Package Base Details: bareos

Git Clone URL: (read-only, click to copy)
Keywords: Backup bacula bareos
Submitter: AlD
Maintainer: None
Last Packager: mfulz
Votes: 16
Popularity: 0.88
First Submitted: 2014-07-23 09:45
Last Updated: 2020-02-19 22:31

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next › Last »

svenne_k commented on 2017-08-30 06:21

Nope, still no openssl support on Arch (due to openssl 1.1 :(

(ldd on the bconsole binary should have both libssl and libcrypto)

svenne_k commented on 2017-08-30 06:15

Regarding your side-note: the Bareos project is active, they just have fewer releases in the open source version that the commercial version (I run both).

A new version is probably out within a month, most likely called 17.2.

I work at a danish Bareos partner company, so I know for sure :)

I have been bugging them for an official Arch build, but they have not had the ressources to set it up yet.. (it should be doable as they run their infrastructure on Suse Opn Build Service (OBS).

Is the SSL working? I currently use a hacked build to have it working in the current aur-version...

spradlim commented on 2017-08-29 19:30

@bsdice, Thanks
I agree that determining the package layout based on the debian files is wrong. I don't have a lot of time to maintain the package and the author of bareos has moved/renamed files between releases. Rather than the aur package breaking after every upgrade this "hack" allowed it to keep working. However, this package does not follow "arch" standards. A lot of what you list such as sbins binaries are installed in the incorrect places or indirect results of depending on this debian file layout.

Maybe if I get some time and am less lazy,I will move away from that, its more work to maintain as the bareos author changes stuff around.

A side note:
It appears like bareos isn't very active anymore. I was thinking about looking at bacula.

bsdice commented on 2017-08-29 19:17

TLDR; I audited the software and made a new package from scratch with below issues imho fixed, see (snip into files PKGBUILD and bareos.install) Credits to the maintainers of bareos and bacula for workarounds and a little template help.


I've been tinkering with a spare LTO5 drive for homeoffice backup needs using this package. Here are some issues I have encountered:

- OpenSSL-1.1 API breakage
- sbin binaries are installed in /usr/bin/sbin/ (should be /usr/bin)
- wrong chmod of /etc/bareos and its files (+x for config files is wrong)
- on my fully up-to-date Arch machine, /etc/nst0 (tape) is owned by root:storage. Post-install script should add user bareos to group storage in order to access the tape drive without root
- configure parameters not fully up to date with 16.2.6 i.e. some superfluous settings (ipv6 is enabled by default, others I forget)
- build/package/opt dependencies slightly out of tune (e.g. openssl is basically installed everywhere, configure will see it and try to use it, make will fall over due to API breakage, in essence making openssl-1.0 a hard dependency)
- Not using /run for PID and lock files (together with tmpfiles.d by systemd)
- Config files that come with the package are in the way if you modify them and want to upgrade. Imho Arch philosophy should be more like "supply samples and let the user pick any configs" instead of throwing active upstream configs in his face on every install and upgrade. Compare for a visual image. ;-)
- with bat qt-gui deprecated upstream in favor of web-gui I wonder what is gained from splitting this package up into client, server, database support and whatnot instead of doing one package. Granted, it will pull in postgresql as well as mysql support libs (sqlite is pulled in by python already) but with an uncertain future of bat, it no longer requires graphical libs on the server.
- post-remove cleanup could use some work (not stopping and disabling services in pre-uninstall etc.)
- This package imho wrongly relies on Debianisms and I may be wrong but does pulling in dbconfig-common files make any sense on Arch?
- Since I have a lot of cores I use aggressive parallel make settings to speed things up; make install of bareos requires -j1 otherwise it will error out (just to note that)
- In my package there is no requirement for logrotate and also there is no /var/log/bareos, the user should log to systemd and let it do all the rotating work
- I ran namcap -i on PKGBUILD and .xz and may have fixed a couple of other things

I won't upload my PKGBUILD into AUR because I have little time to maintain it right now, so just contributing some hopefully valuable feedback.


spradlim commented on 2017-08-29 18:44


I added openssl-1.0 dependency back in. Again, let me know if it works. It really bothers me that I am unable to duplicate this problem. Sorry for any troubles.

beatus commented on 2017-08-29 18:00

I'm getting a similar issue to @CastenF.

make[2]: Leaving directory '/home/beatus/.cache/pacaur/bareos/src/bareos/platforms/debian'
make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/beatus/.cache/pacaur/bareos/src/bareos/platforms'
==> Entering fakeroot environment...
==> Starting package_bareos-common()...
cp: cannot stat 'usr/lib/bareos/libbareos-[0-9]*.so': No such file or directory
==> ERROR: A failure occurred in package_bareos-common().
:: failed to build bareos-common package(s)

The git link does not work from his comment. The openssl workaround from before fixed this.

CarstenF commented on 2017-08-26 21:38

Hello spradlim. I have the following Problem with bareos-compiling.
There was a Version where I can fix this issue.
When I apply these
than the build does not fail like this.

make[2]: Leaving directory '/yaourt/yaourt-tmp-carstenfeuls/aur-bareos-common/src/bareos/platforms/debian'
make[1]: Leaving directory '/yaourt/yaourt-tmp-carstenfeuls/aur-bareos-common/src/bareos/platforms'
==> Entering fakeroot environment...
==> Starting package_bareos-common()...
cp: cannot stat 'usr/lib/bareos/libbareos-[0-9]*.so': No such file or directory

It is the same bug we have before with openssl.
And please add openssl-1.0 as dependency.

spradlim commented on 2017-05-10 12:31

Change made freaknils.

@CarstenF, I didn't read your comment on libbareosndmp right. Now that should work for both of you.

freaknils commented on 2017-05-10 11:59

Hmm now the build is working fine, but if I want to try to execute bareos I get the same error like CarstenF wrote:

:/usr/lib/bareos > bareos-dir -t
bareos-dir: error while loading shared libraries: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory is there in ./install/usr/lib/bareos/ but it is missing in the package.

It seems that you created this problem in PKGBUILD.common:97-99
If I remove these lines from PKGBUILD it works fine.

spradlim commented on 2017-05-10 00:56

All: CartstenF workaround for openssl-1.0 is now installed. I left the ticket open upstream for support with openssl-1.0 support.

There should be no issues with the package, let me know if anyone sees anything wrong.