There is an upgraded BackupPC in the testing repository. It is version 3.0.0, which was released in January.
The setup differences between version 2.1.2 and this version is that some file directories have shifted locations:
1. /var/lib/backuppc/conf is now instead /etc/BackupPC/
2. /var/lib/backuppc/log is now /var/log/BackupPC
===============================
If you are upgrading ... you _CAN_NOT_ just copy your old config.pl config file into /etc/BackupPC can continue on ... you need to migrate in any changes that you made to original file to this config.pl file as there are updated options in the new file.
How is the best way to do that ... you did save a copy of the original file prior to changing it ... right :P
If not ... here is what I did: ----commands---- cd /tmp
mkdir backuppc
cd backuppc
wget http://dev.centos.org/centos/4/testing/i386/RPMS/backuppc-2.1.2-3.c4.centos4...
rpm2cpio backuppc-2.1.2-3.c4.centos4.i386.rpm | cpio -idv
----end commands-----
You should be in /tmp/backuppc and you should see all the files (extracted) from the original RPM in there ... inside the /tmp/backuppc/var/lib/backuppc/conf/ should be an original config.pl file. You can use that file to create a diff file that you can read to make changes to the new config.pl file.
here is what I did prior to upgrade:
----commands----
cd /var/lib/backkuppc/
cp -a conf conf.bak
cp -a logs logs.bak
cd conf.bak
cp /tmp/backuppc/var/lib/backuppc/conf/config.pl config.pl.orig
diff config.pl.orig config.pl > config.pl.diff
----end commands----
Now you are ready to upgrade ... you will need to enable the testing repo to do the upgrade (or download the files manually and install manually via RPM). How to do the upgrade via yum:
Put the testing repo file into /etc/yum.repos.d/ :
http://dev.centos.org/centos/4/CentOS-Testing.repo
(the file is disabled by default)
Once you have the file in place, use this command: ----commands----
yum --enablerepo=c4-testing upgrade backuppc perl-Compress-Zlib perl-File-RsyncP perl-Time-modules perl-XML-RSS
----end commands----
(that command in all on one line if it wraps in your mail client)
You can use that diff file from above to manually add new changes to the /etc/BackupPC/config.pl file after upgrade.
Also after upgrade, you can move all the files in /var/lib/backuppc/log/ to /var/log/BackupPC/
Once everything is configured ... restart backuppc and httpd
Once everything is working, you can get rid of the following directories in "/var/lib/backuppc/" ... conf, conf.bak, log, log.bak
If you are installing new, replace "upgrade" with "install" in the above yum command ... and see the README.centos file in /usr/share/doc/backuppc-3.0.0/ after install
Here is the original announcement, which also has good info: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2006-April/002216.html
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Johnny Hughes wrote:
There is an upgraded BackupPC in the testing repository. It is version 3.0.0, which was released in January.
The setup differences between version 2.1.2 and this version is that some file directories have shifted locations:
/var/lib/backuppc/conf is now instead /etc/BackupPC/
/var/lib/backuppc/log is now /var/log/BackupPC
As a packager, I would seriously consider removing the mixed-case from the directory names (and package name) and contact backuppc about this fact.
In Unix we have a tendency to not use uppercase or mixed case for a specific reason and applications shouldn't mandate new standards or poison existing standards, more than they already have. (/etc/X11 comes to mind)
Kind regards, -- dag wieers, dag@wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 15:38 +0100, Dag Wieers wrote:
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Johnny Hughes wrote:
There is an upgraded BackupPC in the testing repository. It is version 3.0.0, which was released in January.
The setup differences between version 2.1.2 and this version is that some file directories have shifted locations:
/var/lib/backuppc/conf is now instead /etc/BackupPC/
/var/lib/backuppc/log is now /var/log/BackupPC
As a packager, I would seriously consider removing the mixed-case from the directory names (and package name) and contact backuppc about this fact.
In Unix we have a tendency to not use uppercase or mixed case for a specific reason and applications shouldn't mandate new standards or poison existing standards, more than they already have. (/etc/X11 comes to mind)
I do not disagree with this at all ... however, there is much documentation written that becomes worthless if I change those aspects of the program (location of config files, and logs, etc.).
I certainly could change all those things (I did add 64bit arch support, for example) ... but I do not want to also then rewrite all docs, etc.
