backuppc-users — General list for user discussion, questions and support

Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC and EPEL10

[Richard S. <hob...@gm...>]

Let me amend, it looks like we need perl-Net-FTP-RetrHandle but it may yet
have other deps...

On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 5:00 PM Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 7:06 AM Jamie Burchell via BackupPC-users <
> bac...@li...> wrote:
>
>> Is the current bad karma due to the build failing? I still see this:
>>
>>
>>
>> Error: Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides
>> perl(Net::FTP::AutoReconnect) needed by BackupPC-4.4.0-20.el10_2.x86_64
>> from brew-139020571 - nothing provides perl(Net::FTP::RetrHandle) needed by
>> BackupPC-4.4.0-20.el10_2.x86_64 from brew-139020571 (try to add
>> '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or '--nobest' to use not
>> only best candidate packages) Installation of
>> BackupPC-0:4.4.0-20.el10_2.x86_64 failed. See dnf-3 command output above
>> for more information.
>>
>
> Those are run time dependencies not build time dependencies so I didn't
> see the issue when building. Those will need to be built for EPEL 10 as
> well but I'm not the maintainer.
>
> It looks like perl-libnet needs to be built for EPEL 10...
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
>

Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC and EPEL10

[Richard S. <hob...@gm...>]

On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 7:06 AM Jamie Burchell via BackupPC-users <
bac...@li...> wrote:

> Is the current bad karma due to the build failing? I still see this:
>
>
>
> Error: Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides
> perl(Net::FTP::AutoReconnect) needed by BackupPC-4.4.0-20.el10_2.x86_64
> from brew-139020571 - nothing provides perl(Net::FTP::RetrHandle) needed by
> BackupPC-4.4.0-20.el10_2.x86_64 from brew-139020571 (try to add
> '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or '--nobest' to use not
> only best candidate packages) Installation of
> BackupPC-0:4.4.0-20.el10_2.x86_64 failed. See dnf-3 command output above
> for more information.
>

Those are run time dependencies not build time dependencies so I didn't see
the issue when building. Those will need to be built for EPEL 10 as well
but I'm not the maintainer.

It looks like perl-libnet needs to be built for EPEL 10...

Thanks,
Richard

[BackupPC-users] backuppc virtual machine vmware free

[Mia M. <mia...@gm...>]

Hi everyone, I've been using BackupPC installed on Debian 5 for a long
time, and it works great with shared folder backups. I wanted to ask, is it
possible to back up entire VMware free virtual machines?

Re: [BackupPC-users] debian patch for localconfig.pl

[Paul F. <pg...@fo...>]

"G.W. Haywood" wrote:
 > Hi there,
 > 
 > On Sat, 15 Nov 2025,  Paul Fox via backuppc-users wrote:
 > 
 > > jbk wrote:
 > > 
 > > > Unless I'm misunderstanding this, is the localconfig.pl to 
 > > > define a backup schedule for the server?
 > >
 > > No, not specifically.  It holds any configuration you might otherwise
 > > put in config.pl, which is read prior to localconfig.pl.  All it
 > > really does is let you segregate local changes from distributed
 > > changes, if that's useful to the administrator.
 > >
 > > Honestly, now that we're talking about it, I can't see why this shouldn't
 > > just be added to backuppc as a permanent feature.  It's pretty lightweight,
 > > and useful.  So I guess I'm championing it after all.
 > 
 > Hmmmm...
 > 
 > You can get the entire patchset from (for example)
 > 
 > https://udd.debian.org/patches.cgi?src=backuppc&version=4.4.0-11
 > 
 > and easily apply the localconfig part.  It's a one-line change in
 > .../lib/BackupPC/Storage/Text.pm.  Although I've gone through all the
 > patches, checked whether or not they should be aplide here at the top
 > of the stream and applied those that I think shoudld, I haven't spent
 > a lot of time on this one and I haven't applied it.  At this stage I
 > don't propose to.  There's a good chance I've missed something but as
 > it stands I'm not sure that I understand what the patch is for.  I'm
 > also not sure that it will do what everyone here seems to think that
 > it will do.  So I have reservations.  Below is how I read it.  I'd be
 > very pleased if others will chime in with their own take on it.
 > 
 > The BackupPC configuration routines read the configuration files into
 > a big hash.  With the Debian patch, when localconfig.pl is present it
 > will be read *before* BackupPC's main config.pl, and anything in your
 > localconfig.pl which *also* exists in config.pl will be overridden by
 > the values in config.pl, so if you wanted the values in localconfig.pl
 > to be used in preference to those in config.pl, you'd have to comment
 > them out or whatever in config.pl.  So far so not especially useful.

I've just done some testing on 4.4.0.

    - I was surprised to find that the debian patch is still in place,
	in the code, since when I originally filed the issue it was
	because it appeared that my local changes were no longer being
	applied in backuppc 4, and so I assumed the patch had been
	dropped.

    - I find that it (currently) works exactly as you describe: 
	config entries found in config.pl take precedence over those
	found in localconfig.pl.  So presumably this was also
	happening during my initial use of backuppc 4, and it wasn't
	that the patch had been dropped -- my changes just wasn't
	having any effect, since my localconfig.pl changes were being
	"hidden" by the original values in config.pl.

It seems that something happened in the backuppc 3 to 4 transition
which changed how the config is read, or stored, or processed, and it
broke the debian patch.  I don't have the knowledge (of either perl,
or backuppc internals) to track down what changed.

Since the Debian patch has been broken for several years now, it seems
like there must not be much demand for the functionality.  Given that,
it seems that backuppc issue #486 is moot, and can be closed with no
changes.

If the old behavior is desireable, then probably a new "enhancement"
issue should be created.

paul
=----------------------
paul fox, pg...@fo... (arlington, ma, where it's 31.5 degrees)

Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC and EPEL10

[Jamie B. <ja...@ib...>]

Is the current bad karma due to the build failing? I still see this:



Error: Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides
perl(Net::FTP::AutoReconnect) needed by BackupPC-4.4.0-20.el10_2.x86_64
from brew-139020571 - nothing provides perl(Net::FTP::RetrHandle) needed by
BackupPC-4.4.0-20.el10_2.x86_64 from brew-139020571 (try to add
'--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or '--nobest' to use not
only best candidate packages) Installation of
BackupPC-0:4.4.0-20.el10_2.x86_64 failed. See dnf-3 command output above
for more information.



