On Monday 05 June 2006 21:41, Dan Langille wrote:
> On 5 Jun 2006 at 21:32, Kern Sibbald wrote:
> > If you cannot build a statically linked FD, then you can still do a
> > bare metal recovery by simply reloading your OS from CDs or whatever
> > then using a pre-built dynamically linked Bacula FD to restore the
> > user files and modified system files -- a bit more time consuming but
> > perfectly feasable.
>
> If I were to recover a failed machine, I would reinstall the OS, and
> then install bacula-fd using package system for my OS. Then go from
> there. I like the idea of the rescue-cd. It is attractive.
>
> But my money is on the "install-the-OS-first" method. When things
> have gone wrong, I want to use what I already know.
Yes, everyone has his/her preferred technique, and in my previous email I
wanted everyone to be clear that I consider the Bacula Rescue disk a very
important tool (especially because it captures your current disk partitioning
scheme), but that there are also other ways of recovering a system.
The Rescue Disk has saved me from several disasters that would have required a
full system reload. One was a stupid "rm -rf xxx *" that should have been "rm
-rf xxx*", and another was some glitch with the system. In both cases, I was
able to boot into an unbootable system, setup the FD in less than 5 minutes
and restore all the missing or damaged files.
I have some new ideas about how Bacula can automatically detect broken/missing
files and restore only those files. This is something I will probably work on
on the next version (I've already slipped a bit of code into Bacula with this
in mind ...).
--
Best regards,
Kern
(">
/\
V_V
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