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 09:32 -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote:
I do not disagree with this at all ... however, there is much documentation written that becomes worthless if I change those aspects of the program (location of config files, and logs, etc.).
I certainly could change all those things (I did add 64bit arch support, for example) ... but I do not want to also then rewrite all docs, etc.
I don't want to be an ass, but couldn't you use sed or something to speed that up?
Regards,
Ranbir
On Wed, 2007-02-28 at 16:21 -0500, Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote:
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 09:32 -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote:
I do not disagree with this at all ... however, there is much documentation written that becomes worthless if I change those aspects of the program (location of config files, and logs, etc.).
I certainly could change all those things (I did add 64bit arch support, for example) ... but I do not want to also then rewrite all docs, etc.
I don't want to be an ass, but couldn't you use sed or something to speed that up?
A don't want to be an a$$ either, but I suspect Johnny has plenty of other things on his plate of higher priority (recent new errata kernels, seamonkey re-updates, CentOS5 Beta, ...) as I'm sure does Dag who complained about the mixed case "violations" in the first place. From my experience with sed/awk/etc. it would take a bit of cut-and-try to get it right. Perhaps a volunteer with a dislike for the mixed case names and some free time can step up to the job. ("Not I" said the pig ... :-)
Phil
Phil Schaffner wrote:
On Wed, 2007-02-28 at 16:21 -0500, Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote:
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 09:32 -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote:
I do not disagree with this at all ... however, there is much documentation written that becomes worthless if I change those aspects of the program (location of config files, and logs, etc.).
I certainly could change all those things (I did add 64bit arch support, for example) ... but I do not want to also then rewrite all docs, etc.
I don't want to be an ass, but couldn't you use sed or something to speed that up?
A don't want to be an a$$ either, but I suspect Johnny has plenty of other things on his plate of higher priority (recent new errata kernels, seamonkey re-updates, CentOS5 Beta, ...) as I'm sure does Dag who complained about the mixed case "violations" in the first place. From my experience with sed/awk/etc. it would take a bit of cut-and-try to get it right. Perhaps a volunteer with a dislike for the mixed case names and some free time can step up to the job. ("Not I" said the pig ... :-)
Patches are happily accepted :)
On Wed, 2007-02-28 at 17:38 -0500, Phil Schaffner wrote:
On Wed, 2007-02-28 at 16:21 -0500, Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote:
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 09:32 -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote:
I do not disagree with this at all ... however, there is much documentation written that becomes worthless if I change those aspects of the program (location of config files, and logs, etc.).
I certainly could change all those things (I did add 64bit arch support, for example) ... but I do not want to also then rewrite all docs, etc.
I don't want to be an ass, but couldn't you use sed or something to speed that up?
A don't want to be an a$$ either, but I suspect Johnny has plenty of other things on his plate of higher priority (recent new errata kernels, seamonkey re-updates, CentOS5 Beta, ...) as I'm sure does Dag who complained about the mixed case "violations" in the first place. From my experience with sed/awk/etc. it would take a bit of cut-and-try to get it right. Perhaps a volunteer with a dislike for the mixed case names and some free time can step up to the job. ("Not I" said the pig ... :-)
Well ... the real issue is that I don't think I should be controlling where the config files or log files go. That is for the people who produce the software to do.
I don't think that things like that should be changed ... unless they are changed by the person who wrote the program. That person moved the files for a reason. He wrote the program, and he should know more than me where he wants the config files. log files, etc.
I am looking to make this usable by CentOS users, not fork the code.
What happens when you go to that guy's website to get help and he says ... go to /etc/BackupPC and what does xxx.conf say ... BUT, I have moved that to /var/lib/backuppc/conf instead of /etc/BackupPC ... or whatever the issue is.
For example, I personally do not appreciate trying to help someone with CentOS where the technician who installed it for them decided that the php from CentOS sucked, so they built version x.y.z from source for them ... and did not use an RPM.
Me changing major function locations (Log locations, Config locations, etc.) is not any different than that ... which I certainly do not want to do.
That (IMHO) makes it harder for the user to use the program or get help.
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
-
Dag Wieers -
Johnny Hughes -
Johnny Hughes -
Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu -
Karanbir Singh -
Phil Schaffner