*From:* Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...>
*Sent:* 19 November 2025 12:39
*To:* General list for user discussion, questions and support <
bac...@li...>
*Subject:* Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC and EPEL10



On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 3:53 PM Kenneth Porter <sh...@se...>
wrote:

You could provide a DNF/yum/RPM repo by deploying to COPR.

https://developer.fedoraproject.org/deployment/copr/about.html



Not really worth it at this point, this update will go to stable in about a
week. Of course good karma can help it get there faster:



https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2025-d4b409390d



Thanks,

Richard

Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC and EPEL10

[Richard S. <hob...@gm...>]

On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 3:53 PM Kenneth Porter <sh...@se...>
wrote:

> You could provide a DNF/yum/RPM repo by deploying to COPR.
>
> https://developer.fedoraproject.org/deployment/copr/about.html


Not really worth it at this point, this update will go to stable in about a
week. Of course good karma can help it get there faster:

https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2025-d4b409390d

Thanks,
Richard

Re: [BackupPC-users] Problems disk usage after migrated/reinstalled from 3.3 to 4.4

[G.W. H. <ba...@ju...>]

Hi there,

On Sun, 16 Nov 2025, klxout wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2025, G.W. Haywood wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Nov 2025, klxout wrote:
> > >
> > >> I have similar issues described in
> > >> https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/issues/418
> > >> ...
> > >> ...
> > >> Any suggestion to solve this problems?
> >
> > First let's make sure that there *is* a problem. ...
> > ...
> > 1.
> >
> > Did you run BackupPC_nightly by hand?
> >
> > How many times has it been run on the nightly backup schedule since
> > your most recent install of BackupPC version 4?
> > ...
> 
> I have forced executed multiples times changing time, and now after
> 7 day seems that some files were purged but not all because I have a
> retention full 2 days and incremental 1 day

I'm sure that BackupPC is working just fine.

Over on Github I've just comitted b343cb5 to add a bit more logging to
BackupPC_nightly.  Now if $Conf{XferLogLevel}>=3 in the configuration,
then the log shows how many files - otherwise eligible for deletion -
were skipped because their mtime was more recent than the hard-coded
value of 7 days prior to the time of the nightly run.  It also logs
the number of blocks occupied by those files.

>From the most recent BackupPC_nightly run here:

8<--------------------------------------------------------------------------
2025-11-19 01:00:01 Running 1 BackupPC_nightly jobs from 0..15 (out of 0..15)
2025-11-19 01:00:01 Running BackupPC_nightly -m -P 13 0 255 (pid=29902)
2025-11-19 01:00:01 Next wakeup is 2025-11-19 02:00:00
2025-11-19 01:00:02 BackupPC_nightly now running BackupPC_refCountUpdate -m -s -c -P 13 -r 0-255
2025-11-19 01:00:02  admin : __bpc_pidStart__ 29907
2025-11-19 01:00:20 Started incr backup on ...
...
...
...
2025-11-19 01:27:17 Started incr backup on ...
2025-11-19 01:46:01 Finished incr backup on ...
2025-11-19 02:00:13 Next wakeup is 2025-11-19 03:00:00
2025-11-19 02:10:28  admin : BackupPC_refCountUpdate total errors: 0
2025-11-19 02:10:28  admin : BackupPC_refCountUpdate skipped deleting 557 unused files which currently occupy a total of 16048 blocks
2025-11-19 02:10:28  admin : __bpc_pidEnd__ 29907
2025-11-19 02:10:29 BackupPC_nightly now running BackupPC_sendEmail
8<--------------------------------------------------------------------------

There's been a suggestion that seven days might be a bit long.  At the
moment I'm in no hurry to change it, or to make it a configuration
option, but I'd consider PRs for the latter.  Note that EditConfig.pl
is (not to put too fine a point on it) a nightmare.  If anyone wants
to take up the gauntlet there's a debug version of sorts here.

-- 

73,
Ged.

Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC and EPEL10

[Kenneth P. <sh...@se...>]

You could provide a DNF/yum/RPM repo by deploying to COPR.

https://developer.fedoraproject.org/deployment/copr/about.html

Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC and EPEL10

[G.W. H. <ba...@ju...>]

Hi there,

On Tue, 18 Nov 2025, Jamie Burchell wrote:

> I just discovered that BackupPC is currently not available in EPEL10 and
> disappointing, it looks like it may not be added:
>
>> _*Unless someone else wants to support it, I don't plan to branch
>> BackupPC as the upstream developer "disappeared" in the last couple years
>> and there has been no activity.*_
>
> Source: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2370641
>
> I have added a comment that the project has a new maintainer and activity
> now. It would be a shame for it to not become easily available in new RHEL
> versions.

Don't worry, sometimes things on the ground get a bit ahead of the
tracking systems.  The Red Hat maintainer and I have been in touch
with each other since the middle of the year - in fact it was he who
encouraged me to take my chainsaw to the BackupPC-XS build scripts
when I'd really rather have been getting my teeth into rsync-bpc.
He's well aware of developments in BackupPC.  Occasionally I'll BCC
him in my posts to this List.

On Tue, 18 Nov 2025, Kenneth Porter wrote:

> I'd recommend processing any outstanding Bugzilla items in their tracker
> and eliminating the need for whatever patches they've had to make in the
> EPEL package. Make it as painless as possible to update their EPEL package.

These are the issues for Red Hat/BackupPC that I know of:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=backuppc

Apart from the 'new version available' alerts, all relate to the use
of the zlib bundled in BackupPC-XS, and were eliminated when I removed
the zlib code from BackupPC-XS 0.63rc1.  Bear in mind that the issues
were raised semi-automatically, and most installations would never use
the bundled zlib in any case.  Issues 2366405, 2366407, 2366411 and
2366425 are all the same one for four different Red Hat distributions.

If anyone has any other pointers to issue trackers for BackupPC (and
the two supporting packages, BackupPC-XS and rsync-bpc, and of course
*other* than those on github/backuppc/), please post to this thread.

> One could also set up a tiny yum repo with only the BackupPC packages
> for the world to use. I've gone this way for a lot of 3rd party
> packages. MariaDB and the Kea DHCP server, for example. You get the
> benefits of package management without needing to stay with an ancient
> version.

It's easy enough to set up the repo, and if the target system doesn't
already have Apache that's pretty straightforward too.  If there's an
Apache already on the target system I'm not quite so sure - comments?

-- 

73,
Ged.

Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC and EPEL10

[Jamie B. <ja...@ib...>]

That’s fine, I think I just need to wait for Rocky to release 10.2 – I
guess it’s all still relatively new. I only just recently noticed
DigitalOcean had Rocky 10 images available and was giving them a spin to
see if there are any issues with packages I usually use. There are a few
not available yet.





