On Sun, 2009-05-10 at 00:53 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > I think it is, although in the last year, the number of incidents of people > coming to the amanda-users list for help with rpms has dropped noticeably. I > have NDI if its because the rpms are now working "out of the box" or if its > because there seems to be a wider selection of ways to do it that appeal to > the user, newbie or old hand, meaning amanda is getting onto fewer systems. I > personally like the set it up once and forget it until you need to recover > something that amanda offers. Heck, even the $3500 a seat Arkeia takes far > more fiddling than amanda, every time you want to run it. Hell of a way to > run a train. IMNSHO, the eye candy doesn't cut it, good backups do. > > My last post in this thread. However, if the OP installs the amanda rpms and > it works the way it is supposed to, I would very much like to hear about that. > > Most folks just go away once the question has been answered/argued about > without ever letting us know of the successes or failures of our chosen > methods. That leaves both of us in the dark calling each other less than > experts. And that isn't pretty to the bystanders. ---- I don't know a thing about arkeia. I use and have used Computer Associates BrightStor ArcServe at a few clients, both Windows and Linux versions and it's OK. I'm at the point now where there won't be any more purchases of ArcServe. I use Backup Exec on one Windows server and hate it. It's only virtue was that it was really cheap. I used to use amanda with most of my Linux clients. It's a very good program but is entirely command line driven unless you purchase Zamanda and thus my clients have no chance at restoring files without my involvement. Several years ago, I switched over to Bacula because Kern Sibbald is a genius (see apcupsd) and there are other tools like their web based backup reports and a webmin module and now they have 'BAT' (Bacula Administration Tool) which is a very nice QT4 driven console application. In short, I think amanda has lost much of the newer installations to Bacula and not because amanda isn't a very effective backup program...it is, but because their development has been too slow to embrace new features. A current feature list can be found here... http://bacula.org/en/dev-manual/Current_State_Bacula.html What I have discovered is that the software compression sophistication of amanda is moot when using LTO which is pretty much all I use any more. The sophistication of changer handling in Bacula makes using the 8 and 16 tape changer mechanisms a piece of cake. I have installations with Windows, Macintosh and Linux clients and the client setup is essentially the same regardless. Sorry to tell you this but amanda is yesterdays news. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
