From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Tue Sep 2 05:12:19 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Per Reedtz Thomsen) Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 21:12:19 -0700 Subject: [Box Backup] Article about Box at linux.com Message-ID: <0763275E-F424-4A80-9845-CABC8BE1B457@reedtz.com> http://www.linux.com/feature/145803 Thanks, Per -- Per Reedtz Thomsen | Reedtz Consulting, LLC | F: 209 883 4119 V: 209 883 4102 | pthomsen@reedtz.com | C: 209 996 9561 GPG ID: 1209784F | Yahoo! Chat: pthomsen | AIM: pthomsen From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Tue Sep 2 19:39:06 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (boxbackup@boxbackup.org) Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 11:39:06 -0700 Subject: [Box Backup] Compilation failure on Arch Linux Message-ID: <20080902113906.AEBFED5@resin13.mta.everyone.net> Hello, Compilation of boxbackup fails with Arch Linux. The errors are posted here: http://pastebin.com/m25918e5c I am using gcc 4.3.1-3 Let me know if you need any additional details. On a side note, it compiles fine under CentOS 5.2 with gcc-4.1.2-42. Thanks From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Tue Sep 2 20:31:16 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Chris Wilson) Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 20:31:16 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Box Backup] Compilation failure on Arch Linux In-Reply-To: <20080902113906.AEBFED5@resin13.mta.everyone.net> References: <20080902113906.AEBFED5@resin13.mta.everyone.net> Message-ID: Hi, On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, shemsp1@digis.net wrote: > Compilation of boxbackup fails with Arch Linux. > > The errors are posted here: > http://pastebin.com/m25918e5c I think this and several other errors have been fixed in the trunk since the release candidate was released. Please could you try downloading the latest sources from Subversion and see if that helps? Cheers, Chris. -- _____ __ _ \ __/ / ,__(_)_ | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK | / (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Ruby/Perl/SQL Developer | \ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU : free your mind & your software | From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Thu Sep 4 06:03:12 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Shem Valentine) Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 23:03:12 -0600 Subject: [Box Backup] Compilation failure on Arch Linux In-Reply-To: References: <20080902113906.AEBFED5@resin13.mta.everyone.net> Message-ID: <48BF6C10.4090804@digis.net> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------060004070707050701020402 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Chris, Thank you for the response. As suggested I have checked out the latest trunk. However running bootstrap results in an error, I've appended it to the same pastebin url. http://pastebin.com/m25918e5c Chris Wilson wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, shemsp1@digis.net wrote: > > >> Compilation of boxbackup fails with Arch Linux. >> >> The errors are posted here: >> http://pastebin.com/m25918e5c >> > > I think this and several other errors have been fixed in the trunk since > the release candidate was released. Please could you try downloading the > latest sources from Subversion and see if that helps? > > Cheers, Chris. > --------------060004070707050701020402 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Chris,

Thank you for the response.

As suggested I have checked out the latest trunk. However running bootstrap results in an error, I've appended it to the same pastebin url.

http://pastebin.com/m25918e5c

Chris Wilson wrote:

Hi,

On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, shemsp1@digis.net wrote:

Compilation of boxbackup fails with Arch Linux.

The errors are posted here:
http://pastebin.com/m25918e5c


I think this and several other errors have been fixed in the trunk since 
the release candidate was released. Please could you try downloading the 
latest sources from Subversion and see if that helps?

Cheers, Chris.

--------------060004070707050701020402-- From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Thu Sep 4 06:43:51 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Shem Valentine) Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 23:43:51 -0600 Subject: [Box Backup] Compilation failure on Arch Linux In-Reply-To: <48BF6C10.4090804@digis.net> References: <20080902113906.AEBFED5@resin13.mta.everyone.net> <48BF6C10.4090804@digis.net> Message-ID: <48BF7597.9070804@digis.net> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080805060105020408000008 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit My apologies, the new pastebin url for bootstrap is at: http://pastebin.com/m42dc2dc3 Shem Valentine wrote: > Hello Chris, > > Thank you for the response. > > As suggested I have checked out the latest trunk. However running > bootstrap results in an error, I've appended it to the same pastebin url. > http://pastebin.com/m25918e5c > > > Chris Wilson wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, shemsp1@digis.net wrote: >> >> >>> Compilation of boxbackup fails with Arch Linux. >>> >>> The errors are posted here: >>> http://pastebin.com/m25918e5c >>> >> >> I think this and several other errors have been fixed in the trunk since >> the release candidate was released. Please could you try downloading the >> latest sources from Subversion and see if that helps? >> >> Cheers, Chris. >> > --------------080805060105020408000008 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit My apologies, the new pastebin url for bootstrap is at:

http://pastebin.com/m42dc2dc3

Shem Valentine wrote:

Hello Chris,

Thank you for the response.

As suggested I have checked out the latest trunk. However running bootstrap results in an error, I've appended it to the same pastebin url.
http://pastebin.com/m25918e5c
Chris Wilson wrote:
Hi,

On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, shemsp1@digis.net wrote:

  
Compilation of boxbackup fails with Arch Linux.

The errors are posted here:
http://pastebin.com/m25918e5c
    
I think this and several other errors have been fixed in the trunk since 
the release candidate was released. Please could you try downloading the 
latest sources from Subversion and see if that helps?

Cheers, Chris.
  