*From:* Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...>
*Sent:* 18 November 2025 15:15
*To:* General list for user discussion, questions and support <
bac...@li...>
*Cc:* Jamie Burchell <ja...@ib...>
*Subject:* Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC and EPEL10



Since I just requested the branches for EPEL everything built for 10.2.



I can request branches for 10.1 but 10.0 is EOL so it's not possible for me
to build for.



it may be possible to build 10.0 packages in COPR but I don't see a direct
option.



Thanks,

Richard

Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC and EPEL10

[Richard S. <hob...@gm...>]

Since I just requested the branches for EPEL everything built for 10.2.

I can request branches for 10.1 but 10.0 is EOL so it's not possible for me
to build for.

it may be possible to build 10.0 packages in COPR but I don't see a direct
option.

Thanks,
Richard

Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC and EPEL10

[Jamie B. <ja...@ib...>]

> As of today 11/18 it appears that it is being built in the EPEL10 testing
repository.



Unfortunately the build is failing, citing a dependency issue. I also can’t
test it, because it’s in the 10.2 branch rather than 10.0 (Rocky Linux is
only at 10.0 at the moment)…



*From:* jbk <jb...@kj...>
*Sent:* 18 November 2025 14:35
*To:* bac...@li...
*Subject:* Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC and EPEL10



On 11/17/25 8:55 AM, Jamie Burchell wrote:

Hi



I just discovered that BackupPC is currently not available in EPEL10 and
disappointing, it looks like it may not be added:



> _*Unless someone else wants to support it, I don't plan to branch
BackupPC as the upstream developer "disappeared" in the last couple years
and there has been no activity.*_



Source: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2370641



I have added a comment that the project has a new maintainer and activity
now. It would be a shame for it to not become easily available in new RHEL
versions.



Jamie

As of today 11/18 it appears that it is being built in the EPEL10 testing
repository.

So it seems it will be available. Back when I installed Rocky9 backuppc was
not available then either so I built it with help using the mock build
system per this post here:
Backuppc build on Rocky9
<https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/where-is-backuppc/7278>

I was able to upgrade directly from that build to the epel one once that
was available.
I suppose you would have to use F41 for your source files now or F40.

-- 

Jim KR

Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC and EPEL10

[jbk <jb...@kj...>]

On 11/17/25 8:55 AM, Jamie Burchell wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I just discovered that BackupPC is currently not available 
> in EPEL10 and disappointing, it looks like it may not be 
> added:
>
> > _/Unless someone else wants to support it, I don't plan to 
> branch BackupPC as the upstream developer "disappeared" in 
> the last couple years and there has been no activity./_
>
> Source: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2370641
>
> I have added a comment that the project has a new 
> maintainer and activity now. It would be a shame for it to 
> not become easily available in new RHEL versions.
>
> Jamie
>
As of today 11/18 it appears that it is being built in the 
EPEL10 testing repository.

So it seems it will be available. Back when I installed 
Rocky9 backuppc was not available then either so I built it 
with help using the mock build system per this post here:
Backuppc build on Rocky9 
<https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/where-is-backuppc/7278>

I was able to upgrade directly from that build to the epel 
one once that was available.
I suppose you would have to use F41 for your source files 
now or F40.

-- 
Jim KR

Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC and EPEL10

[Kenneth P. <sh...@se...>]

I'd recommend processing any outstanding Bugzilla items in their tracker 
and eliminating the need for whatever patches they've had to make in the 
EPEL package. Make it as painless as possible to update their EPEL package.

One could also set up a tiny yum repo with only the BackupPC packages 
for the world to use. I've gone this way for a lot of 3rd party 
packages. MariaDB and the Kea DHCP server, for example. You get the 
benefits of package management without needing to stay with an ancient 
version.

[BackupPC-users] BackupPC and EPEL10

[Jamie B. <ja...@ib...>]

Hi



I just discovered that BackupPC is currently not available in EPEL10 and
disappointing, it looks like it may not be added:



> _*Unless someone else wants to support it, I don't plan to branch
BackupPC as the upstream developer "disappeared" in the last couple years
and there has been no activity.*_



Source: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2370641



I have added a comment that the project has a new maintainer and activity
now. It would be a shame for it to not become easily available in new RHEL
versions.



Jamie

Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC in a commercial setting / support status

[Steven B. <ste...@qu...>]

Hi Ged,

Great.  We've been monitoring the activity on the project.  It's very 
encouraging to see it being actively developed again - very much 
appreciate your support.

We'll look into setting up a test env to take the RC for a spin.

Steve

On 13/11/2025 21:23, G.W. Haywood wrote:
> Caution: This sender is from outside of Quintessa. Do not click links 
> or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the 
> content is safe.
>
>
> Hi there,
>
> On Tue, 3 Jun 2025, Steven Benbow wrote:
>
>> ... if something can be put in place we would be interested to
>> participate further with some minor developments (UI tweaks etc.)
>> that we've been considering.  But in the first instance a new
>> release, just so that we can point to a 2025 version, would
>> certainly help!
>
> Yesterday I released version 0.63 of BackupPC-XS on Github.
>
> This evening I also released version 4.4.1rc1 of BackupPC itself.
>
> You can get them both by downloading the master branch 'Zip' file, or
> by cloning with git.
>
> The new version of BackupPC requires the new version of BackupPC-XS,
> although you can use version 0.62 if you make a one-character change
> to the .../bin/BackupPC Perl script which specifies 0.63.
>
> Although I'm running them here on a production server, please consider
> them experimental at this stage.  As - obviously - they have not been
> packaged by any distribution, if you want to test them they will need
> to be installed from source.  I expect BackupPC-XS 0.63 builds to be a
> source of entertainment for quite some time.
>
> These releases are completely compatible with backups made by V4.4.0,
> there is no need for any change to any previously backed up data.
>
> At this stage there is no change to rsync-bpc, which together with the
> smbclient interface is where the bulk of what I (jokingly) describe as
> my free time will be spent for very probably the rest of this year.
>
> At least I hope so.  I'm here to help.
>
> -- 
>
> 73,
> Ged.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> BackupPC-users mailing list
> Bac...@li...
> List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
> Wiki:    https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki
> Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/

-- 
Dr Steven J Benbow BSc MSc PhD CMath MIMA
Quintessa Ltd, The Hub, 14 Station Road, Henley-on-Thames, Oxfordshire, RG9 1AY, UK
Tel: 01491 636246  DD: 01491 630051  Web: http://www.quintessa.org

Quintessa Limited is an employee-owned company registered in England, Number 3716623.
Registered office: Quintessa Ltd, The Hub, 14 Station Road, Henley-on-Thames, Oxfordshire, RG9 1AY, UK

If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify pr...@qu... and delete it from your systems.  Our privacy and other policies are available from https://www.quintessa.org/about-us/policies

Re: [BackupPC-users] Nightly routine running at the same time as backups

[Guillermo R. <gui...@gm...>]

> I thought that the blackout period meant that no _*backups*_ would take
> place. So in my example, backuppc wakes up every hour but doesn’t backup
> between 6-23 but the nightly would run at 8?
>

Yes, that is correct, the blackout only affects backup jobs. In your
example, backups will be scheduled to run at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, and the
nightly will run at 8. I have the same configuration.

