Chief Technician Posted December 7, 2007 Report Share Posted December 7, 2007 Hello. After many hours, I have come to the following conclusion. Retrospect Workgroup v6.1.138 does not function properly with OS X Server v10.4.8. How did I arrive at this conclusion? After updating to v6.1.138, I could not complete a backup to DVD-RW. This is something I have been doing for the last 18 months with Retrospect on the computer in question. I was being prompted with a Device Error 100. According to the manual, the device (DVD-RW) is refusing a command. The DVD-RW drive in this computer is a Pioneer DVR-106D (Apple version), as the computer is a Dual 1.25GHz G4. Yes, I checked the device database and this drive is supported. The first thing I tried was to revert to the previous version of Retrospect (v6.1.126). The way I did this was to install it over v6.1.138. While I could launch v6.1.126, the error persisted. I then reverted to a bootable backup of the system (made with SuperDuper, since Retrospect doesn't preserve ACLs, but I digress) that had v6.1.126 installed BEFORE I updated to v6.1.138. This backup, when using v6.1.126, works as expected. In summation, don't install v6.1.138 if you are using OS X Server v10.4.8 or a Pioneer DVR-106D. Something is not right with v6.1.138 and you will not be able to backup data to the Pioneer DVR-106D. If you've already installed v6.1.138, installing v6.1.126 over it is not going to solve your problem. Hopefully someone at EMC is reading this and will want to contact me to resolve this problem. If this problem exists with Leopard server, then I will be forced to consider moving to BRU, and with the economic downturn upon us, EMC wouldn't want to lose a customer, would they? May this revelation be useful to someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted December 7, 2007 Report Share Posted December 7, 2007 As I suggested in the previous thread, if: A) I tried one thing; it didn't work. I tried something else, it did work. Therefore the only solution is B doesn't really pass a logic test. I'm not discounting at all the observation that device support in the newest version might be broken. Without doubt, we've seen problems with device support in Retrospect for the whole year. But there are likely other reasons why your attempt to fall back to an earlier version didn't work. We just don't know what steps you took. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Technician Posted December 7, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 7, 2007 Quote: As I suggested in the previous thread, if: A) I tried one thing; it didn't work. I tried something else, it did work. Therefore the only solution is B doesn't really pass a logic test. Yes, it does. Although I think the hangup is in how you phrased it. You are thinking of it as "Therefore the only solution is B." I would say "Therefore the solution that does not work is A". So, if I tried A, and it didn't work, and then I tried B, and it worked, A must not work. Simple. Quote: I'm not discounting at all the observation that device support in the newest version might be broken. Without doubt, we've seen problems with device support in Retrospect for the whole year. Perhaps EMC is not allocating enough resources to their Mac product (rhetorical)? Quote: But there are likely other reasons why your attempt to fall back to an earlier version didn't work. We just don't know what steps you took. I did document my steps, though not in outline form. First, I wrote Quote: How did I arrive at this conclusion? After updating to v6.1.138, I could not complete a backup to DVD-RW. This means that I had a previous version of Retrospect that I updated to v6.1.138. What was the problem with v6.1.138? Well, I stated that as Quote: I could not complete a backup to DVD-RW. To be more specific, I then added Quote: I was being prompted with a Device Error 100. So what did I do next? Well, I stated what I did next as Quote: The first thing I tried was to revert to the previous version of Retrospect (v6.1.126). How did I do this? Quote: The way I did this was to install it over v6.1.138. After doing this, what was the status of the issue? Quote: the error persisted. So what did I do after discovering that installing v6.1.126 over v6.1.138 did not solve my problem? Quote: I then reverted to a bootable backup of the system (made with SuperDuper, since Retrospect doesn't preserve ACLs, but I digress) that had v6.1.126 installed BEFORE I updated to v6.1.138. What was the status of the issue after doing that? Quote: This backup, when using v6.1.126, works as expected. I suppose what I should have wrote was "When using Retrospect v6.1.126 from a pre-update system backup, Retrospect works as expected." So my steps were documented, and its pretty clear what did and did not happen. In installed v6.1.138, and a qualified setup no longer functioned properly. I installed v6.1.126 over v6.1.138, and a qualified setup still did not work properly. I then reverted to a backup of the system which had v6.1.126 on it BEFORE updating to v6.1.138, and the qualified setup now works properly. So its really cut-and-dry. v6.1.138 did not work in our qualified configuration. v6.1.126 does work in our qualified configuration. Installing v6.1.126 over v6.1.138 does not resolve the problem created by v6.1.138. I do not know how else to state these facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhwalker Posted December 8, 2007 Report Share Posted December 8, 2007 I suspect that your problem is the Retrospect Driver Update (RDU), not Retrospect itself. You haven't provided version information (that I have been able to see) for what RDU versions you used with each of these two Retrospect installs. There are some bugs in the recent RDU versions that broke all formats except +R; you might try regressing to an earlier RDU, such as RDU 6.1.11.101, which does not have this bug. The RDU versions are here: http://kb.dantz.com/article.asp?article=7886&p=2 Russ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 This thread got forked. Additional info next door at: http://forums.dantz.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=104485 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klipspringer Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 I had the same problem with Retrospect 6.1.138, OXS 10.4.11, RDU 6.1.13.101, Pioneer 109. Continual Error 100 and "disc locked" messages. Solution was to simply replace RDU with older 6.1.9.102; no need to replace Retrospect itself with older version. Highly, highly disappointing to update software only to find it doesn't work, and to spend hours searching for a solution. EMC, are you listening? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.