Filipe Brandenburger wrote on 2008-12-07 11:05:00 -0500 [[BackupPC-devel] Changing TopDir on config file]:
> Looking at the history of the list at SourceForge, I found this:
> Which contains a patch that, indeed, fixes the problem.
thank you for confirming that. I did not get around to testing the fix.
> It's a fairly
> obvious patch, since it's setting the CPool and Pool variables right
> after TopDir is read from the configuration, and not before.
> I'm trying to get Fedora to include that patch in their RPM [...]
alex bodnaru wrote on 2008-12-08 05:31:04 +0200 [Re: [BackupPC-devel] Changing TopDir on config file]:
> for that, i had to patch backuppc a little, but i hope that will be fixed
> here's my solution, as posted here before.
Err, for getting the fix included in the Fedora package? I believe you misread
the original post.
> > after an inquiry (and perl is not my language) i did the fix: append the
> > following two lines to /usr/share/backuppc/lib/BackupPC/Lib.pm:
Apparently meaning you duplicated the assignments. Otherwise, your fix
seems to correspond with mine, though I didn't check exactly.
Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote on 2008-12-07 23:15:08 -0500 [Re: [BackupPC-devel] Changing TopDir on config file]:
> It does seem like there is a bug in the code since
... it does not work as it should :-). There seems to be no argument on that
> Alternatively, what I do is I keep TopDir as is but make it a symbolic
> link to my actual TopDir (which is actually an NFS share).
... but that is a users issue, so it does not really belong on
> Note that an unintended advantage of using nfs (without the no_root_squash
> parameter) is that root (ironically) is not allowed to walk the
> BackupPC directory tree which keeps virus checks and chkrootkit away
> which avoids the problem you mention above.
It's not a bug, it's a feature? Shouldn't chkrootkit really be configurable to
skip directories? Or, presuming chkrootkit's point of view is correct, isn't
/var/lib/backuppc the wrong place to put the pool, i.e. shouldn't future
Debian/Ubuntu packages put it under /srv, for instance? Not that I'd want to
think about the update path from current package versions ...