Best regards,
Guillermo

Re: [BackupPC-users] Problems disk usage after migrated/reinstalled from 3.3 to 4.4

[Adam P. <pr...@lo...>]

Would this
https://sourceforge.net/p/backuppc/mailman/message/59193166/

help to answer the question?

Short: Old V3 backups are still in the cpool in "single digit" 
subdirectories. V4 always creates a "two digit" subdirectories. I already 
deleted the V3 subdirs and reclaimed the space.

Adam Pribyl



On Sun, 16 Nov 2025, klxout wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'll  try to answer your questions:
>
> First let's make sure that there *is* a problem.  In some commands
> below you may need to change the logged-in user ID to one which can
> read the necessary files (often, for example, to user 'backuppc').  --->
> Sorry I don't know how to check this, user is running backuppc is backuppc
> and seems ok, any other check?
>
> 1.
>
> Did you run BackupPC_nightly by hand?
>
> How many times has it been run on the nightly backup schedule since
> your most recent install of BackupPC version 4?
> I have forced executed multiples times changing time, and now after 7 day
> seems that some files were purged but not all  because I have a
> retention full 2 days and incremental 1 day
>
> config
> [image: imatge.png]
>
>
> ***
> 2025-11-16 18:00:00 Running 2 BackupPC_nightly jobs from 0..15 (out of
> 0..15)
> 2025-11-16 18:00:00 Running BackupPC_nightly -m -P 2 0 127 (pid=67245)
> 2025-11-16 18:00:00 Running BackupPC_nightly -P 2 128 255 (pid=67246)
> 2025-11-16 18:00:00 Next wakeup is 2025-11-17 04:00:00
> 2025-11-16 18:00:01 BackupPC_nightly now running BackupPC_refCountUpdate -m
> -s -c -P 2 -r 128-255
> 2025-11-16 18:00:01 BackupPC_nightly now running BackupPC_refCountUpdate -m
> -s -c -P 2 -r 0-127
> 2025-11-16 18:00:01  admin : __bpc_pidStart__ 67259
> 2025-11-16 18:00:01  admin1 : __bpc_pidStart__ 67258
> 2025-11-16 18:00:23  admin1 : __bpc_pidEnd__ 67258
> 2025-11-16 18:00:23 Finished  admin1  (BackupPC_nightly -P 2 128 255)
> 2025-11-16 18:00:47  admin : __bpc_pidEnd__ 67259
> 2025-11-16 18:00:47 BackupPC_nightly now running BackupPC_sendEmail
> 2025-11-16 18:00:47 Finished  admin  (BackupPC_nightly -m -P 2 0 127)
> 2025-11-16 18:00:47 Pool nightly clean removed 0 files of size 0.00GB
> 2025-11-16 18:00:47 Pool is 0.00GB, 0 files (0 repeated, 0 max chain, 0 max
> links), 0 directories
> 2025-11-16 18:00:47 Cpool nightly clean removed 0 files of size 0.00GB
> 2025-11-16 18:00:47 Cpool is 0.00GB, 0 files (0 repeated, 0 max chain, 0
> max links), 0 directories
> 2025-11-16 18:00:47 Pool4 nightly clean removed 0 files of size 0.00GB
> 2025-11-16 18:00:47 Pool4 is 0.00GB, 0 files (0 repeated, 0 max chain, 0
> max links), 0 directories
> 2025-11-16 18:00:47 Cpool4 nightly clean removed 2710 files of size 309.23GB
> 2025-11-16 18:00:47 Cpool4 is 1413.54GB, 95357 files (0 repeated, 0 max
> chain, 1496 max links), 16467 directories
> 2025-11-16 18:00:47 Running BackupPC_rrdUpdate (pid=67276)
> 2025-11-16 18:00:47  admin-1 : RRD updated: date 1763337600; cpoolKb
> 0.000000; total 1351783435.940430; poolKb 0.000000; pool4Kb 0.000000;
> cpool4Kb 1447466560.000000
> 2025-11-16 18:00:47 Finished  admin-1  (BackupPC_rrdUpdate)
> ***
>
> It seems that no tall backups are purge, I suspect...
>
>
> 2.-
>
> find /local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/ -type f -mtime +9 | head
> root@opencde-backups-1:/local/var/lib/backuppc#  find
> /local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/ -type f -mtime +7 | head
> /local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/b2/b3b31903e2aca45f31a482993eaed662
> /local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/b2/b3b3b58e806d43a38e983909305aa39c
> /local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/b2/b3b3a0ba5c8b13f51c9a87bfc7c56b3e
> /local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/b2/b3b3f43686dd71f467b9c14d04f7d993
> /local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/b2/b3b25f7087776b1a4b1e1698e89c337d
> /local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/b2/b3b3c6f036d4833e86db3803d88e8023
> /local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/ba/b2bb85d79e6345166ff714eec5543699
> /local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/ba/b3ba25b2c0e22981764533d2a25c75a6
> /local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/ba/b3ba52777bf7a5c8853cdb78ca4def07
> /local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/ba/b3ba794ee40fc2f1549bd96ba64f1757
>
>
> 3.-
>
>  grep 'my $minMtime'  /usr/share/backuppc/bin/BackupPC_refCountUpdate
>            my $minMtime = time() - 7 * 24 * 3600;
>
>
>
> Missatge de G.W. Haywood <ba...@ju...> del dia dt., 11 de
> nov. 2025 a les 14:50:
>
>> Hi there,
>>
>> On Tue, 11 Nov 2025, klxout wrote:
>>
>>> I have similar issues described in
>>> https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/issues/418
>>>
>>> I have the same problem recently upgraded debian with 3.3 backuppc to
>>> debian 13 with latest backuppc 4.4 from debian repositories and space is
>>> increasing.... seems files are never purged
>>>
>>> Now I have reinstalled backuppc with a fresh install using apt-get remove
>>> --purge backuppc* and I'm evaluating the results
>>>
>>> in the logs appears always 0 space recovered from v4 pool (only v4 is
>>> enabled as it was a default install)
>>>
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:00 Running 2 BackupPC_nightly jobs from 0..15 (out of
>> 0..15)
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:00 Running BackupPC_nightly -m -P 11 0 127 (pid=50769)
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:00 Running BackupPC_nightly -P 11 128 255 (pid=50770)
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:00 Next wakeup is 2025-11-11 04:00:00
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:01 BackupPC_nightly now running BackupPC_refCountUpdate
>> -m -s -c -P 11 -r 128-255
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:01 BackupPC_nightly now running BackupPC_refCountUpdate
>> -m -s -c -P 11 -r 0-127
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:01  admin : __bpc_pidStart__ 50783
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:01  admin1 : __bpc_pidStart__ 50782
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:16  admin : __bpc_pidEnd__ 50783
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:16 BackupPC_nightly now running BackupPC_sendEmail
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:16 Finished  admin  (BackupPC_nightly -m -P 11 0 127)
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:37  admin1 : __bpc_pidEnd__ 50782
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Finished  admin1  (BackupPC_nightly -P 11 128
>>> 255)*2025-11-10 18:00:37 Pool nightly clean removed 0 files of size
>> 0.00GB
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Pool is 0.00GB, 0 files (0 repeated, 0 max chain, 0
>> max links), 0 directories
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Cpool nightly clean removed 0 files of size 0.00GB
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Cpool is 0.00GB, 0 files (0 repeated, 0 max chain, 0
>> max links), 0 directories
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Pool4 nightly clean removed 0 files of size 0.00GB
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Pool4 is 0.00GB, 0 files (0 repeated, 0 max chain, 0
>> max links), 0 directories
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Cpool4 nightly clean removed 0 files of size 0.00GB*
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Cpool4 is 782.54GB, 92649 files (0 repeated, 0 max
>> chain, 1632 max links), 16452 directories
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Running BackupPC_rrdUpdate (pid=50797)
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:38  admin-1 : skipping repeated RRD update for the same
>> day: last update time is 1762819200
>>> 2025-11-10 18:00:38 Finished  admin-1  (BackupPC_rrdUpdate)
>>>
>>> Any suggestion to solve this problems?
>>
>> First let's make sure that there *is* a problem.  In some commands
>> below you may need to change the logged-in user ID to one which can
>> read the necessary files (often, for example, to user 'backuppc').
>>
>> 1.
>>
>> Did you run BackupPC_nightly by hand?
>>
>> How many times has it been run on the nightly backup schedule since
>> your most recent install of BackupPC version 4?
>>
>> 2.
>>
>> In the Github issue (#418) on which you commented, did you read
>> Craig's post of Feb 25, 2021 at
>>
>> https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/issues/418#issuecomment-785825325
>>
>> in which he talks about the mtimes of pool files?  Did you try any of
>> Craig's suggestions there?
>>
>> Does your filesystem properly set the 'x' bit in file metadata?
>>
>> Do you know roughly how old (looking at mtimes of the files) is the
>> oldest file in your 'cpool'?
>>
>> If not, what's the output of
>>
>>    find /POOLDIR/ -type f -mtime +9 | head
>>
>> where /POOLDIR/ is the full path to your cpool ?  (For example on a
>> system *here*, that would be
>>
>>    find /var/lib/BackupPC/cpool/ -type f -mtime +9 | head
>>
>> because the cpool directory *here* is in /var/lib/BackupPC/ - but note
>> that your cpool directory might not be in the same place as mine).
>>
>> 3.
>>
>> What's the output of
>>
>>    grep 'my $minMtime' /path/to/BackupPC_refCountUpdate
>>
>> where /path/to/ is the path to your BackupPC Perl scripts.
>>
>> --
>>
>> 73,
>> Ged.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> BackupPC-users mailing list
>> Bac...@li...
>> List:    https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
>> Wiki:    https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki
>> Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/
>>
>

