Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 7 Apr 1999 13:04:19 -0500
From:      Nathan Ahlstrom <nrahlstr@winternet.com>
To:        Joseph Scott <joseph@randomnetworks.com>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: BRU 2000 and FBSD 3.1
Message-ID:  <19990407130419.B15292@winternet.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9904071325440.11660-100000@sonic.digital-web.net>; from Joseph Scott on Wed, Apr 07, 1999 at 01:29:46PM -0400
References:  <Pine.BSF.4.10.9904071325440.11660-100000@sonic.digital-web.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Joseph Scott <joseph@randomnetworks.com> wrote:
> 
> 	I was looking at BRU 2000 (the commericial edition) to do backups
> on some new FBSD 3.1 machines that will be going up soon.  I was wondering
> if anyone had any stories, bad or good, in regards to BRU on FBSD;
> especially 3.1 and the X11 interface.
> 
> 	By the way, I came across BRU at http://www.freebsdmall.com/ and
> if we decide to go for it that's where we'll order it from.

I use the BRU 2000 to backup the FreeBSD.org servers.  It is ok.  I runs 
fine on 2.2-STABLE, 3.1-STABLE, and -current (pre KVM changes).  The version 
I have is a BSDI statically linked version.  Are they now offering a native 
FreeBSD version?  

[I should note that I have not tried it since the KVM changes were put into 
-stable and -current, I hope it still works.]

My only complaint is that it has few provisions for tape management, which
is why I would prefer to use amanda24.  If amanda supported backup images 
larger than the tape size. 

I have not used the X11 interface.

-- 
Nathan Ahlstrom                        FreeBSD: http://www.FreeBSD.org/
nrahlstr@winternet.com                 PGP Key ID: 0x67BC9D19


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990407130419.B15292>