--------------080805060105020408000008-- From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Fri Sep 5 14:23:06 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Damien B) Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 15:23:06 +0200 Subject: [Box Backup] Troubleshooting a 0.10 In-Reply-To: <48B979EE.6040902@gmail.com> References: <48B95460.4060808@gmail.com> <48B979EE.6040902@gmail.com> Message-ID: <9f135a750809050623k7d0d8545w1cdab07f26ca94a9@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 6:48 PM, Damien B wrote: > The culprit seems to be that, a proc subtely mounted for this named running > chrooted. I should have started by examining /proc/mounts... > > Now there are some gigabytes to transfer before I can check whether all the > folders are processed correctely ^^; Boxbackup is now running happily. The mounted proc filesystem was the one and only problem. Thanks for the help. Damien From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Fri Sep 5 18:51:36 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (dnk) Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 10:51:36 -0700 Subject: [Box Backup] windows client tutorial Message-ID: <994DE140-EEC2-4068-AE3E-ADDCF4485C07@gmail.com> Good day all... I am having my first crack at the boxbackup... now most of the tutorials and such i have found deal with linux server with linux clients.... however I am looking for one that details the windows client setup. I have been reading mailing list archives, and I have seen references to cygwin, and so on... I just want to be sure I get it right. Anyone have a link? Dnk From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Fri Sep 5 18:52:54 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (James O'Gorman) Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 18:52:54 +0100 Subject: [Box Backup] Compilation failure on Arch Linux In-Reply-To: <48BF7597.9070804@digis.net> References: <20080902113906.AEBFED5@resin13.mta.everyone.net> <48BF6C10.4090804@digis.net> <48BF7597.9070804@digis.net> Message-ID: <48C171F6.9060803@netinertia.co.uk> Hi Shem, Shem Valentine wrote: > My apologies, the new pastebin url for bootstrap is at: > > http://pastebin.com/m42dc2dc3 > > Shem Valentine wrote: >> Hello Chris, >> >> Thank you for the response. >> >> As suggested I have checked out the latest trunk. However running >> bootstrap results in an error, I've appended it to the same pastebin url. >> http://pastebin.com/m25918e5c Can you send us the output of 'autoconf --version' and 'automake --version' please? James From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Fri Sep 5 23:44:41 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Chris Wilson) Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 23:44:41 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Box Backup] Troubleshooting a 0.10 In-Reply-To: <48B979EE.6040902@gmail.com> References: <48B95460.4060808@gmail.com> <48B979EE.6040902@gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi Damien, On Sat, 30 Aug 2008, Damien B wrote: > > If you have a proc filesystem mounted anywhere inside the backup > > location, you must exclude it from 0.10, because it will completely > > confuse 0.10 and may cause it to crash or hang forever. > > The culprit seems to be that, a proc subtely mounted for this named > running chrooted. I should have started by examining /proc/mounts... I'm just wondering why you didn't spot these error messages in your logs? > Aug 28 00:10:25 ns29253 bbackupd[25191]: Backup object failed, error when > reading /var/named/run-root/proc/acpi/event > Aug 28 00:10:25 ns29253 bbackupd[25191]: Error code when uploading was (1/2), > Common OSFileOpenError (Can't open a file -- attempted to load a non-existant > config file or bad file referenced within?) Is there anything you can suggest that we can do to make these errors clearer or encourage people to check their logs and investigate problems like this? Cheers, Chris. -- _____ __ _ \ __/ / ,__(_)_ | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK | / (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Ruby/Perl/SQL Developer | \ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU : free your mind & your software | From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Sat Sep 6 09:05:44 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (boxbackup@boxbackup.org) Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2008 01:05:44 -0700 Subject: [Box Backup] Compilation failure on Arch Linux Message-ID: <20080906010544.256AF656@resin13.mta.everyone.net> Hello James, Here is the output. autoconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.62 Copyright (C) 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc. License GPLv2+: GNU GPL version 2 or later This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it. There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law. Written by David J. MacKenzie and Akim Demaille. automake (GNU automake) 1.10.1 Copyright (C) 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc. License GPLv2+: GNU GPL version 2 or later This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it. There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law. Written by Tom Tromey and Alexandre Duret-Lutz Thanks, -Shem --- james@netinertia.co.uk wrote: From: James O'Gorman To: boxbackup@boxbackup.org Subject: Re: [Box Backup] Compilation failure on Arch Linux Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 18:52:54 +0100 Hi Shem, Shem Valentine wrote: > My apologies, the new pastebin url for bootstrap is at: > > http://pastebin.com/m42dc2dc3 > > Shem Valentine wrote: >> Hello Chris, >> >> Thank you for the response. >> >> As suggested I have checked out the latest trunk. However running >> bootstrap results in an error, I've appended it to the same pastebin url. >> http://pastebin.com/m25918e5c Can you send us the output of 'autoconf --version' and 'automake --version' please? James _______________________________________________ boxbackup mailing list boxbackup@boxbackup.org http://lists.warhead.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/boxbackup From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Sat Sep 6 13:16:42 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (James O'Gorman) Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2008 13:16:42 +0100 Subject: [Box Backup] Compilation failure on Arch Linux In-Reply-To: <20080906010544.256AF656@resin13.mta.everyone.net> References: <20080906010544.256AF656@resin13.mta.everyone.net> Message-ID: <48C274AA.9050406@netinertia.co.uk> shemsp1@digis.net wrote: > Hello James, > > Here is the output. [snip] > automake (GNU automake) 1.10.1 It's possible this is the problem. I'm on 1.9.6 and have no issues. I'm not sure what's changed between 1.9.x and 1.10.x. I'll try and look into this. James From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Sat Sep 6 13:20:35 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Damien B) Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2008 14:20:35 +0200 Subject: [Box Backup] Troubleshooting a 0.10 In-Reply-To: References: <48B95460.4060808@gmail.com> <48B979EE.6040902@gmail.com> Message-ID: <48C27593.8050109@gmail.com> Chris Wilson wrote: > I'm just wondering why you didn't spot these error messages in your logs? > >> Aug 28 00:10:25 ns29253 bbackupd[25191]: Backup object failed, error when >> reading /var/named/run-root/proc/acpi/event >> Aug 28 00:10:25 ns29253 bbackupd[25191]: Error code when uploading was (1/2), >> Common OSFileOpenError (Can't open a file -- attempted to load a non-existant >> config file or bad file referenced within?) I think it's a combination of several factors. At first, logging was not activated at all for bbackupd (instructions present to change syslog.conf in the wiki, but not on the mainly referenced page: http://www.boxbackup.org/client.html ). Then with logging activated my obvious behaviour is to "tail -f", which "doesn't work" with that kind of background process. I think I didn't really looked much further, and then I *decided* it was a directory filtering problem, so I focused on activating specific debugging options for that problem. > Is there anything you can suggest that we can do to make these errors > clearer or encourage people to check their logs and investigate problems > like this? First place I went was the http://www.boxbackup.org/trouble.html page, which starts with "Unfortunately, the error messages are not particularly helpful at the moment.", which kind of discourage looking for error messages at all :) One thing which would be helpful on that page is IMHO those three things: - point to the activation of logging on the storage client - point to the activation of logging on the storage server - give some kind of command line to look for errors like grep bbackupd /var/log/messages | egrep "\([[:digit:]]+/[[:digit:]]+" (which is not cross-platform I know) Damien From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Sat Sep 6 16:41:14 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (James O'Gorman) Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2008 16:41:14 +0100 Subject: [Box Backup] Compilation failure on Arch Linux In-Reply-To: <48C274AA.9050406@netinertia.co.uk> References: <20080906010544.256AF656@resin13.mta.everyone.net> <48C274AA.9050406@netinertia.co.uk> Message-ID: <48C2A49A.7030909@netinertia.co.uk> James O'Gorman wrote: > shemsp1@digis.net wrote: >> Hello James, >> >> Here is the output. > [snip] >> automake (GNU automake) 1.10.1 > > It's possible this is the problem. I'm on 1.9.6 and have no issues. I'm > not sure what's changed between 1.9.x and 1.10.x. I'll try and look into > this. I'm afraid I can't reproduce this error. Automake 0.10.1 works fine for me. Could you try checking out the source again (into a clean directory) and see if that works? James From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Fri Sep 12 08:34:26 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Tuukka Pasanen) Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 10:34:26 +0300 Subject: [Box Backup] Patch for openSuSE 11.0 Message-ID: <48CA1B82.5040808@ilmi.fi> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070207050802040106020705 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I'm packing boxbackup