[Rear-users] Hi to the ReaR community
schlomo at schapiro.org
Wed Jan 25 23:33:36 CET 2012
yes, I am also in favour to separate dist files and local additions. But I
would still encourage users to extend ReaR directly to "hack" it. And yes,
since we at work do everything in packages (RPM), I would most definitively
recommend everybody who wants to customize ReaR to build their own
"company-rear" package that requires rear and adds some scripts or default
And yes, everybody should be happy in their own fashion.
On 25 January 2012 14:50, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote:
> It would not make any more sense for me to submit a patch to invoke a
> restore over ssh from my backuppc server than it would to expect
> RedHat to patch my IP addresses into the distributions.
I must disagree with this comparison, it seems a bit extreme for my taste.
If backuppc as a backup software offers a standard way of restoring data
then I don't see any reason why not to add backuppc support into ReaR so
that users install backuppc and rear and with BACKUP=BACKUPPC ReaR will
"just do the right thing".
If OTOH every user uses backuppc completely different then you are probably
right and backuppc support in ReaR will always be lacking. Again, I woul
let the backuppc users solve and decide upon that particular problem and
just help them to use ReaR.
For example, it might be that the BACKUP=EXTERNAL method should see more
attention as it allows one to plug any backup and restore command into
ReaR. One common example that I also use myself is customized rsync backup
scripts that will never fit into the standard backup methods in ReaR. All
that needs are a few config lines in local.conf or in site.conf. I am
pretty sure that backuppc "integration" would be very simple with the
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rear-users