CentOS - Jul 2015 - was, Backups solution from WinDoze to linux, is, looking at bareos [SOLVED]

I see that bareos is, actually, the descendent of bacula. I've been
looking at some of the documentation, and searching, but one thing I'd
like to find out, before I try to implement it, and that I haven't found
yet: am I going to have to play games, to get it to back up to online
storage, as opposed to tape? (I suppose I'm thinking tar, here, as "no
games".) Is there some default setup for this scenario?

       mark

m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote:
> I see that bareos is, actually, the descendent of bacula. I've been
> looking at some of the documentation, and searching, but one thing I'd
> like to find out, before I try to implement it, and that I haven't
found
> yet: am I going to have to play games, to get it to back up to online
> storage, as opposed to tape? (I suppose I'm thinking tar, here, as
"no
> games".) Is there some default setup for this scenario?
>
Never mind. More googling found it.

Anyone know if this will ever make it into one of the std. repos, or is
there a lawsuit ongoing, or....?

      mark

No ongoing lawsuit, AFAIK. I use their upstream repos just fine.

Oh, and I don't use tape. I use the "File" and
"GlusterFile" storage types,
which work great. Gluster's a great fit, because of how easy it is to
expand your storage dedicated to backups. Just add another brick or two...

On Thu, Jul 16, 2015, 5:46 PM  <m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote:
> m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote:
> > I see that bareos is, actually, the descendent of bacula. I've
been
> > looking at some of the documentation, and searching, but one thing
I'd
> > like to find out, before I try to implement it, and that I haven't
found
> > yet: am I going to have to play games, to get it to back up to online
> > storage, as opposed to tape? (I suppose I'm thinking tar, here, as
"no
> > games".) Is there some default setup for this scenario?
> >
> Never mind. More googling found it.
>
> Anyone know if this will ever make it into one of the std. repos, or is
> there a lawsuit ongoing, or....?
>
>       mark
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>

On 07/16/2015 04:25 PM, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote:
> m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote:
>> I see that bareos is, actually, the descendent of bacula. I've been
>> looking at some of the documentation, and searching, but one thing
I'd
>> like to find out, before I try to implement it, and that I haven't
found
>> yet: am I going to have to play games, to get it to back up to online
>> storage, as opposed to tape? (I suppose I'm thinking tar, here, as
"no
>> games".) Is there some default setup for this scenario?
>>
> Never mind. More googling found it.
> 
> Anyone know if this will ever make it into one of the std. repos, or is
> there a lawsuit ongoing, or....?
There is not an ongoing lawsuit the best I can tell (there is a settled
confidential one) .. BUT .. there is also nothing wrong with bacula
charging for a license, especially in an enterprise environment (as long
as they are playing nicely with all open source licenses, etc).  I would
therefore not necessarily expect to see a change in RHEL with respect to
this issue.  At least not specifically because of $$$ for licenses.

I have no inside information of any kind .. but going on the rules for
EPEL (ie, not interfering with RHEL packages) and not necessarily seeing
a problem for RHEL (at least RHEL 7) from a licensing perspective, I
personally would expect that bareos MIGHT replace bacula at some point
in future versions of Fedora and then that MIGHT be rolled into RHEL 8
and then make it into CentOS as part of that version.

Again, I have no direct knowledge, but that would be my expectation.

Thanks,
Johnny Hughes


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20150719/bb90a0c3/attachment-0001.sig>