for openSUSE 10.2/10.3/11.0/Factory and noticed that boxbackup doesn't compile on openSUSE 11.0. So here is the patch that adds needed includes! I still have some problems to compile Berkley in (I have to investigate configure.ac more)! Tuukka --------------070207050802040106020705 Content-Type: text/x-patch; name="boxbackup-missing_includes_opensuse110-0.11rc2.diff" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="boxbackup-missing_includes_opensuse110-0.11rc2.diff" diff -urN boxbackup-0.11rc2/bin/bbackupctl/bbackupctl.cpp boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//bin/bbackupctl/bbackupctl.cpp --- boxbackup-0.11rc2/bin/bbackupctl/bbackupctl.cpp 2008-01-29 02:58:26.000000000 +0200 +++ boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//bin/bbackupctl/bbackupctl.cpp 2008-09-12 10:18:44.000000000 +0300 @@ -60,6 +60,7 @@ #include "Socket.h" #include "SocketStream.h" #include "IOStreamGetLine.h" +#include #ifdef WIN32 #include "WinNamedPipeStream.h" diff -urN boxbackup-0.11rc2/bin/bbackupquery/bbackupquery.cpp boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//bin/bbackupquery/bbackupquery.cpp --- boxbackup-0.11rc2/bin/bbackupquery/bbackupquery.cpp 2008-01-29 02:58:26.000000000 +0200 +++ boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//bin/bbackupquery/bbackupquery.cpp 2008-09-12 10:18:09.000000000 +0300 @@ -54,6 +54,7 @@ #include #include +#include #ifdef HAVE_SYS_TYPES_H #include diff -urN boxbackup-0.11rc2/bin/bbstoreaccounts/bbstoreaccounts.cpp boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//bin/bbstoreaccounts/bbstoreaccounts.cpp --- boxbackup-0.11rc2/bin/bbstoreaccounts/bbstoreaccounts.cpp 2008-01-29 02:58:25.000000000 +0200 +++ boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//bin/bbstoreaccounts/bbstoreaccounts.cpp 2008-09-12 10:20:30.000000000 +0300 @@ -54,6 +54,7 @@ #include #include #include +#include #include "BoxPortsAndFiles.h" #include "BackupStoreConfigVerify.h" diff -urN boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/backupclient/BackupClientFileAttributes.cpp boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/backupclient/BackupClientFileAttributes.cpp --- boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/backupclient/BackupClientFileAttributes.cpp 2008-01-29 02:58:25.000000000 +0200 +++ boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/backupclient/BackupClientFileAttributes.cpp 2008-09-12 10:15:00.000000000 +0300 @@ -52,6 +52,8 @@ #include #endif +#include + #include #include #include diff -urN boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/backupclient/BackupClientRestore.cpp boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/backupclient/BackupClientRestore.cpp --- boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/backupclient/BackupClientRestore.cpp 2008-01-29 02:58:25.000000000 +0200 +++ boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/backupclient/BackupClientRestore.cpp 2008-09-12 10:15:24.000000000 +0300 @@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ #include #include #include +#include #include "BackupClientRestore.h" #include "autogen_BackupProtocolClient.h" diff -urN boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/backupclient/BackupStoreFileCmbIdx.cpp boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/backupclient/BackupStoreFileCmbIdx.cpp --- boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/backupclient/BackupStoreFileCmbIdx.cpp 2008-01-29 02:58:25.000000000 +0200 +++ boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/backupclient/BackupStoreFileCmbIdx.cpp 2008-09-12 10:16:34.000000000 +0300 @@ -50,6 +50,7 @@ #include #include +#include #include "BackupStoreFile.h" #include "BackupStoreFileWire.h" diff -urN boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/backupclient/BackupStoreFile.cpp boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/backupclient/BackupStoreFile.cpp --- boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/backupclient/BackupStoreFile.cpp 2008-01-29 02:58:25.000000000 +0200 +++ boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/backupclient/BackupStoreFile.cpp 2008-09-12 10:16:00.000000000 +0300 @@ -56,6 +56,7 @@ #include #include #include +#include #ifndef BOX_DISABLE_BACKWARDS_COMPATIBILITY_BACKUPSTOREFILE #include diff -urN boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/backupclient/BackupStoreFile.h boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/backupclient/BackupStoreFile.h --- boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/backupclient/BackupStoreFile.h 2008-01-29 02:58:25.000000000 +0200 +++ boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/backupclient/BackupStoreFile.h 2008-09-12 10:17:03.000000000 +0300 @@ -54,6 +54,7 @@ #include "BackupStoreFilename.h" #include +#include typedef struct { diff -urN boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/common/Logging.cpp boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/common/Logging.cpp --- boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/common/Logging.cpp 2008-01-29 02:58:23.000000000 +0200 +++ boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/common/Logging.cpp 2008-09-12 10:10:13.000000000 +0300 @@ -58,6 +58,7 @@ #include "Logging.h" #include +#include #include "BoxTime.h" diff -urN boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/common/Timer.cpp boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/common/Timer.cpp --- boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/common/Timer.cpp 2008-01-29 02:58:22.000000000 +0200 +++ boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/common/Timer.cpp 2008-09-12 10:11:03.000000000 +0300 @@ -50,6 +50,7 @@ #include "Box.h" #include +#include #include "Timer.h" #include "Logging.h" diff -urN boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/common/WaitForEvent.h boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/common/WaitForEvent.h --- boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/common/WaitForEvent.h 2008-01-29 02:58:22.000000000 +0200 +++ boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/common/WaitForEvent.h 2008-09-12 10:12:26.000000000 +0300 @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ #ifndef WAITFOREVENT__H #define WAITFOREVENT__H +#include + #ifdef HAVE_KQUEUE #include #include diff -urN boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/raidfile/RaidFileRead.cpp boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/raidfile/RaidFileRead.cpp --- boxbackup-0.11rc2/lib/raidfile/RaidFileRead.cpp 2008-01-29 02:58:25.000000000 +0200 +++ boxbackup-0.11rc2-patch//lib/raidfile/RaidFileRead.cpp 2008-09-12 10:19:21.000000000 +0300 @@ -68,6 +68,7 @@ #include #include #include +#include #include "RaidFileRead.h" #include "RaidFileException.h" --------------070207050802040106020705-- From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Fri Sep 12 19:47:08 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (James O'Gorman) Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 19:47:08 +0100 Subject: [Box Backup] Patch for openSuSE 11.0 In-Reply-To: <48CA1B82.5040808@ilmi.fi> References: <48CA1B82.5040808@ilmi.fi> Message-ID: <48CAB92C.10006@netinertia.co.uk> Tuukka Pasanen wrote: > Hi, > I'm packing boxbackup for openSUSE 10.2/10.3/11.0/Factory and noticed > that boxbackup doesn't compile on openSUSE 11.0. > So here is the patch that adds needed includes! I still have some > problems to compile Berkley in (I have to investigate configure.ac more)! To pick up BDB, specify the locations to configure: ./configure --with-bdb-headers=blah --with-bdb-lib=blah (where blah is a path to the headers and library locations, such as /usr/include/db4, /usr/lib/db4) Note that this is only needed for the client and not the server. James From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Fri Sep 12 21:08:52 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (David H Kaufman) Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 16:08:52 -0400 Subject: [Box Backup] Restore fails on symbolic link to itself Message-ID: <2380b1bef9601619468a856d9961bbf7@kaufmanfamily.net> I am running boxbackup 0.10 on Gentoo with ext3 filesystems. I did a test restore of a backup, which restored about 17G of data (out of 42G) and then failed with "Exception: Common OSFileError (Error accessing a file. Check permissions.) (1/9)". This was very mysterious - how could a backup get a permissions error after so much data had been restored? strace (eventually) showed the problem: stat("/mnt/newdisk/kaufman/Maildir/.Trash/Trash/trash", 0x7fff980fc870) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) open("/mnt/newdisk/kaufman/Maildir/.Trash/Trash/trash", O_WRONLY|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0666) = 4 read(3, "\27\3\1\0 ", 5) = 5 read(3, "z\23Bu\f\225\334X\223e\211\303\347\214\314[Hn4\233\357{%v\10\345\25\355\222\327\243\301", 32) = 32 read(3, "\27\3\1\0p", 5) = 5 read(3, "\313\206\345\371y\355\4\226?3\247\303x\37\203\311X\223\366\240\223y\"\373\24\247R\241F\276B\341"..., 112) = 112 unlink("/mnt/newdisk/kaufman/Maildir/.Trash/Trash/trash") = 0 symlink("trash", "/mnt/newdisk/kaufman/Maildir/.Trash/Trash/trash") = 0 geteuid() = 0 lchown("/mnt/newdisk/kaufman/Maildir/.Trash/Trash/trash", 500, 500) = 0 close(4) = 0 write(1, ".", 1.) = 1 stat("/mnt/newdisk/kaufman/Maildir/.Trash/Trash/trash", 0x7fff980fc8a0) = -1 ELOOP (Too many levels of symbolic links) close(3) = 0 brk(0x59a000) = 0x59a000 brk(0x599000) = 0x599000 write(1, "Exception: Common OSFileError (E"..., 81Exception: Common OSFileError (Error accessing a file. Check permissions.) (1/9) ) = 81 exit_group(1) = ? Indeed, that file is a link to itself in the source filesystem: ls -l /home/kaufman/Maildir/.Trash/Trash/ total 0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 kaufman 500 5 2003-11-06 10:11 trash -> trash And it had been restored as such by boxbackup: ls -l /mnt/newdisk/kaufman/Maildir/.Trash/Trash/ total 0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 kaufman 500 5 2008-09-10 14:44 trash -> trash If I removed the restored symlink, and resumed my restore, I got the same error. If I deleted the symlink and touched the file, I got "Exception: BackupStore OutputFileAlreadyExists (4/8)". I shouldn't expect that to work, but I was trying to find a workaround so I could restore the rest of my data! Eventually, I deleted the link-loop in the source filesystem, and forced boxbackup to sync. Then I could resume my restore, which ran to completion and passed my other tests. Some notes, beside the actual symbolic-link-loop problem itself: 1. Printing the actual Unix error message would have shortened the debugging cycle 2. If I didn't have the source filesystem handy, I don't know how I would have fixed the problem 3. A restore "skip-the-first-file" switch would have helped. Alternately, restore "don't abort on errors". Or, if I could know what file was being restored, some ability to remove it from the backup (this sounds the most error-prone and may be a terrible idea). Thanks very much, David From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Fri Sep 12 21:09:35 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (David H Kaufman) Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 16:09:35 -0400 Subject: [Box Backup] How to move boxbackup store to a larger =?UTF-8?Q?disk=3F?