Issues with backup and restore

NethServer Version: 7.7.1908
Module: backup

Hello everyone

I have weird error with the back up module

For the configuration back up when i try to restore a previous configuration the new server interface does not allow me to restore the back ups. No matter that option i choose as a backup source the interface still asks me to choose an option (even though one is already chosen). Making a configuration restore from the old manager interface seems to work ok.

And i do not seem to be able to create a remote data back (trying to save the backup on a hetzner storage box). I am trying to set up the backup destination but none of the configurations work when checked (tried with sftp and CIFS). Both seem to work when trying to connect from my workstation. Any idea on where i can search to solve this?

Remote data backup works because I used it in my lab.
Maybe something specifically with your setup or storage box.

1 Like

Well does not work for me. And nothing seems to be wrong with the storage box. I can mount it or sftp to it with no problems. Even from the machine that has nethserver on through the terminal. But setting the back up never works no matter what back end i use. Any specific logs i can track down to see what the issue is?

Even when i try to choose a local disk on the server manager the dropdown menu has no entries.

Ok so i found a way to make it work.

I saw this admin mail:

Pre backup scripts status: SUCCESS
umount: /mnt/backup-backup-data: not mounted
Backup directory is not mounted
Can’t mount /mnt/backup-backup-data
Action ‘backup-data-duplicity backup-data’: FAIL
Backup status: FAIL

So i manually mount the smb share on /mnt/backup-backup-data with :

mount.cifs -o user=,pass= // /PATH/FOLDER

And then i set up the smb share from the old server manager interface. There was no feedback when i submitted the form but on the new server interface running the back up actually worked. Any check on the remote back ends on the new interface still fails though.

EDIT: Not sure if this counts as solved. I solved my issue but this does not sound like intended behavior