Re: [BackupPC-users] Problems disk usage after migrated/reinstalled from 3.3 to 4.4

[klxout <kl...@gm...>]

Hi,

I'll  try to answer your questions:

First let's make sure that there *is* a problem.  In some commands
below you may need to change the logged-in user ID to one which can
read the necessary files (often, for example, to user 'backuppc').  --->
Sorry I don't know how to check this, user is running backuppc is backuppc
and seems ok, any other check?

1.

Did you run BackupPC_nightly by hand?

How many times has it been run on the nightly backup schedule since
your most recent install of BackupPC version 4?
I have forced executed multiples times changing time, and now after 7 day
seems that some files were purged but not all  because I have a
retention full 2 days and incremental 1 day

config
[image: imatge.png]


***
2025-11-16 18:00:00 Running 2 BackupPC_nightly jobs from 0..15 (out of
0..15)
2025-11-16 18:00:00 Running BackupPC_nightly -m -P 2 0 127 (pid=67245)
2025-11-16 18:00:00 Running BackupPC_nightly -P 2 128 255 (pid=67246)
2025-11-16 18:00:00 Next wakeup is 2025-11-17 04:00:00
2025-11-16 18:00:01 BackupPC_nightly now running BackupPC_refCountUpdate -m
-s -c -P 2 -r 128-255
2025-11-16 18:00:01 BackupPC_nightly now running BackupPC_refCountUpdate -m
-s -c -P 2 -r 0-127
2025-11-16 18:00:01  admin : __bpc_pidStart__ 67259
2025-11-16 18:00:01  admin1 : __bpc_pidStart__ 67258
2025-11-16 18:00:23  admin1 : __bpc_pidEnd__ 67258
2025-11-16 18:00:23 Finished  admin1  (BackupPC_nightly -P 2 128 255)
2025-11-16 18:00:47  admin : __bpc_pidEnd__ 67259
2025-11-16 18:00:47 BackupPC_nightly now running BackupPC_sendEmail
2025-11-16 18:00:47 Finished  admin  (BackupPC_nightly -m -P 2 0 127)
2025-11-16 18:00:47 Pool nightly clean removed 0 files of size 0.00GB
2025-11-16 18:00:47 Pool is 0.00GB, 0 files (0 repeated, 0 max chain, 0 max
links), 0 directories
2025-11-16 18:00:47 Cpool nightly clean removed 0 files of size 0.00GB
2025-11-16 18:00:47 Cpool is 0.00GB, 0 files (0 repeated, 0 max chain, 0
max links), 0 directories
2025-11-16 18:00:47 Pool4 nightly clean removed 0 files of size 0.00GB
2025-11-16 18:00:47 Pool4 is 0.00GB, 0 files (0 repeated, 0 max chain, 0
max links), 0 directories
2025-11-16 18:00:47 Cpool4 nightly clean removed 2710 files of size 309.23GB
2025-11-16 18:00:47 Cpool4 is 1413.54GB, 95357 files (0 repeated, 0 max
chain, 1496 max links), 16467 directories
2025-11-16 18:00:47 Running BackupPC_rrdUpdate (pid=67276)
2025-11-16 18:00:47  admin-1 : RRD updated: date 1763337600; cpoolKb
0.000000; total 1351783435.940430; poolKb 0.000000; pool4Kb 0.000000;
cpool4Kb 1447466560.000000
2025-11-16 18:00:47 Finished  admin-1  (BackupPC_rrdUpdate)
***

It seems that no tall backups are purge, I suspect...