= Message-ID: I am running boxbackup 0.10 on Gentoo Linux with ext3 filesystems. My backup store is on an external disk, but before I move that disk to a less-accessible place, I would like to upgrade the disk. So I did what I usually do when moving filesystem partitions around: dd if=/dev/old-disk1 of=/dev/new-disk1 fsck -f /dev/new-disk1 resize2fs /dev/new-disk1 At the end of which I had a happy, larger EXT3 filesystem on new-disk. But boxbackup doesn't like something I did - I ran: bbstoreaccounts check and got a HEAP of these: File ID 61321 has different container ID, probably moved File ID 61a01 has different container ID, probably moved File ID 61b01 has different container ID, probably moved File ID 61ae4 has different container ID, probably moved File ID 61ae5 has different container ID, probably moved File ID 61ae6 has different container ID, probably moved File ID 61ae7 has different container ID, probably moved File ID 61ae8 has different container ID, probably moved Then it said: Phase 3, check root... Phase 4, fix unattached objects... Phase 5, fix unrecovered inconsistencies... Phase 6, regenerate store info... Store account checked, no errors found. I was hoping that "fix" meant it would fix those container IDs, but rerunning "bbstoreaccounts check" reported the same errors. (At least, it was a heap of errors - I didn't verify that they were exactly the same ones.) So then I ran: bbstoreaccounts check fix but rerunning "bbstoreaccounts check" again reported lots of "different container ID" problems. My real question: what is the right way to upgrade to a larger disk, without throwing away my existing boxbackup store? Thanks very much, David From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Fri Sep 12 21:23:52 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Chris Wilson) Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 21:23:52 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Box Backup] Restore fails on symbolic link to itself In-Reply-To: <2380b1bef9601619468a856d9961bbf7@kaufmanfamily.net> References: <2380b1bef9601619468a856d9961bbf7@kaufmanfamily.net> Message-ID: Hi David, On Fri, 12 Sep 2008, David H Kaufman wrote: > If I removed the restored symlink, and resumed my restore, I got the > same error. If I deleted the symlink and touched the file, I got > "Exception: BackupStore OutputFileAlreadyExists (4/8)". I shouldn't > expect that to work, but I was trying to find a workaround so I could > restore the rest of my data! > > Eventually, I deleted the link-loop in the source filesystem, and forced > boxbackup to sync. Then I could resume my restore, which ran to completion > and passed my other tests. Thanks for the detailed bug report! I think this may be fixed already in 0.11rc2. but I'll write a test and check that it actually is. > Some notes, beside the actual symbolic-link-loop problem itself: > 1. Printing the actual Unix error message would have shortened the > debugging cycle This should be fixed already in 0.11rc2. > 2. If I didn't have the source filesystem handy, I don't know how I would > have fixed the problem Mark the file as deleted on the store using bbackupquery, or ask us for help. > 3. A restore "skip-the-first-file" switch would have helped. Alternately, > restore "don't abort on errors". Or, if I could know what file was being > restored, some ability to remove it from the backup (this sounds the most > error-prone and may be a terrible idea). You can also restore subdirectories so you could manually piece together your filesystem, skipping the broken directory. Boxi will also allow you to exclude files from restoration. Cheers, Chris. -- _____ __ _ \ __/ / ,__(_)_ | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK | / (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Ruby/Perl/SQL Developer | \ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU : free your mind & your software | From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Fri Sep 12 21:26:30 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Chris Wilson) Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 21:26:30 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Box Backup] How to move boxbackup store to a larger =?UTF-8?Q?disk=3F?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi David, On Fri, 12 Sep 2008, David H Kaufman wrote: > At the end of which I had a happy, larger EXT3 filesystem on new-disk. > But boxbackup doesn't like something I did - I ran: > > bbstoreaccounts check > > and got a HEAP of these: > > File ID 61321 has different container ID, probably moved > File ID 61a01 has different container ID, probably moved Are you sure these messages weren't present before you resized the filesystem? I suspect that they were. > I was hoping that "fix" meant it would fix those container IDs, but > rerunning "bbstoreaccounts check" reported the same errors. (At least, > it was a heap of errors - I didn't verify that they were exactly the > same ones.) They are not actually errors. We should probably silence them. They just mean that a file had been moved and the move was tracked by Box Backup. > My real question: what is the right way to upgrade to a larger disk, > without throwing away my existing boxbackup store? What you did looks absolutely fine to me. Cheers, Chris. -- _____ __ _ \ __/ / ,__(_)_ | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK | / (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Ruby/Perl/SQL Developer | \ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU : free your mind & your software | From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Fri Sep 12 22:59:54 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (David H Kaufman) Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 17:59:54 -0400 Subject: [Box Backup] How to move boxbackup store to a larger =?UTF-8?Q?disk=3F?= Message-ID: <5c5d8d3b0d024d1ac73f30a1bd7041c8@kaufmanfamily.net> Chris, Thanks for the rapid response! On Fri, 12 Sep 2008 21:26:30 +0100 (BST), Chris Wilson wrote: ... > On Fri, 12 Sep 2008, David H Kaufman wrote: ... >> File ID 61321 has different container ID, probably moved >> File ID 61a01 has different container ID, probably moved > > Are you sure these messages weren't present before you resized the > filesystem? I suspect that they were. You are correct. I still had the original boxbackup store, and it exhibits the same behavior. (I won't call them errors now!) I should have thought of checking that, thanks for pointing it out! Thanks, David From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Sat Sep 13 02:08:11 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (David H Kaufman) Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 21:08:11 -0400 Subject: [Box Backup] Restore fails on symbolic link to itself In-Reply-To: References: <2380b1bef9601619468a856d9961bbf7@kaufmanfamily.net> Message-ID: <5d0fe3db7ecd6da6d879fa01696fa9c0@kaufmanfamily.net> Hi Chris, Thanks for the quick response. I will investigate 0.11rc2 - it's not in Gentoo portage yet, but there ways around that (and a bug in their bugzilla which I'll add a note to). On Fri, 12 Sep 2008 21:23:52 +0100 (BST), Chris Wilson wrote: ... >> 2. If I didn't have the source filesystem handy, I don't know how I > would >> have fixed the problem > > Mark the file as deleted on the store using bbackupquery, or ask us for > help. I didn't see any way to do this, in 0.10. Is that another 0.11 innovation? >> 3. A restore "skip-the-first-file" switch would have helped. > Alternately, >> restore "don't abort on errors". Or, if I could know what file was being >> restored, some ability to remove it from the backup (this sounds the > most >> error-prone and may be a terrible idea). > > You can also restore subdirectories so you could manually piece together > your filesystem, skipping the broken directory. Boxi will also allow you > to exclude files from restoration. In theory, yes, but without knowing where the breakage was it would have been difficult to figure out. I'll take a look at Boxi too. If I haven't said this already - boxbackup is great, which is why it's worth my effort to investigate each of these issues. So all my questions are really a compliment! Thanks again David From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Sat Sep 13 10:53:38 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Chris Wilson) Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2008 10:53:38 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Box Backup] How to move boxbackup store to a larger =?UTF-8?Q?disk=3F?