[gentoo-user] subclipse???
What are the commands to find out if subclipse is supported through an overlay? http://subclipse.tigris.org/ Thanks, Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] Compressed Filesystem
On Mittwoch 30 Dezember 2009, Albert Hopkins wrote: > On Wed, 2009-12-30 at 00:08 +0100, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > > just think a moment of the tons of bug fixes constantly going into > > ext4. That > > crap is not stable. Pre-alpha maybe. > > People say this from time to time, yet I have been running ext4 on my > root directory of my laptop since July 2008. The only problem I've had > since then is one time it would not mount on boot. I merely had to fsck > it from a live media an then it was ok (nothing lost or currupted). But > that was a long time ago when it was still ext4dev. And I've had > numerous crashes and battery depletions on the laptop without incident. > So the pre-alpha FUD that some people are spreading is either not true > or I just happen to be the luckiest ext4 user in the world :-). > tell that to the people who got their configs zeroed because extX devs value benchmarks at default settings as more important than your data.
Re: [gentoo-user] Compressed Filesystem
On Wed, 2009-12-30 at 00:08 +0100, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > just think a moment of the tons of bug fixes constantly going into > ext4. That > crap is not stable. Pre-alpha maybe. People say this from time to time, yet I have been running ext4 on my root directory of my laptop since July 2008. The only problem I've had since then is one time it would not mount on boot. I merely had to fsck it from a live media an then it was ok (nothing lost or currupted). But that was a long time ago when it was still ext4dev. And I've had numerous crashes and battery depletions on the laptop without incident. So the pre-alpha FUD that some people are spreading is either not true or I just happen to be the luckiest ext4 user in the world :-).
Re: [gentoo-user] Compressed Filesystem
Am 29.12.2009 14:04, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann: > I do no know btrfs. But there are two nice things about reiser4: > it takes your data seriously. It tries everything to make sure your data hit > the platter. Device does not support barriers? Reiser4 detects that and goes > into sync mode. > Second, reiser4 is really, really really fast (except mounting). thinking "ricer" here (ricer vs. reiser ;-) ): would you recommend it over ext4 for a productive root-fs, considering speed and safety ? Personally I avoided reiserfs for years after having some really bad crashes back then but sure, things developed since then. S
[gentoo-user] Re: brasero drive detection
On 12/29/2009 12:30 AM, Helmut Jarausch wrote: Hi, I have two machines with nearly identical hardware and (believed) identical GenToo (~amd64) systems. On one of these I have to start brasero with --device=/dev/sr0 while on the other one brasero detects the driver by itself. Both 'hal' configuration look identical. Has anybody an idea where the difference might come from? I don't have a /dev/sr0, so I don't know what that device is. My machine has symlinks for /dev/dvdrw and /dev/cdrw pointing to /dev/hdb, which is the dvd burner, naturally. Do you have the same symlinks on both machines? I would check the contents of /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-cd.rules to see if they are the same. If in doubt, just delete that file and let udev make a new one on the next reboot.
Re: [gentoo-user] Compressed Filesystem
On Mittwoch 30 Dezember 2009, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: > Am 29.12.2009 14:04, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann: > > I do no know btrfs. But there are two nice things about reiser4: > > it takes your data seriously. It tries everything to make sure your data > > hit the platter. Device does not support barriers? Reiser4 detects that > > and goes into sync mode. > > Second, reiser4 is really, really really fast (except mounting). > > thinking "ricer" here (ricer vs. reiser ;-) ): > > would you recommend it over ext4 for a productive root-fs, considering > speed and safety ? just think a moment of the tons of bug fixes constantly going into ext4. That crap is not stable. Pre-alpha maybe.
Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Konqueror URL links
On 28 Dec 2009, at 13:16, Mick wrote: ... I remember that when I hovered my mouse over links in web pages on Konq 3.5, it would show at the bottom of the window the URL that the link in question contained. This allowed me to decide if I wanted to visit the URL or not. This is usually called the "status bar" - I might guess you may be able to show or hide it in Konq's view options. Stroller.
Re: [gentoo-user] rsync reverts to old file versions
>> Periodically, I'll manually touch up cover art that I've scanned, and >> I've noticed that it will revert to the untouched-up version after one >> of these rsyncs. Does that make sense to anyone? >> >> - Grant > > So it it synchronizes in the opposite direction of the one given in the > command? It's weird. It sounds like it's not ringing bells for anyone so I'll keep testing and come back with something more concrete. - Grant
[gentoo-user] LyX doesn't find style files / classes anymore
Hi, since a few days, LyX doesn't find it's style files or Latex classes anmore, although they are still installed on the system. Any hints as to what be causing this? Thanks... Dirk
Re: [gentoo-user] Compressed Filesystem
On Dienstag 29 Dezember 2009, Helmut Jarausch wrote: > On 28 Dec, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > > On Montag 28 Dezember 2009, Helmut Jarausch wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> I'm looking for a working and maintained compressed filesystem. > >> I'd like to use it for backing up my root and my /usr filesystems, > >> so that I can use rsync to keep it up-to-date. > >> > >> I've come across CompFused which seems to be just what I'm looking for, > >> but it's buggy not maintained anymore. > >> > >> Similarly, fusecompress > >> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127433 > >> doesn't build on an up-to-date Gentoo system and doesn't > >> look maintained either. > >> > >> There would be sys-fs/zfs-fuse but that sounds like overkill to me. > >> > >> Are there any other packages? > >> > >> Many thanks for a hint, > >> Helmut. > > > > reiser4. Bonus, it only tries to compress stuff that can be compressed > > (the test is quick&dirty and sometimes wrong, but most of the time good > > enough). > > Thanks! > But what's the future of reiser4 FS ? What are the advantages compared > to btrfs ? reiser4 was denied for 'layer violation'. btrfs violates those layers even more. I do no know btrfs. But there are two nice things about reiser4: it takes your data seriously. It tries everything to make sure your data hit the platter. Device does not support barriers? Reiser4 detects that and goes into sync mode. Second, reiser4 is really, really really fast (except mounting).
Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrade or start over..
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 01:41:51 -0800 (PST), Jon Hardcastle wrote: > I absolutely depend on mdadm/lvm (which i believe require in some way > devicemapper and udev) and these are the biggest things i am worried > about changing. Does anyone have any experience here? I am assuming > that unmerging and remerging should be relatively problem free? If i > can get these bad boys upto date that is all i really care about... The lvm and mdadm packages are the user space utilities used to setup devices. Removing them won't stop your existing devices from working. As long as you r-emerge the new versions before rebooting, you should be fine. Make sure you quickpkg the old versions before removing, in case the new emerge fails for some reason. The worst case, if it crashes between unmerge and merge, is that you'll have to use a live CD and chroot to install them. -- Neil Bothwick I used to live in the real world, but I got evicted. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrade or start over..
On Tuesday 29 December 2009 11:41:51 Jon Hardcastle wrote: > I absolutely depend on mdadm/lvm (which i believe require in some way > devicemapper and udev) and these are the biggest things i am worried about > changing. Does anyone have any experience here? I am assuming that > unmerging and remerging should be relatively problem free? If i can get > these bad boys upto date that is all i really care about... > All that happened is that some functionality in mdadm was moved into lvm2 as that was the major user of that functionality. IIRC disk encryption was the other user. All lvm users here with up to date systems already did this step without trouble, so you can proceed as usual. As you are modifying some low level vital functionality, the usual precautions will apply: ensure that no-one reboots the machine while you are doing this, notebook batteries must not die in the middle, no power outages. And do everything in a single terminal session. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrade or start over..
--- On Sun, 27/12/09, Alan McKinnon wrote: > From: Alan McKinnon > Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrade or start over.. > To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org > Date: Sunday, 27 December, 2009, 22:24 > On Sunday 27 December 2009 21:46:23 > Jon Hardcastle wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I have a gentoo circa 2008 install that i have pretty > much the bare minimal > > to keep up to date... i now have the problem > that i need to upgrade mdadm, > > lvm and probably a few other bits and pieces. > This machine is used almost > > exclusively as a windows file server. > > > > I am getting blocks all over the show and lots of > applications needs > > reinstalling/upgradining on a emerge world. i > have also had problems > > getting the kernel to do what it needs to do a i > installed the minimal > > when i started.. > > > > So i am wondering... it is easier to try and upgrade > it, or as i have 2 > > raid 1 drives as the operating system drives and > the rest of the drives > > are pure data, i can disconnect one and wipe the > other reinstall from > > fresh as a degraded raid 1 and when i know we > are good to go, wipe the > > disconnected drive and add to the array to > resync and go from there? > > the mdadm/lvm blocks are easy to fix, just unmerge mdadm > and merge lvm. > > Then upgrade portage to latest *masked* version (it's > stable and trouble-free > despite the classification), and most of the remaining > blockers should be > resolved automatically by portage. Depending on what > remains, you may or may > not decide to proceed with an upgrade as opposed to a > reinstall. > > But it's only one year back, shouldn't give too much > trouble on a minimalist > system. Off the top of my head, I can only really think of > the monolithic to > split ebuild samba split > > > -- > alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com > > I absolutely depend on mdadm/lvm (which i believe require in some way devicemapper and udev) and these are the biggest things i am worried about changing. Does anyone have any experience here? I am assuming that unmerging and remerging should be relatively problem free? If i can get these bad boys upto date that is all i really care about...
[gentoo-user] brasero drive detection
Hi, I have two machines with nearly identical hardware and (believed) identical GenToo (~amd64) systems. On one of these I have to start brasero with --device=/dev/sr0 while on the other one brasero detects the driver by itself. Both 'hal' configuration look identical. Has anybody an idea where the difference might come from? Many thanks for a hint, Helmut. -- Helmut Jarausch Lehrstuhl fuer Numerische Mathematik RWTH - Aachen University D 52056 Aachen, Germany
Re: [gentoo-user] Compressed Filesystem
On 28 Dec, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > On Montag 28 Dezember 2009, Helmut Jarausch wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'm looking for a working and maintained compressed filesystem. >> I'd like to use it for backing up my root and my /usr filesystems, >> so that I can use rsync to keep it up-to-date. >> >> I've come across CompFused which seems to be just what I'm looking for, >> but it's buggy not maintained anymore. >> >> Similarly, fusecompress >> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127433 >> doesn't build on an up-to-date Gentoo system and doesn't >> look maintained either. >> >> There would be sys-fs/zfs-fuse but that sounds like overkill to me. >> >> Are there any other packages? >> >> Many thanks for a hint, >> Helmut. >> > > reiser4. Bonus, it only tries to compress stuff that can be compressed (the > test is quick&dirty and sometimes wrong, but most of the time good enough). > Thanks! But what's the future of reiser4 FS ? What are the advantages compared to btrfs ? Many thanks, Helmut. -- Helmut Jarausch Lehrstuhl fuer Numerische Mathematik RWTH - Aachen University D 52056 Aachen, Germany
