[Box Backup] Re: boxbackup digest, Vol 1 #248 - 2 msgs

[Robert Grzankowski]

On Fri, 2005-01-21 at 12:00 +0000, boxbackup-request at fluffy.co.uk wrote:
> Send boxbackup mailing list submissions to
> 	boxbackup at fluffy.co.uk
> 
> 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 at fluffy.co.uk
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	boxbackup-admin at fluffy.co.uk
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of boxbackup digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. Re: first backup (Per Thomsen)
>    2. Re: Assertion failure (Chris Wilson)
> 
> --__--__--
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 06:53:34 -0800
> From: Per Thomsen <pthomsen at reedtz.com>
> To: boxbackup at fluffy.co.uk
> Subject: Re: [Box Backup] first backup
> Reply-To: boxbackup at fluffy.co.uk
> 
> On 1/19/05 11:45 AM, Robert Grzankowski wrote:
> 
> >  Hello!
> >  I have configured two servers for boxbackup services. One is client 
> > and server for another one and vice versa. I have troubles to get 
> > first backup files from each other. The same thing in lazy mode and 
> > when I want to get snapshot.
> >  Do I need to make first backup files localy and then move that to 
> > remote host?
> >  For example: I want /var/temp to be backed up on A server. I created 
> > an account, certified this and resent certified key to the B host. On 
> > the B host I configured client :
> >  /usr/local/bin/bbackupd-config /etc/box lazy 1234567 hostA /var/temp
> >  When i start  /usr/local/bin/bbackupctl sync i got:
> >  AutomaticBackup = true
> >    UpdateStoreInterval = 3600 seconds
> >    MinimumFileAge = 1 seconds
> >    MaxUploadWait = 0 seconds
> >  Succeeded.
> >  And nothing else :( I mean , no new files transferred beetwen host A 
> > and B.
> >  Thanks in advance for any help
> 
> Can you send us your config files from hosts A (bbstored.conf) and B 
> (bbackupd.conf)?
> 
> Also look in the log files on the client machine (B) for any output that 
> might explain the lack of backups. Usual location is /var/log/box, if 
> syslog is configured as described in 
> http://www.fluffy.co.uk/boxbackup/server.html. Let us know what (if 
> anything) you see.
> 
> Are you getting backups to run in the other direction (if I understand 
> your configuration correctly, both servers are running bbstored)?
> 
> Thanks,
> Per
> 
> -- 
> Per Reedtz Thomsen | Reedtz Consulting, LLC | F: 209 883 4119
> V: 209 883 4102    |   pthomsen at reedtz.com  | C: 209 996 9561
> GPG ID: 1209784F   |  Yahoo! Chat: pthomsen | AIM: pthomsen
> 
> 
> --__--__--
> 
Hi!
I realized yesterday, I misunderstood configuration description and
didn't realized i haven't set backulocation points from command line.
I edited configs files, set those points and everything going well.
Thank you for the answer.
BTW great application!!! Thanks to the authors.

Robert


> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 20:29:51 +0000 (GMT)
> From: Chris Wilson <chris at qwirx.com>
> To: boxbackup at fluffy.co.uk
> Subject: Re: [Box Backup] Assertion failure
> Reply-To: boxbackup at fluffy.co.uk
> 
> Hi Ben,
> 
> > You're running a debug version of the daemon. The check is desirable there, 
> > because inode reuse over the lifetime of a test daemon run is incredibly 
> > unlikely, suggesting a bug which should be caught.
> 
> OK, that explains it, thanks.
> 
> > If you're modifying the code, look into it. If you're just running the daemon 
> > to back up your files, swap to the release version. You might also want to 
> > wipe the contents of /var/bbackupd just to be on the safe side.
> 
> I deliberately hacked the makebuildenv.pl to remove the RELEASE flag, 
> because I wanted to see the debugging messages, hoping that they would 
> help me to work out why exclusions aren't working for me, in the spirit of 
> Kernighan's views about preferring debug statements to debugger sessions. 
> However, they turned out not to be as useful as I hoped, and I hadn't 
> anticipated the side effects. Sorry for the confusion.
> 
> Cheers, Chris.