= In-Reply-To: <5c5d8d3b0d024d1ac73f30a1bd7041c8@kaufmanfamily.net> References: <5c5d8d3b0d024d1ac73f30a1bd7041c8@kaufmanfamily.net> Message-ID: Hi David, On Fri, 12 Sep 2008, David H Kaufman wrote: > You are correct. I still had the original boxbackup store, and it > exhibits the same behavior. (I won't call them errors now!) I should > have thought of checking that, thanks for pointing it out! I'm looking into how to remove these errors. I suspect that there is a (very minor) problem that bbstoreaccounts can fix here, but currently doesn't. Cheers, Chris. -- _____ __ _ \ __/ / ,__(_)_ | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK | / (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Ruby/Perl/SQL Developer | \ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU : free your mind & your software | From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Sat Sep 13 10:59:05 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Chris Wilson) Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2008 10:59:05 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Box Backup] Restore fails on symbolic link to itself In-Reply-To: <5d0fe3db7ecd6da6d879fa01696fa9c0@kaufmanfamily.net> References: <2380b1bef9601619468a856d9961bbf7@kaufmanfamily.net> <5d0fe3db7ecd6da6d879fa01696fa9c0@kaufmanfamily.net> Message-ID: Hi David, On Fri, 12 Sep 2008, David H Kaufman wrote: > Thanks for the quick response. I will investigate 0.11rc2 - it's not in > Gentoo portage yet, but there ways around that (and a bug in their > bugzilla which I'll add a note to). Thanks, it would be great to have 0.11rc2 or higher (I'll do a new release soon) in Gentoo, as 0.10 is so outdated. > > Mark the file as deleted on the store using bbackupquery, or ask us > > for help. > > I didn't see any way to do this, in 0.10. Is that another 0.11 > innovation? Sorry, I thought this was implemented but it's not. I'm working on implementing it now. > > You can also restore subdirectories so you could manually piece > > together your filesystem, skipping the broken directory. Boxi will > > also allow you to exclude files from restoration. > > In theory, yes, but without knowing where the breakage was it would have > been difficult to figure out. I'll take a look at Boxi too. The newer versions such as 0.11rc2 should be much better at reporting which file caused a problem when it happened, which should help to do this. > If I haven't said this already - boxbackup is great, which is why it's > worth my effort to investigate each of these issues. So all my questions > are really a compliment! Thanks! Cheers, Chris. -- _____ __ _ \ __/ / ,__(_)_ | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK | / (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Ruby/Perl/SQL Developer | \ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU : free your mind & your software | From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Fri Sep 12 22:46:11 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (David H Kaufman) Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 17:46:11 -0400 Subject: [Box Backup] How to move boxbackup store to a larger =?UTF-8?Q?disk=3F?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7e212b66dadda1c2a59be750213fe1b3@kaufmanfamily.net> Chris, Thanks for the rapid response! On Fri, 12 Sep 2008 21:26:30 +0100 (BST), Chris Wilson wrote: > Hi David, > > On Fri, 12 Sep 2008, David H Kaufman wrote: > >> At the end of which I had a happy, larger EXT3 filesystem on new-disk. >> But boxbackup doesn't like something I did - I ran: >> >> bbstoreaccounts check >> >> and got a HEAP of these: >> >> File ID 61321 has different container ID, probably moved >> File ID 61a01 has different container ID, probably moved > > Are you sure these messages weren't present before you resized the > filesystem? I suspect that they were. You are correct. I still had the original boxbackup store, and it exhibits the same behavior. (I won't call them errors now!) I should have thought of checking that, thanks for pointing it out! Thanks, David >> I was hoping that "fix" meant it would fix those container IDs, but >> rerunning "bbstoreaccounts check" reported the same errors. (At least, >> it was a heap of errors - I didn't verify that they were exactly the >> same ones.) > > They are not actually errors. We should probably silence them. They just > mean that a file had been moved and the move was tracked by Box Backup. > >> My real question: what is the right way to upgrade to a larger disk, >> without throwing away my existing boxbackup store? > > What you did looks absolutely fine to me. > > Cheers, Chris. > -- > _____ __ _ > \ __/ / ,__(_)_ | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK | > / (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Ruby/Perl/SQL Developer | > \ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU : free your mind & your software | > _______________________________________________ > boxbackup mailing list > boxbackup@boxbackup.org > http://lists.warhead.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/boxbackup From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Mon Sep 15 09:58:15 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (boxbackup@boxbackup.org) Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 10:58:15 +0200 Subject: [Box Backup] Changes in bbackupd.conf ignored Message-ID: <48CE23A7.6070403@ogersoft.at> I installed boxbackup - both server and client run on a ubuntu 8.04 box. After working around some ubuntu-introduced bugs (install scripts broken) by using the excelent howto from www.boxbackup.org i could to a inital backup-test. I use snapshot mode. My first BackupLocations look like: home { Path = /home ExcludeDir = /home/mainuser } There are some testusers around with about 150 mb data and they are stored as expeced by typing: bbackupctl sync Now after that successful test I wanted to backup the data of the mainuser (about 9 GB) and changed the bbackupd.conf to: home { Path = /home ExcludeDir = /home/mainuser/.ssh ExcludeDir = /home/mainuser/special } After that change I restarted the boxbackup-client (bbackupd) and did a new: bbackupctl sync This was unbelievably fast and space efficient. It endet after 1 second with a successful message and does not need one MB space more on the server! So I was a little in doubt and did a bbackupquery "compare -aq" quit which told me about a endless list of missing files on the server. So it looks like bbackupquery recognizes the changed bbackupd.conf, but bbackupctl does not. Has anybody an idea what I did wrong? gerhard From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Mon Sep 15 10:12:22 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Chris Wilson) Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 10:12:22 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Box Backup] Changes in bbackupd.conf ignored In-Reply-To: <48CE23A7.6070403@ogersoft.at> References: <48CE23A7.6070403@ogersoft.at> Message-ID: Hi Gerhard, On Mon, 15 Sep 2008, gerhard.oettl.ml@ogersoft.at wrote: > After that change I restarted the boxbackup-client (bbackupd) and did a > new: > > bbackupctl sync > > This was unbelievably fast and space efficient. It endet after 1 second with a > successful message and does not need one MB space more on the server! bbackupctl sync does not wait for the sync to finish, it returns as soon as it's started. You want "sync-and-wait" for that. Or just check your system logs to see when it says "finished scanning local files"> > So it looks like bbackupquery recognizes the changed bbackupd.conf, but > bbackupctl does not. bbackupd has to recognise it. Did you run bbackupctl reload to tell it to reload the config file? Cheers, Chris. -- _____ __ _ \ __/ / ,__(_)_ | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK | / (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Ruby/Perl/SQL Developer | \ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU : free your mind & your software | From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Mon Sep 15 19:22:08 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (boxbackup@boxbackup.org) Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 20:22:08 +0200 Subject: [Box Backup] Changes in bbackupd.conf ignored In-Reply-To: References: <48CE23A7.6070403@ogersoft.at> Message-ID: <48CEA7D0.3060407@ogersoft.at> Chris Wilson schrieb: > Hi Gerhard, > > On Mon, 15 Sep 2008, gerhard.oettl.ml@ogersoft.at wrote: > >> After that change I restarted the boxbackup-client (bbackupd) and did a >> new: >> >> bbackupctl sync >> >> This was unbelievably fast and space efficient. It endet after 1 second with a >> successful message and does not need one MB space more on the server! > > bbackupctl sync does not wait for the sync to finish, it returns as soon > as it's started. So the following output: bbackupctl sync Using configuration file /etc/boxbackup/bbackupd.conf Daemon configuration summary: AutomaticBackup = false UpdateStoreInterval = 0 seconds MinimumFileAge = 0 seconds MaxUploadWait = 0 seconds Succeeded. is a little missleading for a newbe like me - sounds like it finished uploading. > You want "sync-and-wait" for that. The boxbackup version of the 0.10+really0.10-1ubuntu3 package does not know this parameter: bbackupctl sync-and-wait Using configuration file /etc/boxbackup/bbackupd.conf Daemon configuration summary: AutomaticBackup = false UpdateStoreInterval = 0 seconds MinimumFileAge = 0 seconds MaxUploadWait = 0 seconds ERROR. (Check command spelling) And the manpage does not mention a "sync-and-wait" though it sounds like it does what I expected that "bbackupctl sync" would do ;-) > Or just check your > system logs to see when it says "finished scanning local files"> > >> So it looks like bbackupquery recognizes the changed bbackupd.conf, but >> bbackupctl does not. > > bbackupd has to recognise it. Did you run bbackupctl reload to tell it to > reload the config file? I did a /etc/init.d/boxbackup-client restart Watching tcpdump on port 2201 for a while I would say it works heavyly and I have to be more patient. thanks gerhard From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Mon Sep 15 21:21:24 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Chris Wilson) Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 21:21:24 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Box Backup] Changes in bbackupd.conf ignored In-Reply-To: <48CEA7D0.3060407@ogersoft.at> References: <48CE23A7.6070403@ogersoft.at> <48CEA7D0.3060407@ogersoft.at> Message-ID: Hi Gerhard, On Mon, 15 Sep 2008, gerhard.oettl.ml@ogersoft.at wrote: > > bbackupctl sync does not wait for the sync to finish, it returns as > > soon as it's started. > > So the following output: > > bbackupctl sync > > Using configuration file /etc/boxbackup/bbackupd.conf > Daemon configuration summary: > AutomaticBackup = false > UpdateStoreInterval = 0 seconds > MinimumFileAge = 0 seconds > MaxUploadWait = 0 seconds > Succeeded. > > is a little missleading for a newbe like me - sounds like it finished