bacula. Many people said it's too complex and try to make it works is a challenge. I've tested backuppc and I don't like it for a stupid reason... I must install on centos external software, configure a web server with cgi with suid enabled (apache does not have mod_perl) I must exchange ssh key or configure smb shares. On backuppc site is reported that there is no database because it is another point of failure. But to make backup pc working I need different softwares to make it work. With bacula I need pgsql (installed with 3 step) install bacula with yum and configure bacula. Bacula is amazing in it's configurantion...you must spend time for studying it but it is solid and powerfull. This is my choice and this not mean that backuppc is bad.
Then after this...I'm new to bacula.
On different sites, on bacula docs and on sample files, there is specified a job related to database (catalog) backup. The catalog is used to restore a backup.
What do you think about backupping catalog on the same backup server?
The scenario is a baremetal recovery for example. For this the "volumes" (e.g .tapes, hdd) should be at hand, and to help the restore process also the "catalog" ...
If the backup server dies, how I can restore catalog(s)?
the catalog is just a db dump ... so restoring a catalog implies setting a db service up. This helps to browse the meta data and to find the right volume for restoring data.
If server dies, I can restore without reinstall bacula?
its possible to "manually" dump your files from your volumes but that is less flexible. We use a process for baremetal restores where we boot a live-system with an "bacula" service enabled and import then the newest catalog.
What solution do you use?
Check your use cases. In any case, the catalog helps to restore files. Therefore after "all" bacula jobs we have a catalog job to make sure that we have a current catalog on the volumes, additionally we store the catalog dump outside of the volumes (RunAfterJob).
-- LF
Hi Allessandro and all Bacula users and especially to (potential) Bacula contributors,
On Mon, 11 May 2015 20:49:08 +0200 Alessandro Baggi alessandro.baggi@gmail.com wrote:
In my last request I have asked info about backuppc and other backup solutions. After some test I have choosen bacula.
Concerning the topic "Free Software" I read that the relations between the FSFE and Kern Sibbald changed. https://fsfe.org/news/2015/news-20150414-01.en.html
"Since 2006, the FSFE has been the fiduciary for the copyrights held by developers in the Bacula.org software, on the basis of a Fiduciary License Agreement (FLA)"
"Effective the 6th of March 2015, the FLA between Kern Sibbald and FSFE has been terminated at the request of Kern Sibbald. The FSFE is committed to ensuring to the best of its ability that Bacula.org software remains Free Software, and can only regret that Kern Sibbald in this way chose to terminate the FLA."
In the Copyright Assignment Agreement that Contributors have to sign http://www.bacula.org/downloads/CAA-bacula.en.pdf
I found the the following
-------------- 8< -------------- Contributors .. grants a License, including, ..
5. the right to use, reproduce, redistribute and make derivative works of the Software under other including non-free licenses." -------------- 8< --------------
I wouldn't like to sign this.
To whom it may concern and kind regards,
Gabriele
Am 12.05.2015 um 12:24 schrieb Gabriele Pohl gp@dipohl.de:
Hi Allessandro and all Bacula users and especially to (potential) Bacula contributors,
On Mon, 11 May 2015 20:49:08 +0200 Alessandro Baggi alessandro.baggi@gmail.com wrote:
In my last request I have asked info about backuppc and other backup solutions. After some test I have choosen bacula.
Concerning the topic "Free Software" I read that the relations between the FSFE and Kern Sibbald changed. https://fsfe.org/news/2015/news-20150414-01.en.html
"Since 2006, the FSFE has been the fiduciary for the copyrights held by developers in the Bacula.org software, on the basis of a Fiduciary License Agreement (FLA)"
"Effective the 6th of March 2015, the FLA between Kern Sibbald and FSFE has been terminated at the request of Kern Sibbald. The FSFE is committed to ensuring to the best of its ability that Bacula.org software remains Free Software, and can only regret that Kern Sibbald in this way chose to terminate the FLA."
In the Copyright Assignment Agreement that Contributors have to sign http://www.bacula.org/downloads/CAA-bacula.en.pdf
I found the the following
-------------- 8< -------------- Contributors .. grants a License, including, ..
- the right to use, reproduce, redistribute and
make derivative works of the Software under other including non-free licenses." -------------- 8< --------------
I wouldn't like to sign this.
Gabriele, this list is the wrong place for such tune. The changes to find more contributors are here "list: bacula-users". The place where both sides can depict there positions.
-- LF
-
Alessandro Baggi -
Devin Reade -
Gabriele Pohl -
Hal Wigoda -
John R Pierce -
Leon Fauster