2.-

 find /local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/ -type f -mtime +9 | head
root@opencde-backups-1:/local/var/lib/backuppc#  find
/local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/ -type f -mtime +7 | head
/local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/b2/b3b31903e2aca45f31a482993eaed662
/local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/b2/b3b3b58e806d43a38e983909305aa39c
/local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/b2/b3b3a0ba5c8b13f51c9a87bfc7c56b3e
/local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/b2/b3b3f43686dd71f467b9c14d04f7d993
/local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/b2/b3b25f7087776b1a4b1e1698e89c337d
/local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/b2/b3b3c6f036d4833e86db3803d88e8023
/local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/ba/b2bb85d79e6345166ff714eec5543699
/local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/ba/b3ba25b2c0e22981764533d2a25c75a6
/local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/ba/b3ba52777bf7a5c8853cdb78ca4def07
/local/var/lib/backuppc/cpool/b2/ba/b3ba794ee40fc2f1549bd96ba64f1757


3.-

  grep 'my $minMtime'  /usr/share/backuppc/bin/BackupPC_refCountUpdate
            my $minMtime = time() - 7 * 24 * 3600;



Missatge de G.W. Haywood <ba...@ju...> del dia dt., 11 de
nov. 2025 a les 14:50:

> Hi there,
>
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2025, klxout wrote:
>
> > I have similar issues described in
> > https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/issues/418
> >
> > I have the same problem recently upgraded debian with 3.3 backuppc to
> > debian 13 with latest backuppc 4.4 from debian repositories and space is
> > increasing.... seems files are never purged
> >
> > Now I have reinstalled backuppc with a fresh install using apt-get remove
> > --purge backuppc* and I'm evaluating the results
> >
> > in the logs appears always 0 space recovered from v4 pool (only v4 is
> > enabled as it was a default install)
> >
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:00 Running 2 BackupPC_nightly jobs from 0..15 (out of
> 0..15)
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:00 Running BackupPC_nightly -m -P 11 0 127 (pid=50769)
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:00 Running BackupPC_nightly -P 11 128 255 (pid=50770)
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:00 Next wakeup is 2025-11-11 04:00:00
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:01 BackupPC_nightly now running BackupPC_refCountUpdate
> -m -s -c -P 11 -r 128-255
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:01 BackupPC_nightly now running BackupPC_refCountUpdate
> -m -s -c -P 11 -r 0-127
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:01  admin : __bpc_pidStart__ 50783
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:01  admin1 : __bpc_pidStart__ 50782
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:16  admin : __bpc_pidEnd__ 50783
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:16 BackupPC_nightly now running BackupPC_sendEmail
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:16 Finished  admin  (BackupPC_nightly -m -P 11 0 127)
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:37  admin1 : __bpc_pidEnd__ 50782
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Finished  admin1  (BackupPC_nightly -P 11 128
> > 255)*2025-11-10 18:00:37 Pool nightly clean removed 0 files of size
> 0.00GB
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Pool is 0.00GB, 0 files (0 repeated, 0 max chain, 0
> max links), 0 directories
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Cpool nightly clean removed 0 files of size 0.00GB
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Cpool is 0.00GB, 0 files (0 repeated, 0 max chain, 0
> max links), 0 directories
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Pool4 nightly clean removed 0 files of size 0.00GB
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Pool4 is 0.00GB, 0 files (0 repeated, 0 max chain, 0
> max links), 0 directories
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Cpool4 nightly clean removed 0 files of size 0.00GB*
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Cpool4 is 782.54GB, 92649 files (0 repeated, 0 max
> chain, 1632 max links), 16452 directories
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:37 Running BackupPC_rrdUpdate (pid=50797)
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:38  admin-1 : skipping repeated RRD update for the same
> day: last update time is 1762819200
> > 2025-11-10 18:00:38 Finished  admin-1  (BackupPC_rrdUpdate)
> >
> > Any suggestion to solve this problems?
>
> First let's make sure that there *is* a problem.  In some commands
> below you may need to change the logged-in user ID to one which can
> read the necessary files (often, for example, to user 'backuppc').
>
> 1.
>
> Did you run BackupPC_nightly by hand?
>
> How many times has it been run on the nightly backup schedule since
> your most recent install of BackupPC version 4?
>
> 2.
>
> In the Github issue (#418) on which you commented, did you read
> Craig's post of Feb 25, 2021 at
>
> https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/issues/418#issuecomment-785825325
>
> in which he talks about the mtimes of pool files?  Did you try any of
> Craig's suggestions there?
>
> Does your filesystem properly set the 'x' bit in file metadata?
>
> Do you know roughly how old (looking at mtimes of the files) is the
> oldest file in your 'cpool'?
>
> If not, what's the output of
>
>    find /POOLDIR/ -type f -mtime +9 | head
>
> where /POOLDIR/ is the full path to your cpool ?  (For example on a
> system *here*, that would be
>
>    find /var/lib/BackupPC/cpool/ -type f -mtime +9 | head
>
> because the cpool directory *here* is in /var/lib/BackupPC/ - but note
> that your cpool directory might not be in the same place as mine).
>
> 3.
>
> What's the output of
>
>    grep 'my $minMtime' /path/to/BackupPC_refCountUpdate
>
> where /path/to/ is the path to your BackupPC Perl scripts.
>
> --
>
> 73,
> Ged.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> BackupPC-users mailing list
> Bac...@li...
> List:    https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
> Wiki:    https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki
> Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/
>

Re: [BackupPC-users] debian patch for localconfig.pl

[Les M. <les...@gm...>]

On Sun, Nov 16, 2025 at 12:31 PM G.W. Haywood <ba...@ju...> wrote:

> If I were
> running the show in a large organization I'd probably lock that down,
> because one of the biggest risks in any organization which uses a lot
> of computers with browsers on them is that one of the browsers will be
> compromised by something malicious.