uploading. Thanks, I've improved the wording in trunk to make it clearer, I hope. > > You want "sync-and-wait" for that. > > The boxbackup version of the 0.10+really0.10-1ubuntu3 package does not > know this parameter: Sorry, it wasn't implemented in 0.10, you'll either need to upgrade or find another way to wait for the end of the sync. > And the manpage does not mention a "sync-and-wait" though it sounds like > it does what I expected that "bbackupctl sync" would do ;-) Sorry, the man page is quite out of date, we have too many different kinds of documentation with no way to keep them all in sync. But it does say this about the sync command: "Initiates a backup to the store of whatever needs to be backed up." which at least hints that it only starts the sync, not waiting for it to finish. > > bbackupd has to recognise it. Did you run bbackupctl reload to tell it > > to reload the config file? > > I did a /etc/init.d/boxbackup-client restart That would do it as well. The manual page does also list the reload command, which implies that the daemon will not reload its configuration until asked to do so. Cheers, Chris. -- _____ __ _ \ __/ / ,__(_)_ | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK | / (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Ruby/Perl/SQL Developer | \ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU : free your mind & your software | From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Tue Sep 16 00:08:08 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Chris Wilson) Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:08:08 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Box Backup] backup-finish question In-Reply-To: <20080813100501.5372de72@matrix.tuxianer.homelinux.net> References: <20080813100501.5372de72@matrix.tuxianer.homelinux.net> Message-ID: Hi Torsten and all, On Wed, 13 Aug 2008, Torsten wrote: > at every backup run backup-start is executed successfully. > > But backup-finish is not executed always. If there is an error, then > only backup-error is run. Is this the desired behavior ? Sorry for the delay in replying. You are right that backup-finish should always be run. I'll fix that very soon. Thanks for pointing it out. However, I think there should be an event for backup-ok as well. I'm planning to add this, but unfortunately this will mean that people will have to adjust their notify scripts again. Hopefully this will only affect "early adopters" of 0.11, but if anybody wants to speak against this, please do so now. I also plan to add an option to stop the suppression of duplicate events, as there are many situations where you would want them (e.g. anyone who wants a report generated after every backup), and it's not at all clear whether the most useful setting for the backup-ok event would be to allow or disable it. Ideally, I think, notification scripts could do this themselves, for example by tracking the last reported backup state and sending a notification whenever it changes. However, if anyone objects or has a better plan, please speak up now. Finally, I'm planning to add some extra parameters to the notification script calls that happen at the end of a backup (backup-finish, backup-ok, backup-error, read-error and store-full) to pass session statistics to the notify script, to help with generating useful reports without grepping the syslog. This should not affect backwards compatibility, as existing scripts should just ignore the extra parameters, I hope. But again, please speak up if you object. Cheers, Chris. -- _____ __ _ \ __/ / ,__(_)_ | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK | / (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Ruby/Perl/SQL Developer | \ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU : free your mind & your software | From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Tue Sep 16 00:08:08 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Chris Wilson) Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:08:08 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Box Backup] backup-finish question In-Reply-To: <20080813100501.5372de72@matrix.tuxianer.homelinux.net> References: <20080813100501.5372de72@matrix.tuxianer.homelinux.net> Message-ID: Hi Torsten and all, On Wed, 13 Aug 2008, Torsten wrote: > at every backup run backup-start is executed successfully. > > But backup-finish is not executed always. If there is an error, then > only backup-error is run. Is this the desired behavior ? Sorry for the delay in replying. You are right that backup-finish should always be run. I'll fix that very soon. Thanks for pointing it out. However, I think there should be an event for backup-ok as well. I'm planning to add this, but unfortunately this will mean that people will have to adjust their notify scripts again. Hopefully this will only affect "early adopters" of 0.11, but if anybody wants to speak against this, please do so now. I also plan to add an option to stop the suppression of duplicate events, as there are many situations where you would want them (e.g. anyone who wants a report generated after every backup), and it's not at all clear whether the most useful setting for the backup-ok event would be to allow or disable it. Ideally, I think, notification scripts could do this themselves, for example by tracking the last reported backup state and sending a notification whenever it changes. However, if anyone objects or has a better plan, please speak up now. Finally, I'm planning to add some extra parameters to the notification script calls that happen at the end of a backup (backup-finish, backup-ok, backup-error, read-error and store-full) to pass session statistics to the notify script, to help with generating useful reports without grepping the syslog. This should not affect backwards compatibility, as existing scripts should just ignore the extra parameters, I hope. But again, please speak up if you object. Cheers, Chris. -- _____ __ _ \ __/ / ,__(_)_ | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK | / (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Ruby/Perl/SQL Developer | \ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU : free your mind & your software | From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Tue Sep 16 08:45:44 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Torsten) Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 09:45:44 +0200 Subject: [Box Backup] backup-finish question In-Reply-To: References: <20080813100501.5372de72@matrix.tuxianer.homelinux.net> Message-ID: <20080916094544.392068ac@matrix.tuxianer.homelinux.net> Hi Chris, every single function you plan sounds good to me. Especially extra parameters to backup-events. I think changing the notification script should not be a problem, because 0.11 is still an release candidate. Btw, are there new plans to release? nice day, Torsten > Hi Torsten and all, > > On Wed, 13 Aug 2008, Torsten wrote: > > > at every backup run backup-start is executed successfully. > > > > But backup-finish is not executed always. If there is an error, then > > only backup-error is run. Is this the desired behavior ? > > Sorry for the delay in replying. You are right that backup-finish should > always be run. I'll fix that very soon. Thanks for pointing it > out. > > However, I think there should be an event for backup-ok as well. I'm > planning to add this, but unfortunately this will mean that people will > have to adjust their notify scripts again. Hopefully this will only affect > "early adopters" of 0.11, but if anybody wants to speak against this, > please do so now. > > I also plan to add an option to stop the suppression of duplicate events, > as there are many situations where you would want them (e.g. anyone who > wants a report generated after every backup), and it's not at all clear > whether the most useful setting for the backup-ok event would be to allow > or disable it. > > Ideally, I think, notification scripts could do this themselves, for > example by tracking the last reported backup state and sending a > notification whenever it changes. However, if anyone objects or has a > better plan, please speak up now. > > Finally, I'm planning to add some extra parameters to the notification > script calls that happen at the end of a backup (backup-finish, backup-ok, > backup-error, read-error and store-full) to pass session statistics to the > notify script, to help with generating useful reports without grepping the > syslog. This should not affect backwards compatibility, as existing > scripts should just ignore the extra parameters, I hope. But again, please > speak up if you object. > > Cheers, Chris. > -- > _____ __ _ > \ __/ / ,__(_)_ | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK | > / (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Ruby/Perl/SQL Developer | > \ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU : free your mind & your software | From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Tue Sep 16 20:31:57 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Chris Wilson) Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 20:31:57 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Box Backup] backup-finish question In-Reply-To: <20080916094544.392068ac@matrix.tuxianer.homelinux.net> References: <20080813100501.5372de72@matrix.tuxianer.homelinux.net> <20080916094544.392068ac@matrix.tuxianer.homelinux.net> Message-ID: Hi Torsten, On Tue, 16 Sep 2008, Torsten wrote: > every single function you plan sounds good to me. Especially extra parameters to backup-events. > > I think changing the notification script should not be a problem, because 0.11 is still an release candidate. > > Btw, are there new plans to release? I'll do a new release candidate real soon now, maybe in a week or so. Cheers, Chris. -- _____ __ _ \ __/ / ,__(_)_ | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK | / (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Ruby/Perl/SQL Developer | \ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU : free your mind & your software | From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Mon Sep 22 04:01:54 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (David H Kaufman) Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 23:01:54 -0400 Subject: [Box Backup] BoxBackup 0.11rc2 