Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 16:56:40 -0500 (CDT) From: "Paul Seniura" <pdseniura@techie.com> To: "Lukas Ertl" <le@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Q's about IBM TSM (was Re: HEADSUP: ibcs2 and svr4 compat headedfor history) Message-ID: <20040628215640.C14935C29@techpc04.okladot.state.ok.us> In-Reply-To: <20040628212811.W658@korben.in.tern> References: <1088385053.18392.3.camel@newton.aipo.gov.au><20040628192527.1C2755C29@techpc04.okladot.state.ok.us><20040628212811.W658@korben.in.tern>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Lukas, This is gettin' more OT... > On Mon, 28 Jun 2004, Paul Seniura wrote: > > >> The linux client trips over the whole filesystem overlay thing badly and > >> I'm not sure disabling that to run just the TSM client is a good idea. > >> (Plus I hate the idea of maintaining custom kernel patches.) > > > > I've had no luck, likewise, with the Linux TSM client. > > I had never considered another compatible client until > > seeing your msg just now. > > I'm using the Linux client with the nullfs hack. Works rather well. > At least the Linux client isn't as awful as the ancient SCO client. I google'd and didn't like what I saw. Stuff about nullfs not being too kosher on -Current. :( If I may ask, which version of the TSM client are you using? And I suppose the server-side version, too? That might make a big difference here. > > IBM says they need more "user base" to even consider a BSD > > flavor... go figure... > > OK, go out and annoy your IBM sales droid. I did. No luck so far, but if > they ask for user base, give them some figures. :-) Yep dun did that & have the burns to prove it. ;) We'll keep trying, tho... My krak about "go figure" was a slam on the number of OSX users that would need TSM while IBM supports _it_. I guess IBM wants the G5 to actually succeed by mustering them into "The Enterprise". Imagine that! But TPTB here will *not* go for G5s, but that ain't stoppin' me trying to convince them... I can already show them tons of $$ savings per workstation for our power users... ;) FWIW I'd rather advocate for a 'free' backup system. We're having to wait for the SCO-IBM lawsuit, before TPTB here will even consider testing Linux/390. And yeah I know the state of Freebsd/390 is rather dismal, having trouble writing drivers for IBM's big-irons etc. You'd need to test with a standalone 390 and their engineers on call when it crashes. ;) I successfully cloned OS/2 systems with nothing more than Info-Zip and boot diskettes, storing the 'image' in RECFM=U datasets on the mainframe, with enough network on the boot dskts to fetch it. The clone was absolutely complete with extended attributes & icons etc. all intact and even booted correctly. This is more a tribute to how well Info-Zip supports the various platforms. Probably will do my own backups on this FreeBSD box the same way. End-users, tho, will be a different matter -- they won't know what to do without a GUI. <ouch!> ;) Any of this would be possible nowadays with custom bootable CDs. I wonder what it would entail with your nullfs hack and having to _restore_ a user's system from TSM? > cheers, > le -- thx, Paul Seniura.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040628215640.C14935C29>