One of the things I always tried to do as a sysadmin was to toss every
config file I touched into a version control program so I could easily
see what changes had been made over time.  I used subversion with its
web interface for centralized control, but those details don't matter.
  Something that complicated would be a bit much for any application
to add on its own, but maybe keeping the original as-distributed
config and some configurable number of recent versions would make
sense for a program that is all about backups.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
     les...@gm...

Re: [BackupPC-users] debian patch for localconfig.pl

[G.W. H. <ba...@ju...>]

Hi there,

On Sat, 15 Nov 2025,  Paul Fox via backuppc-users wrote:

> jbk wrote:
> 
> > Unless I'm misunderstanding this, is the localconfig.pl to 
> > define a backup schedule for the server?
>
> No, not specifically.  It holds any configuration you might otherwise
> put in config.pl, which is read prior to localconfig.pl.  All it
> really does is let you segregate local changes from distributed
> changes, if that's useful to the administrator.
>
> Honestly, now that we're talking about it, I can't see why this shouldn't
> just be added to backuppc as a permanent feature.  It's pretty lightweight,
> and useful.  So I guess I'm championing it after all.

Hmmmm...

You can get the entire patchset from (for example)

https://udd.debian.org/patches.cgi?src=backuppc&version=4.4.0-11

and easily apply the localconfig part.  It's a one-line change in
.../lib/BackupPC/Storage/Text.pm.  Although I've gone through all the
patches, checked whether or not they should be aplide here at the top
of the stream and applied those that I think shoudld, I haven't spent
a lot of time on this one and I haven't applied it.  At this stage I
don't propose to.  There's a good chance I've missed something but as
it stands I'm not sure that I understand what the patch is for.  I'm
also not sure that it will do what everyone here seems to think that
it will do.  So I have reservations.  Below is how I read it.  I'd be
very pleased if others will chime in with their own take on it.

The BackupPC configuration routines read the configuration files into
a big hash.  With the Debian patch, when localconfig.pl is present it
will be read *before* BackupPC's main config.pl, and anything in your
localconfig.pl which *also* exists in config.pl will be overridden by
the values in config.pl, so if you wanted the values in localconfig.pl
to be used in preference to those in config.pl, you'd have to comment
them out or whatever in config.pl.  So far so not especially useful.

But if you use the Web interface to edit the configuration, things go
rapidly downhill.  When the Web interface saves the configuration, it
all gets saved to config.pl.  The localconfig.pl isn't touched at all.
So now you have a localconfig.pl which is quite possibly obsolete and
misleading.  For some poor sysadmin newly arrived on the first day in
a new job and who is going to be hard pressed for a few weeks, this I
think will violate the Principle of Least Surprise.  When she finds
out what happened, I wouldn't want to defend against her imprecations.

For the record I'm not very keen on the way that the configuration in
config.pl is saved by the editor in the Web UI.  You might start with
a nicely formatted document which happens to be valid Perl, but after
EditConfig.pl has done with it you can have something which is rather
untidy, even if it is still valid Perl.  A great deal of value text is
wantonly changed (e.g. things like different quoting) without actually
changing the values.  It makes using 'diff' a nightmare.  If I were to
dig into that, I'd want to do something to make sure that the original
comments and formatting were left as far as possible intact.  I think
that might be a tall order.  And more and more we have to think about
UTF-8 encoding in the text.

There is already a mechanism for configurations for individual hosts,
in files under .../pc/.  Something more like that would, I think, be
more useful than this patch but it would be a bit more work.  I'm far
too busy with things that are broken to look at this myself, but I'd
welcome more discussion here on the list and hopefully at the end of
it a well thought out PR.

Finally a word on security.  In addition to my being a little unhappy
with what the current EditConfig.pl does with the main configuration
file, I'm also a little nervous about editing configuration files in
BackupPC by the combination of a Web server and a browser.  If I were
running the show in a large organization I'd probably lock that down,
because one of the biggest risks in any organization which uses a lot
of computers with browsers on them is that one of the browsers will be
compromised by something malicious.  Conceivably, then, a hacker might
be in a position to prevent backups from from happening [1] or even to
delete them all.  Just to be on the safe(r) side I tend to chown/chmod
my configs root/640.  OTOH there *is* something to be said for making
it easy(/easier) for a relatively unskilled user to change some of the
configuration.  I feel that the aggregate damage from large numbers of
inexperienced people being let loose with an unfamiliar text editor on
BackupPC's configuration files might significantly exceed that caused
by the occasional workstation compromise.  So I think we should all be
thinking very carefully about how we approach this for the future.

-- 

73,
Ged.

[1] Something not unlike this happened in an incident discussed here
on the list last week, although it turned out that it was by accident
and not by design.

Re: [BackupPC-users] unable to build backuppc from source

[G.W. H. <ba...@ju...>]

Hello again,

On Sun, 16 Nov 2025, daggs via BackupPC-users wrote:

> I'm working on building backuppc from source on alpine linux on the
> home folder of a user and I've encountered an issue.  when I clone
> the main backuppc repo to my home folder and run perl configure.pl
> inside it like the readme states the build fails stating that I need
> to install from a tarball or run makeDist.  So I've extracted the
> latest tag name for the tags list ad used it as version, now I'm
> getting this:
> 
> $ ./makeDist --version 4.4.1rc1
> ./makeDist: bin/BackupPC_Admin_SCGI contains an error (or someone killed me)
> 
> any idea what am I missing or how to fix  this issue?

Alpine Linux leans toward the minimalist end of the spectrum so you're
probably just missing a few Perl modules.  The makeDist script checks
that the BackupPC scripts which it's packaging can be compiled by Perl
before it makes the package.  To do that it runs 'perl -c scriptName'
where scriptName is any of the BackupPC scripts.  When a module needed
by a BackupPC script can't be loaded by the system, you see the error
message which you quoted.  Might be you need at least the SCGI module.

I've just committed a change to makeDist which adds the '--verbose'
option.  If you grab the new version and run that with --verbose added
to the command line you will probably see what's missing from your
kit.  As makeDist is a Perl script you could edit it.  You'd get most
of the verbosity I've added by editing one line in your existing copy.
Just remove the string '2> /dev/null' from the *last* of the three
occurrences of that string in the file.  It looks like the first two
tests ran OK, so you don't need to worry about them, but each tests
only one script.  The third test is in a loop and tests dozens.

When you find which modules you need you might be able to install them
from an Alpine package using 'apk'; if they aren't packaged for Alpine
you can grab them from e.g. CPAN.  You can install them to a location
under your home directory if you wish, but it's unusual to do that and
you'd need to make sure that Perl could then find them when needed by
adding the correct path(s) to Perl's environment at runtime.

