Package Base Details: bareos

Git Clone URL: (read-only, click to copy)
Keywords: Backup bacula bareos
Submitter: AlD
Maintainer: spradlim (mfulz)
Last Packager: mfulz
Votes: 12
Popularity: 0.27
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 Next › Last »

freaknils commented on 2017-05-08 19:26

Building bareos-common.

This is the output of the build:

If I do it in a fresh VM I get the same error.

spradlim commented on 2017-05-08 17:08

@freaknils: What package are you trying to install filedaemon?
I am not seeing this error so am having trouble debugging it.

freaknils commented on 2017-05-07 12:34

Same error still here:
cp: the call from stat for 'usr/lib/bareos/libbareos-[0-9]*.so' is not possible: File or folder not found

spradlim commented on 2017-05-06 02:01

Fixed. Sorry was busy

freaknils commented on 2017-05-05 08:17

Hey, thanks for your work. Did you got a solution for this problem?
Do you need any support?

spradlim commented on 2017-05-02 14:00

I will take a look at it tonight, thanks guys.

freaknils commented on 2017-05-01 17:24

@CarstenF: Same error on x86_64 machine here.

CarstenF commented on 2017-05-01 11:01

Hello spradlim,

thank you for maintaining bareos.
I have not the problem does bareos not compile anymore.
I get the following error message( I have translated the error message from german)
cp: the call from stat for 'usr/lib/bareos/libbareos-[0-9]*.so' is not possible: File or folder not found

I think it could habe something to do with the openssl update.
Some reasearch to solve this issue does not help.
On my Cubietruck "armv7" the package does not build after the update today.
I have a package list what changed during this update.

Maybe this can help to find a solution.

spradlim commented on 2017-01-30 02:48


You are correct that it builds them once and installs the needed one this is an offical Arch Linux way of doing it. They are called split packages and you can read more about them here:

As for a command that installs just a file daemon on my clients I use:
"pacaur -S bareos-filedaemon"

I used to use yaourt but then found out it doesn't support split packages. I actually determined this when trying to install another PKGBUILD maintained by another user.

I took over maintaining bareos, it already had split packages, I kept them. They have an advantage that the components can be installed many times on the same machine, but only need to be built once. For example the director and storage daemon is a common case for users.

PiroXiline commented on 2017-01-28 20:53

Hello, spradlim.

I though I was completely wrong, as it often happens.

But no. I see not.
I do install bareos-filedaemon,
and get:

$ makepkg -si
==> WARNING: The package group has already been built, installing existing packages...
==> Installing bareos package group with pacman -U...
[sudo] password for pyro:
loading packages...
warning: bareos-common-16.2.4-1 is up to date -- reinstalling
warning: bareos-bconsole-16.2.4-1 is up to date -- reinstalling
warning: bareos-database-common-16.2.4-1 is up to date -- reinstalling
warning: bareos-database-mysql-16.2.4-1 is up to date -- reinstalling
warning: bareos-database-postgresql-16.2.4-1 is up to date -- reinstalling
warning: bareos-database-sqlite3-16.2.4-1 is up to date -- reinstalling
warning: bareos-database-tools-16.2.4-1 is up to date -- reinstalling
warning: bareos-devel-16.2.4-1 is up to date -- reinstalling
warning: bareos-director-16.2.4-1 is up to date -- reinstalling
warning: bareos-storage-fifo-16.2.4-1 is up to date -- reinstalling
warning: bareos-tools-16.2.4-1 is up to date -- reinstalling
warning: bareos-storage-16.2.4-1 is up to date -- reinstalling
warning: bareos-director-python-plugin-16.2.4-1 is up to date -- reinstalling
warning: bareos-storage-python-plugin-16.2.4-1 is up to date -- reinstalling
resolving dependencies...
warning: cannot resolve "mtx", a dependency of "bareos-storage-tape"
:: The following package cannot be upgraded due to unresolvable dependencies:

:: Do you want to skip the above package for this upgrade? [y/N]

In other words - It do compile and install all BareoOS packages. It compile and install whole bareos group.
That what I was talking about in previous message, mentioning PKGBUILD is bold and include all packages all together. And all BareOS packages share that one PKGBUILD.
That all this is one also can be seen through - all AUR package pages share one page and one message thread, only Description changes.

Or I don't understand something.

Maybe you don't see users perspective.

This seems like with official way - we can build only a main BareOS group package and all other names are aliases to "bareos" one.
And with this group we build all packages and install them.

So, to clear the question.
I approach with a question to you, as a maintainer.
Please, can you provide information on how you build/install separate packages, and if so - can you provide a description of it where users can see it?


Now, I see - it builds all packages. And then I can choose which to install.

The thing is - you need to do it manually. User needs to do process manually and to see packages and to do minor, but nonstandard operation, which is completely not obvious, because users and even experienced ones are blind while no needed information provided.

Official AUR building guide ( states to use "$ makepkg -si", take a note "-i" is install option, and that installs everything.
Yaourt also does it "official way" installing everything, I also think other helpers do the same.

So what user need to do literally:
$ cd 'to_build\git_directory'
$ git clone
$ cd package_name
# Get everything and builds everything, but not install
$ makepkg -s
# See list of packages
$ ls
# Install chosen packages
# pacman -U selected_package.pkg.tar.xz

That does the trick.

So Michael, please provide this information.

It can be seen as I am disrespectful, but I thank you.
I go to such extends to link developers/maintainers/users and share perspective. I am persistent - because it takes effort of persistency to explain bugreports/feature_requests, otherwise, as 99% do - we skip "it", and becouse of that - "it" silently repeats to all other people over and over who knows how many times.