bacula version conflict question
 

hey, i got kind of an unusual question about bacula. okay, so i have a server and a pc. i recently upgraded the pc to fc22. the server has fc20.

the dumb thing is that the max repo'ed version of bacula for fc20 is 5.2.13-18 and the min repo'ed version for fc22 is 7.0 something. well, the issue is that 7 can communicate backwards to 5.2 but 5.2 cannot communicate forward to 7 so right now i cannot back up my pc.

what i am trying to do is figure out the best way around this before i go and do something stupid. so i tried to install bacula 5.2 on my pc but downloading the rpms and manually installing but i need like 20 dependencies and i am guessing that right now some of those dependencies are being used otherwise which is going to lead to a spiderweb of issues which i do not want to deal with.

i am going to upgrade the server eventually to a newer version however i am not there yet. i am not sure what to do here short of installing a full version of bacula on my pc and then running one on my server too.

any advice how to handle this?

bacula-server = fc20 = 7.0
bacula-client = fc22 = 5.2
upgrade the server to fc22 or downgrade the pc to fc20?

FYI: Unnecessary. You only need the client. Installing the full version on the PC will not fix anything.

Man, I love rsync more and more every day.

well, i appreciate the input but reformatting my pc backward takes about a day+ to get it back to where it should be. reformatting my server takes 2+ days to get it back to where it should be. using fedup takes a day+ from what i was able to understand from studying it and is iffy.

i wanted to avoid those three because i plan on reformatting later in the year when i am ready to, a few months away BUT my pc has the more vital data on it that needs to be backed so i will have to figure out some other method for a bit...rsync is possible but i need to figure that out. i appreciate your bringing that up.

i was hoping for something like a few hours of configuring or something but from all of the research...i have done it just does not seem to be there.

Well, just this once, have a google on other backup tools for Linux - there are lots to choose from. You may find some that have the same version of SW for both OS versions.

Later, can I also recommend using Centos instead of Fedora for your server. Its the same as RHEL but free, and more stable than Fedora.

Since the bacula-director does all the work, it should poll the agent on the intended host and initiate the backup.
I don't believe the bacula-client initiates the backups, so have you tried an actual backup? And if so, what was the result?
Why do you think they have to be at the same version?

you are correct about that, habitual, the director contacts the client and tells it to start the back-up which it does. it is the next step that is the issue, then the client contacts the storage daemon to send it the information to be stored. bacula can communicate backwards however it cannot communicate forwards (between major revisions) so when the client (5.2) sends the data to the storage daemon (7.0), that is forward communication, it hangs and then fails. i have tried it several times and tried a few other things as well.

i think they are different versions because the only two versions in their respective repositories are for fc22 7.0 and for fc 20 5.2. when i noticed that is when i started looking into the communication and closer at the logs and that is when i stumbled onto the root of the issue.

chris, i have been seriously considering switching to centos for my server but then i run into the same issue. right now i have a server, my pc and a dvr but in the long run what i would like to do is build a specific back-up server to back eveything up onto which will manage about 20-30 tb of storage. in that instance i would then have 4 main computers. the dvr i dont really need to have backed up but it would be nice. my pc and my server have very vital data, the pc having the most vital, that i REALLY would like backed up.

i like fedora on my pc. i dont like ubuntu for that but i like using mythbunutu for my dvr. i have had issues on my dvr with fedora and myth. my server is fedora but i have been considering centos and lastly the back-up is almost certainly to be freenas because it is light and runs excellently off a usb stick and from a web browser. well then you have up to 4 different versions of linux running and very likely would run into the same issue. i know that ubuntu right now is only running version 5.2. but say fedora updates or something and centos or freenas doesnt then i run into the same issue and it is not just that, i think i am having the same issue with cups too (fc20 has 1.7 while fc22 has 2.0).

so, i have to either start considering a different back-up option + which i have not done because i was sold on bacula for its broad configurability so i can set up back-ups so many different ways or i have to figure out a way around the communication issues which doesnt seem like it is going to happen or all pcs have to have the same version of the same flavor of linux so say fc22 on all.

Fair enough.
As I say, there are (too) many backup options and I'm sure there are plenty that don't require matched versions at both ends.

A basic one might be rsync, or look eg at amanda/zmanda https://www.zmanda.com/quick-backup-setup.html.
This example (zmanda HOWTO in 15 mins) is a bit old, but it demonstrates that that tool is designed to backup different OSes eg 4 different ones in that article.
:)
Have a look.

PS: Actually a 'neutral' method is preferable unless you want to lock all your systems into the same OS+version - also you may need to recover onto a different OS/version at some point...

I ditched bacula as a backup solution when I realized the archive format is proprietary (requires bacula) and therefore adds an 'extra' step to the restoration process. Too bulky for my needs.

rsync is universal.

You could maybe build bacula 7 from source on fc22...
It would be nice to see these indicators you say you found in the logs.

I assume you have tried eliminating the obvious by telnet'ing to the bacula_server:ports from fc22?

yeah, habitual, the more i think about it the more i agree with your thinking there. if they had the files there, just the raw files then that would dramatically increase the flexibility in restoring things or recovering lost data. i dont mind using bacula to restore but it seems that only being able to have bacula restore creates an inflexibility in the way you can deal with things.

right now i am going to set it up because i got sick and decided to rebuild my server now but i think long term i am going to look to another solution.

here is the error codes from bacula...

the link took me to a page that basically said it was a password issue but i knew that wasnt the situation and it mentions bad storage response so then i watched output from webacula and the way it happened and i could see from there that a connection to my pc from the director was happening and a job was being started but not finished. since the client it such simple code and i can reasonably expect from that it was some kind of autentication issue, i looked into the versions and then researched and found the developer saying specifically that 5.2 cannot communicate forwards to 7.0.

This could be the issue.

Bacula 7 repo config
 

Had a similar issue and after a bit of Google-Fu found Chris Couture's post

http://www.chriscouture.com/installi...ebon-centos-7/

About half-way through post, he shows how to setup YUM repo for EPEL repo and version 7 of Bacula.

Worked for me, YMMV.