Please let me know how you get on.  So far, you're doing famously!

-- 

73,
Ged.

[BackupPC-users] unable to build backuppc from source

[daggs <da...@gm...>]

Greetings,

I'm working on building backuppc from source on alpine linux on the home folder of a user and I've encountered an issue.
when I clone the main backuppc repo to my home folder and run perl configure.pl inside it like the readme states the build fails
stating that I need to install from a tarball or run makeDist.
So I've extracted the latest tag name for the tags list ad used it as version, now I'm getting this:
$ ./makeDist --version 4.4.1rc1
./makeDist: bin/BackupPC_Admin_SCGI contains an error (or someone killed me)

any idea what am I missing or how to fix  this issue?

Thanks,

Dagg

Re: [BackupPC-users] installing backuppc-xs locally

[daggs <da...@gm...>]

Greetings,

> Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2025 at 3:12 PM
> From: "G.W. Haywood" <ba...@ju...>
> To: bac...@li...
> Subject: Re: [BackupPC-users] installing backuppc-xs locally
>
> Hi there,
> 
> Re: [BackupPC-users] installing backuppc-xs locally
> 
> On Sat, 15 Nov 2025, daggs via BackupPC-users wrote:
> > On Fri, 14 Nov 2025, Michael Stowe wrote:
> > > On 2025-11-14 06:03, daggs via BackupPC-users wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > as alpine linux doesn't provide backuppc, I'd like to build it,
> > > > but I don't want the installation to be to the /, I want it
> > > > locally under my home folder, rsync-bpc works, now I'm tackling
> > > > backuppc-xs, is there a way to install it locally?
> > > 
> > > It would seem harder to install remotely.  Isn't anything you install, 
> > > installed locally?
> > > 
> > > It's Linux.  Install things wherever you want.  Not that this is a best 
> > > practice, but it would be very hard for any software to prevent you from 
> > > doing so.
> > 
> > as usual, I didn't explained myself properly, by locally I means
> > locally to the user, e.g. inside his home folder and not the default
> > location at / my apologies for not being clear.
> 
> Firstly thank you for your attention to list etiquette when posting.
> 
> Secondly, yes, around here and in the networking business generally we
> usually use 'local' to mean "on a computer somewhere around here that
> I can touch with my fingers if I want to" - and 'remote' usually means
> "somewhere else on the planet, I might have no idea where").
> 
> Thirdly - and to answer your question - if you grab the latest version
> of BackupPC-XS the instructions for doing exactly what you want are in
> the README and INSTALL files in the top-level directory.  I left them
> there because for my testing before I released v0.63rc1 I had to tweak
> the build system that way, and it seemed useful to leave the option in
> there for anyone who might want to test the build before they actually
> took the plunge and installed it for the whole system.  I would really
> welcome feedback about any problems you might encounter with the build
> so do please let me know if you have any.  (In order to fix things to
> comply with the GNU terms of use I had to be rather severe with my
> changes to the build system; the scripts still need work and are not
> yet well tested.)  Both the latest realease and the current 'stable'
> release (0.62) use 'ExtUtils::MakeMaker' as part of the build process.
> This means that, to specify where you want to install, you should be
> able to use the same method for both 0.62 and 0.63rc1 - but AFAIK it's
> only documented in the README/INSTALL files that I wrote for 0.63rc1.
> I've never tested it for 0.62 so YMMV.  FWIW I've been running 0.63rc1
> here on a production server for almost a week with no obvious issues.
> 
> Please note that I'm on the Digest List, which means that I get a mail
> from the BackupPC List Server once per day just after mid-day (UTC) so
> this may sometimes cause a delay in my replies.
> 
> -- 
> 
> 73,
> Ged.
> 
> 

Thanks for the kind words, I've tried what you've suggested and it worked.
but I had to disable the make test because it failed.
now I'm facing an issue with building backuppc, I'll send a new mail on this.

Dagg.

> _______________________________________________
> BackupPC-users mailing list
> Bac...@li...
> List:    https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
> Wiki:    https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/wiki
> Project: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/
> 

Re: [BackupPC-users] installing backuppc-xs locally

[G.W. H. <ba...@ju...>]

Hi there,

Re: [BackupPC-users] installing backuppc-xs locally

On Sat, 15 Nov 2025, daggs via BackupPC-users wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2025, Michael Stowe wrote:
> > On 2025-11-14 06:03, daggs via BackupPC-users wrote:
> > > 
> > > as alpine linux doesn't provide backuppc, I'd like to build it,
> > > but I don't want the installation to be to the /, I want it
> > > locally under my home folder, rsync-bpc works, now I'm tackling
> > > backuppc-xs, is there a way to install it locally?
> > 
> > It would seem harder to install remotely.  Isn't anything you install, 
> > installed locally?
> > 
> > It's Linux.  Install things wherever you want.  Not that this is a best 
> > practice, but it would be very hard for any software to prevent you from 
> > doing so.
> 
> as usual, I didn't explained myself properly, by locally I means
> locally to the user, e.g. inside his home folder and not the default
> location at / my apologies for not being clear.

Firstly thank you for your attention to list etiquette when posting.

Secondly, yes, around here and in the networking business generally we
usually use 'local' to mean "on a computer somewhere around here that
I can touch with my fingers if I want to" - and 'remote' usually means
"somewhere else on the planet, I might have no idea where").

Thirdly - and to answer your question - if you grab the latest version
of BackupPC-XS the instructions for doing exactly what you want are in
the README and INSTALL files in the top-level directory.  I left them
there because for my testing before I released v0.63rc1 I had to tweak
the build system that way, and it seemed useful to leave the option in
there for anyone who might want to test the build before they actually
took the plunge and installed it for the whole system.  I would really
welcome feedback about any problems you might encounter with the build
so do please let me know if you have any.  (In order to fix things to
comply with the GNU terms of use I had to be rather severe with my
changes to the build system; the scripts still need work and are not
yet well tested.)  Both the latest realease and the current 'stable'
release (0.62) use 'ExtUtils::MakeMaker' as part of the build process.
This means that, to specify where you want to install, you should be
able to use the same method for both 0.62 and 0.63rc1 - but AFAIK it's
only documented in the README/INSTALL files that I wrote for 0.63rc1.
I've never tested it for 0.62 so YMMV.  FWIW I've been running 0.63rc1
here on a production server for almost a week with no obvious issues.

Please note that I'm on the Digest List, which means that I get a mail
from the BackupPC List Server once per day just after mid-day (UTC) so
this may sometimes cause a delay in my replies.

-- 

73,
Ged.