for Gentoo Message-ID: <26a19925bdde8b76979e757e81107157@kaufmanfamily.net> On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 10:59:05 +0100 (BST), Chris Wilson wrote: > Thanks, it would be great to have 0.11rc2 or higher (I'll do a new release > soon) in Gentoo, as 0.10 is so outdated. There is a bug open in the Gentoo bugzilla for boxbackup 0.11 (#205558). I have posted an ebuild for 0.11rc2 to this bug. I'd appreciate it if any other Gentoo users on this thread would take a look, check out the ebuild if they feel comfortable doing that, and post any further comments on the Gentoo bug. Hopefully this is a step towards getting an updated ebuild into Portage. http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=205558 Thanks, David From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Mon Sep 22 15:18:48 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Torsten) Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 16:18:48 +0200 Subject: [Box Backup] Wiki problem Message-ID: <20080922161848.35b78d3b@matrix.tuxianer.homelinux.net> The Box Backup wiki actually prints errors. I do not know who maintains it. I think the server has a new python version which is not compatible. http://www.mail-archive.com/trac-users@googlegroups.com/msg08550.html Torsten From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Mon Sep 22 18:21:15 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (James O'Gorman) Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 18:21:15 +0100 Subject: [Box Backup] Wiki problem In-Reply-To: <20080922161848.35b78d3b@matrix.tuxianer.homelinux.net> References: <20080922161848.35b78d3b@matrix.tuxianer.homelinux.net> Message-ID: <48D7D40B.6080300@netinertia.co.uk> This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig4BF1A7B6FC02C6EF776C0472 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Torsten wrote: > The Box Backup wiki actually prints errors. I do not know who maintains= it. >=20 > I think the server has a new python version which is not compatible. >=20 > http://www.mail-archive.com/trac-users@googlegroups.com/msg08550.html Thanks, good catch. I had to do some system upgrades at the weekend to resolve some security issues with Python and Apache, looks like I missed this when I tested everything (I was more concerned about Subversion breaking!) Cheers, James --------------enig4BF1A7B6FC02C6EF776C0472 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJI19QSAAoJEP8Z3wLA10m97xEH/A1xxDOdW8OoHC+R3Zef6cDA faVbodQPzD2sjMs43ZND2PHAPyTMQWKKeiTQ2THz1BoUiU9MeDg2TClMDM0ggd9Z 3OzVQcIuJz7bJ4aZP1a+Ufvx2aZri+Kovnks83r/0fKNvIkJ8t9urr+1JKnFeZZx Vd6Z5o954z9SPzJT5JAg9hKPpyGjNu7VDKaQ59Fy2+1d4oy1VRs/WhQdiTwdXiVR rIcp8OJpNJPEahcd/fflV2TQJI7aDje+YJ81QZGlLNwH4jAHdGg2ZRPxYY5e8JXw 8Bi1uO6Qxs+sBlCQUHR8zkF7Dep2Wh9lsEOj3MAG5aMN4+Ghjgggpt9AK8utcjY= =rJll -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig4BF1A7B6FC02C6EF776C0472-- From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Mon Sep 22 18:48:31 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (James O'Gorman) Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 18:48:31 +0100 Subject: [Box Backup] Wiki problem In-Reply-To: <48D7D40B.6080300@netinertia.co.uk> References: <20080922161848.35b78d3b@matrix.tuxianer.homelinux.net> <48D7D40B.6080300@netinertia.co.uk> Message-ID: <48D7DA6F.70700@netinertia.co.uk> This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigFC2264692C3AA53BFBB91D65 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Right, it's all back up and running. Sorry about that, folks! James --------------enigFC2264692C3AA53BFBB91D65 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJI19p2AAoJEP8Z3wLA10m946QH/iqUmJ02TffQkLiKP3ozrBJJ sAm5SHkaUQkba79e40uh0u9he8ozwf2yvMGkSiV+mTsF6/PMU6e4MUACiEvSoifx fQkCu5XyixW83F4oe9P/xczbljXdE5hBkOW13DhPOolRX+IZH6iH63NeU4IpB+xU flPAX57Xek+tEm+OgADu1IHcxqRH5FY7zWfW5YhTQh+Uvc8Fi/E66n+RWT7bTwb9 CUmbEjvxIllx5JL1xqoedLkltMtpiBqpyKYaf5sc2RmUWFskCze6VZ590vbRp10w WHZvN6MPeJwiXTYlVd7ozcPQdfI+aE+2LNyOyXGIg7/v4EvH8BAgnxkCnG0Rw8w= =aXcJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigFC2264692C3AA53BFBB91D65-- From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Mon Sep 22 20:53:06 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Wolfgang Trexler) Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 21:53:06 +0200 Subject: [Box Backup] Wiki problem In-Reply-To: <48D7DA6F.70700@netinertia.co.uk> References: <20080922161848.35b78d3b@matrix.tuxianer.homelinux.net> <48D7D40B.6080300@netinertia.co.uk> <48D7DA6F.70700@netinertia.co.uk> Message-ID: <48D7F7A2.7080405@trexler.at> James O'Gorman schrieb: > Right, it's all back up and running. > > Sorry about that, folks! He who never caused an outage after a security update among you, throw a stone at him first. ;-) regards Wolfgang From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Wed Sep 24 11:50:29 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Matt Brown) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 11:50:29 +0100 Subject: [Box Backup] Searching with BoxBackup for files Message-ID: <34AB72CF-38F4-458E-8D3B-1F2879855E23@mbrown.co.uk> Hi, I dont think this is possible, and maybe not something that everyone would require (possible feature request). Is it possible to find a file or deleted file within a store of a client. I have a situation today where the user on the network knows he had a file called keys.doc, however unsure which directory it resided in. Chances are as we back up the entire /home partition we do have a copy in BB on the BB Store as a deleted file. How do I go about finding it, without going through every directory tree ?? Guess what I am looking for is a find or grep kind of function :) Matt Brown From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Wed Sep 24 12:12:10 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Ben Summers) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:12:10 +0100 Subject: [Box Backup] Re: Searching with BoxBackup for files In-Reply-To: <20080924110002.25047.12376.Mailman@fear.love.warhead.org.uk> References: <20080924110002.25047.12376.Mailman@fear.love.warhead.org.uk> Message-ID: <9243B357-D960-442F-B71E-96A739FEE00F@fluffy.co.uk> On 24 Sep 2008, at 12:00, Matt Brown wrote: > > I dont think this is possible, and maybe not something that everyone > would require (possible feature request). > > Is it possible to find a file or deleted file within a store of a > client. I have a situation today where the user on the network knows > he had a file called keys.doc, however unsure which directory it > resided in. Chances are as we back up the entire /home partition we do > have a copy in BB on the BB Store as a deleted file. > > How do I go about finding it, without going through every directory > tree ?? > > Guess what I am looking for is a find or grep kind of function :) How about using grep? bbackupquery "cd home" "list -rotds" quit | grep keys should do the job. Ain't UNIX grand? Ben From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Wed Sep 24 12:49:55 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Matt Brown) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:49:55 +0100 Subject: [Box Backup] Re: Searching with BoxBackup for files In-Reply-To: <9243B357-D960-442F-B71E-96A739FEE00F@fluffy.co.uk> References: <20080924110002.25047.12376.Mailman@fear.love.warhead.org.uk> <9243B357-D960-442F-B71E-96A739FEE00F@fluffy.co.uk> Message-ID: <3CA81DC1-5311-42A8-BE45-C3588F22D66E@mbrown.co.uk> > > How about using grep? > > bbackupquery "cd home" "list -rotds" quit | grep keys > > should do the job. Ain't UNIX grand? > > Ben Thanks Ben - sorry I forgot about output to console then grep :( Matt From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Wed Sep 24 16:30:46 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Charles Burrell) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 09:30:46 -0600 Subject: [Box Backup] Re:Searching with BoxBackup for files Message-ID: <8959a5260809240830r39d97267pea583e9abc0206b6@mail.gmail.com> ------=_Part_42305_20116441.1222270246624 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Searching your BBstore would be a powerful utility. To be honest, the lack of searching as well as a few other centralized server side utilities limit the use of Box Backup in high volume client environments. Matt, for now perhaps you could try to string together several commands and redirect the output of a complete file listing to a text file then grep that file. Good luck On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 5:00 AM, wrote: > Send boxbackup mailing list submissions to > boxbackup@boxbackup.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.warhead.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/boxbackup > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > boxbackup-request@boxbackup.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > boxbackup-admin@boxbackup.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of boxbackup digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Searching with BoxBackup for files (Matt Brown) > > --__--__-- > > Message: 1 > From: Matt Brown > To: boxbackup@boxbackup.org > Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 11:50:29 +0100 > Subject: [Box Backup] Searching with BoxBackup for files > Reply-To: boxbackup@boxbackup.org > > Hi, > > I dont think this is possible, and maybe not something that everyone > would require (possible feature request). > > Is it possible to find a file or deleted file within a store of a > client. I have a situation today where the user on the network knows > he had a file called keys.doc, however unsure which directory it > resided in. Chances are as we back up the entire /home partition we do > have a copy in BB on the BB Store as a deleted file. > > How do I go about finding it, without going through every directory > tree ?? > > Guess what I am looking for is a find or grep kind of function :) > > Matt Brown > > > > > > --__--__-- > > _______________________________________________ > boxbackup mailing list > boxbackup@boxbackup.org > http://lists.warhead.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/boxbackup > > > End of boxbackup Digest > -- Charles Burrell ------=_Part_42305_20116441.1222270246624 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline

Searching your BBstore would be a powerful utility. To be honest, the lack of searching as well as a few other centralized server side utilities limit the use of Box Backup in high volume client environments. Matt, for now perhaps you could try to string together several commands and redirect the output of a complete file listing to a text file then grep that file.

Good luck

On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 5:00 AM, <boxbackup-request@boxbackup.org> wrote:

Send boxbackup mailing list submissions to
boxbackup@boxbackup.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.warhead.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/boxbackup
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
boxbackup-request@boxbackup.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
boxbackup-admin@boxbackup.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of boxbackup digest..."

Today's Topics:

1. Searching with BoxBackup for files (Matt Brown)

--__--__--

Message: 1
From: Matt Brown <matt@mbrown.co.uk>
To: boxbackup@boxbackup.org
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 11:50:29 +0100
Subject: [Box Backup] Searching with BoxBackup for files
Reply-To: boxbackup@boxbackup.org

Hi,

I dont think this is possible, and maybe not something that everyone
would require (possible feature request).

Is it possible to find a file or deleted file within a store of a
client. I have a situation today where the user on the network knows
he had a file called keys.doc, however unsure which directory it
resided in. Chances are as we back up the entire /home partition we do
have a copy in BB on the BB Store as a deleted file.

How do I go about finding it, without going through every directory
tree ??

Guess what I am looking for is a find or grep kind of function :)

Matt Brown

--__--__--

_______________________________________________
boxbackup mailing list
boxbackup@boxbackup.org
http://lists.warhead.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/boxbackup

End of boxbackup Digest

--
Charles Burrell

------=_Part_42305_20116441.1222270246624-- From boxbackup@boxbackup.org Thu Sep 25 19:29:50 2008 From: boxbackup@boxbackup.org (Alexandre Mallais) Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 14:29:50 -0400 Subject: [Box Backup] Re:Searching with BoxBackup for files In-Reply-To: <8959a5260809240830r39d97267pea583e9abc0206b6@mail.gmail.com> References: <8959a5260809240830r39d97267pea583e9abc0206b6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <48DBD89E.4060405@avior.ca> It would really be a nice feature to be able to search the backup. We backup more than 1 TB of data, and it is really a pain in the ass looking one file. Would it be difficult to implement (I guess not?)? Charles Burrell wrote: > Searching your BBstore would be a powerful utility. To be honest, the > lack of searching as well as a few other centralized server side > utilities limit the use of Box Backup in high volume client > environments. Matt, for now perhaps you could try to string together > several commands and redirect the output of a complete file listing to > a text file then grep that file. > > Good luck > > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 5:00 AM,

> wrote: > > Send boxbackup mailing list submissions to > boxbackup@boxbackup.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.warhead.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/boxbackup > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > boxbackup-request@boxbackup.org > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > boxbackup-admin@boxbackup.org > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of boxbackup digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Searching with BoxBackup for files (Matt Brown) > > --__--__-- > > Message: 1 > From: Matt Brown > > To: boxbackup@boxbackup.org > Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 11:50:29 +0100 > Subject: [Box Backup] Searching with BoxBackup for files > Reply-To: boxbackup@boxbackup.org > > Hi, > > I dont think this is possible, and maybe not something that everyone > would require (possible feature request). > > Is it possible to find a file or deleted file within a store of a > client. I have a situation today where the user on the network knows > he had a file called keys.doc, however unsure which directory it > resided in. Chances are as we back up the entire /home partition we do > have a copy in BB on the BB Store as a deleted file. > > How do I go about finding it, without going through every directory > tree ?? > > Guess what I am looking for is a find or grep kind of function :) > > Matt Brown > > > > > > --__--__-- > > _______________________________________________ > boxbackup mailing list > boxbackup@boxbackup.org > http://lists.warhead.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/boxbackup > > > End of boxbackup Digest > > > > > -- > Charles Burrell