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

Re: Debian

On Tuesday 07 June 2005 11:20, José Luis Tallón wrote:
> Kern Sibbald wrote:
> >Hello,
> >
> >I've just been looking at the new Debian Sarge release 3.1, and it looks
> > very interesting.  I'm not 100% happy with my Fedora FC3 system, so am
> > thinking about loading it here and trying it out. It is quite a learning
> > process though needing a lot of time ... :-)
> Well, i will be more than happy to help you with that, if you so desire :-)

OK, thanks.  I'm downloading the first 4 isos with jigdo at the moment.  I'm 
also reading the installation notes (rather large).

> >However, in looking through the packages, I see that they distribute just
> >about every backup package that exists, *except* Bacula.  Can you tell me
> > why Bacula is not on their list?
> Sorry, Kern... but which list have you looked up in?
> (this is so that we can have it corrected as soon as possible)

I looked in "Utilities" where it says backup programs live.  I found Amanda 
and afbackup there.  Then I though I looked in both the compressed and 
uncompressed lists for 3.1 Sarge and did not find it.

Well, after Marius provided the link, I found it was in "Administration 
Utilities" AND it is also in both the full compressed and uncompressed lists.  
I was just dumb and missed it.

> Bacula has indeed been released with Debian 3.1 "Sarge": version
> 1.36.2-2sarge1 [1] or [2] (which is, as you might remember, 1.36.2 with
> all fixes from 1.36.3 backported to it)

Oh, nice!  Thanks.

> > If not, can you tell me who I should talk to
> >about resolving any problems they may have with Bacula?
> There are none, don't you worry.
> The only problems we had previously (due to license incompatibilities),
> you solved them very promptly and appropiately, by making a small
> license change(the exception to allow linking OpenSSL in, even though it
> is GPL-incompatible); This was almost a year ago.

OK thanks. I'm not worrying any more.

> Since then, the only times when Bacula has not been included in the
> "candidate" set of packages (the /testing/ distribution) have been those
> when i had problems solving problems with the auto-configuration
> scripts; Even then, those were just about three times in the last couple
> of years [since i packaged and started maintaining Bacula for Debian]

OK, this is no problem. It is normal that there are a few minor delays. I 
prefer that it installs correctly rather than worrying about deadlines.

> In fact, that is the reason why i hardly ever update the DEBs in
> SourceForge anymore: it is usually much more convenient for users to
> apt-get them. However, i still upload "snapshots" when i am satisfied
> with their quality --which does not happen so often--, so as to have
> another backup.


> >Thanks.
> Thank you, indeed, for your contribution to Free Software.
> This release is a bit better just by including your work, Bacula -- just
> like it is because of the remaining circa nine thousand packages.
> Kind regards,
>     José Luis Tallón

Thanks again for all your work on packaging Bacula.  Hopefully, I'll learn how 
you build your debs ... :-)

> [1] http://packages.debian.org/bacula
> [2] http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_packages.pl? \
>      searchon=names&version=all&exact=1&keywords=bacula

Best regards,



Reply to: