Summary: | Maybe Bacula should be splitted | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Jose Gonzalez Gomez <jgonzalez.openinput> |
Component: | [OLD] Server | Assignee: | App-Backup Team <app-backup> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | d, josiah.ritchie, m.debruijne, martin.adler, maze, rodrigo, zul |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Attachments: |
bacula-init-conf.tar.bz
bacula-1.34.4-clientonly.patch |
Description
Jose Gonzalez Gomez
2004-10-20 14:16:58 UTC
Created attachment 42372 [details]
bacula-init-conf.tar.bz
Tar containing splitted init scripts with corresponding conf.d files.
First of all, it seems that my message (posted also in the server list) has caused a bit of stir. Please accept my sincere apologies if my message was offensive in any way, as that wasn't my intention. After that, let's go back to work... I have been thinking of splitting the build process too, with three possible options: 1. Include some use flags to indicate the kind of build (director daemon, file daemon, storage daemon and console) 2. Split the ebuild in four different ebuilds: bacula-dir, bacula-fd, bacula-sd and bacula-console 3. Leave it as it is now and build everything always. I don't know if there are other packages with the same problem, and in that case, what approach has been taken. I don't even know if it's worth the effort of splitting the build. So before spending my time on this I would like to hear anything from Gentoo devs. First of all let my say that I agree with your reasoning (and think it was a good joke :) Now back to the serious part. I believe option 2 you mentioned in Comment #2 it the best possible solution. With the small addition of a bacula build that would just depend on the 4 ones you suggested. The problem seems to be that bacula itself has no support for the completely separated builds we are talking about. So I'm including here a partial solution more like option 1 of Comment #2. This patch for bacula-1.34.4.ebuild creates an USE flag: clientonly (as per bacula configure option --enable-client-only). When this USE flag is enabled, you only get bacula-fd. This patch could be easily and quickly deployed and I think it should. Then we could try to get to more complex/complete solutions later. If there is need, I can create a version for bacula-1.34.5.ebuild also. Created attachment 43306 [details, diff]
bacula-1.34.4-clientonly.patch
zul: would you like to join app-backup? What is the status of this? I just got around to bacula (switched from amanda) and find it a great system, but just this bug bugs me. :-) I agree that option 2 of comment #2 would be the cleanest solution. And that "editing the init script" got me aswell. The new init script for 1.36.3-r1 ebuild allows /etc/conf.d/bacula to select which daemons to run. It would be good if you guys could take a look at the new ebuild and make suggestions. |