[gentoo-user] xfce - folder icons gone
After todays upgrade my xfce4 folder icons are gone including some file icons with extension txt, ps Including some icons in Application Menu How to restore them? running : USE=thunar emerge -av xfdesktop (log out/in) did not help -- Joseph
Re: [gentoo-user] xfce - folder icons gone
On 10/13/12 00:29, Joseph wrote: After todays upgrade my xfce4 folder icons are gone including some file icons with extension txt, ps Including some icons in Application Menu How to restore them? running : USE=thunar emerge -av xfdesktop (log out/in) did not help I have upgraded four desktop machine and everything worked OK, but the following day I --sync the new machine with Internet instead of one of my servers and I've noticed some icons and folders icons are gone. Could one of these packages had to do with it: [ebuild U ] virtual/libffi-3.0.11 [0] [ebuild R ] dev-libs/glib-2.32.4-r1 [ebuild R ] x11-libs/gtk+-2.24.12 [ebuild R ] net-libs/libsoup-2.38.1 [ebuild R ] x11-libs/gtk+-3.4.4 [ebuild U ] x11-libs/vte-0.28.2-r204 [0.28.2-r203] [ebuild N] dev-lang/spidermonkey-1.8.5-r1 [ebuild U ] sys-auth/polkit-0.107-r1 [0.104-r1] [ebuild U ] sys-auth/consolekit-0.4.5_p20120320-r1 [0.4.5_p20120320] [ebuild R ] net-libs/libsoup-gnome-2.38.1 -- Joseph
Re: [gentoo-user] UEFI boot, again
Am 2012-10-13 00:52, schrieb Bill Kenworthy: another feature is you have to be booted via efi so the variables are available so it can install itself - sorta catch 22 :( Yes, I know that. No problem, when I boot from that stick, I do that via EFI, so I get the correct environment. I just remembered another step that I missed - I dont have the syntax but efibootmgr - google for the correct options. Yes ;-) I do that for days now. What puzzles me: I get the entries into EFI: when I boot I see the entries created by efibootmgr, but when I chose one of the entries pointing to GRUB2 or gentoo the PC tells me that the disk isn't bootable. And I still don't know what is missing. AFAIK that EFI system partition is allowed to be within the first 2 TB of the disk (easy on my 1 TB hdd), has to have the boot-flag set (in parted-terms), and must be type EF02. When EFI doesn't find something bootable on the disk, my interpretation is that it can't find that partition? S
Re: [gentoo-user] UEFI boot, again
I just remembered another step that I missed - I dont have the syntax but efibootmgr - google for the correct options. Yes ;-) I do that for days now. What puzzles me: I get the entries into EFI: when I boot I see the entries created by efibootmgr, but when I chose one of the entries pointing to GRUB2 or gentoo the PC tells me that the disk isn't bootable. And I still don't know what is missing. AFAIK that EFI system partition is allowed to be within the first 2 TB of the disk (easy on my 1 TB hdd), has to have the boot-flag set (in parted-terms), and must be type EF02. When EFI doesn't find something bootable on the disk, my interpretation is that it can't find that partition? Maybe the boot entry in the EFI firmware is wrong. That's what mine looks like: # efibootmgr -v BootCurrent: Timeout: 2 seconds BootOrder: ,0002,0003,0004 Boot* grub2 HD(1,800,4,2693e7bd-d35e-4a39-9bb9-365ee533d690)File(\EFI\grub2\grubx64.efi) Boot0002* Hard DriveBIOS(2,0,00)USB DISK 1100. Boot0003* Network Card BIOS(6,0,00)Realtek PXE B05 D00. Boot0004* Removable Drive BIOS(1,0,00)HTC Android Phone .
Re: [gentoo-user] UEFI boot, again
On Sat, 2012-10-13 at 11:06 +0200, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: Am 2012-10-13 00:52, schrieb Bill Kenworthy: another feature is you have to be booted via efi so the variables are available so it can install itself - sorta catch 22 :( Yes, I know that. No problem, when I boot from that stick, I do that via EFI, so I get the correct environment. I just remembered another step that I missed - I dont have the syntax but efibootmgr - google for the correct options. Yes ;-) I do that for days now. What puzzles me: I get the entrompties into EFI: when I boot I see the entries created by efibootmgr, but when I chose one of the entries pointing to GRUB2 or gentoo the PC tells me that the disk isn't bootable. And I still don't know what is missing. AFAIK that EFI system partition is allowed to be within the first 2 TB of the disk (easy on my 1 TB hdd), has to have the boot-flag set (in parted-terms), and must be type EF02. When EFI doesn't find something bootable on the disk, my interpretation is that it can't find that partition? S Do an ls from the grub prompt ... when booted from the usb stick grub will renumber the devices in a different order. You will need to use ls to find out what the current grub order is, edit the grub menu (i.e., e when at the menu selection) and press F10 (I think) when done to boot. The reason is grub will set itself up with the usbstick as root, whereas once you boot with the correct mapping you can reissue the commands to write them properly. BillK
Re: [gentoo-user] UEFI boot, again
Am 2012-10-13 11:38, schrieb Michael Hampicke: I just remembered another step that I missed - I dont have the syntax but efibootmgr - google for the correct options. Yes ;-) I do that for days now. What puzzles me: I get the entries into EFI: when I boot I see the entries created by efibootmgr, but when I chose one of the entries pointing to GRUB2 or gentoo the PC tells me that the disk isn't bootable. And I still don't know what is missing. AFAIK that EFI system partition is allowed to be within the first 2 TB of the disk (easy on my 1 TB hdd), has to have the boot-flag set (in parted-terms), and must be type EF02. When EFI doesn't find something bootable on the disk, my interpretation is that it can't find that partition? Maybe the boot entry in the EFI firmware is wrong. That's what mine looks like: # efibootmgr -v BootCurrent: Timeout: 2 seconds BootOrder: ,0002,0003,0004 Boot* grub2 HD(1,800,4,2693e7bd-d35e-4a39-9bb9-365ee533d690)File(\EFI\grub2\grubx64.efi) Boot0002* Hard Drive BIOS(2,0,00)USB DISK 1100. Boot0003* Network CardBIOS(6,0,00)Realtek PXE B05 D00. Boot0004* Removable Drive BIOS(1,0,00)HTC Android Phone . look at mine! - # efibootmgr -v BootCurrent: 0008 Timeout: 0 seconds BootOrder: ,0001,0002,0008,0004,0005,0006,0007 Boot* GRUB2 HD(5,4d401800,64000,0c67029a-25de-4e23-b2be-6c502742189e)File(\EFI\GRUB2\grubx64.efi) Boot0001* USB Floppy/CD Vendor(b6fef66f-1495-4584-a836-3492d1984a8d,050001)AMBO Boot0002* USB Hard Drive Vendor(b6fef66f-1495-4584-a836-3492d1984a8d,020001)AMBO Boot0004 ATAPI CD-ROM Drive Vendor(b6fef66f-1495-4584-a836-3492d1984a8d,030001)AMBO Boot0005 Unknown DeviceBIOS(3,0,00)AMGOAMNOo.h.p. . . . . . . .C.D.D.V.D.W. .T.S.-.H.6.5.3.T.NA.....Gd-.;.A..MQ..L.8.R.G.L.G.6.B.F.7.A.4.8.2.4. . . . . . ......AMBO Boot0006 USB Floppy/CD Vendor(b6fef66f-1495-4584-a836-3492d1984a8d,05)AMBO Boot0007 Hard Drive BIOS(2,0,00)AMGOAMNOo.S.T.3.1.0.0.0.5.2.4.A.SA.....Gd-.;.A..MQ..L. . . . . . . . . . . . .V.9.D.P.1.H.0.D......AMBOAMNOo.H.i.t.a.c.h.i. .H.D.S.7.2.1.0.1.0.C.L.A.6.3.2A.....Gd-.;.A..MQ..L. . . . . . .P.J.9.2.0.4.8.J.1.3.S.4.V.G......AMBOAMNO.J.e.t.F.l.a.s.h.T.S.5.1.2.M.J.F.V.3.0. .8...0.7A...F..Gd-.;.A..MQ..L.J.e.t.F.l.a.s.h.T.S.5.1.2.M.J.F.V.3.0. .8...0.7......AMBO Boot0008* UEFI: JetFlashTS512MJFV30 8.07 ACPI(a0341d0,0)PCI(1a,0)USB(1,0)USB(1,0)USB(2,0)HD(1,800,f47fe,000195b8)AMBO
Re: [gentoo-user] UEFI boot, again
Am 13.10.2012 12:13, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger: Am 2012-10-13 11:38, schrieb Michael Hampicke: I just remembered another step that I missed - I dont have the syntax but efibootmgr - google for the correct options. Yes ;-) I do that for days now. What puzzles me: I get the entries into EFI: when I boot I see the entries created by efibootmgr, but when I chose one of the entries pointing to GRUB2 or gentoo the PC tells me that the disk isn't bootable. And I still don't know what is missing. AFAIK that EFI system partition is allowed to be within the first 2 TB of the disk (easy on my 1 TB hdd), has to have the boot-flag set (in parted-terms), and must be type EF02. When EFI doesn't find something bootable on the disk, my interpretation is that it can't find that partition? Maybe the boot entry in the EFI firmware is wrong. That's what mine looks like: # efibootmgr -v BootCurrent: Timeout: 2 seconds BootOrder: ,0002,0003,0004 Boot* grub2 HD(1,800,4,2693e7bd-d35e-4a39-9bb9-365ee533d690)File(\EFI\grub2\grubx64.efi) Boot0002* Hard Drive BIOS(2,0,00)USB DISK 1100. Boot0003* Network Card BIOS(6,0,00)Realtek PXE B05 D00. Boot0004* Removable DriveBIOS(1,0,00)HTC Android Phone . look at mine! - # efibootmgr -v BootCurrent: 0008 Timeout: 0 seconds BootOrder: ,0001,0002,0008,0004,0005,0006,0007 Boot* GRUB2 HD(5,4d401800,64000,0c67029a-25de-4e23-b2be-6c502742189e)File(\EFI\GRUB2\grubx64.efi) Boot0001* USB Floppy/CD Vendor(b6fef66f-1495-4584-a836-3492d1984a8d,050001)AMBO Boot0002* USB Hard Drive Vendor(b6fef66f-1495-4584-a836-3492d1984a8d,020001)AMBO Boot0004 ATAPI CD-ROM Drive Vendor(b6fef66f-1495-4584-a836-3492d1984a8d,030001)AMBO Boot0005 Unknown Device BIOS(3,0,00)AMGOAMNOo.h.p. . . . . . . .C.D.D.V.D.W. .T.S.-.H.6.5.3.T.NA.....Gd-.;.A..MQ..L.8.R.G.L.G.6.B.F.7.A.4.8.2.4. . . . . . ......AMBO Boot0006 USB Floppy/CD Vendor(b6fef66f-1495-4584-a836-3492d1984a8d,05)AMBO Boot0007 Hard Drive BIOS(2,0,00)AMGOAMNOo.S.T.3.1.0.0.0.5.2.4.A.SA.....Gd-.;.A..MQ..L. . . . . . . . . . . . .V.9.D.P.1.H.0.D......AMBOAMNOo.H.i.t.a.c.h.i. .H.D.S.7.2.1.0.1.0.C.L.A.6.3.2A.....Gd-.;.A..MQ..L. . . . . . .P.J.9.2.0.4.8.J.1.3.S.4.V.G......AMBOAMNO.J.e.t.F.l.a.s.h.T.S.5.1.2.M.J.F.V.3.0. .8...0.7A...F..Gd-.;.A..MQ..L.J.e.t.F.l.a.s.h.T.S.5.1.2.M.J.F.V.3.0. .8...0.7......AMBO Boot0008* UEFI: JetFlashTS512MJFV30 8.07 ACPI(a0341d0,0)PCI(1a,0)USB(1,0)USB(1,0)USB(2,0)HD(1,800,f47fe,000195b8)AMBO Looks good, could you cross-check if the GUID is correct? My EFI partition is the first one on my ssd, so I use # sgdisk -i1 /dev/sda to check. The value you are looking for is Partition unique GUID - should be the same to what efibootmgr displays (0c67029a-25de-4e23-b2be-6c502742189e)
Re: [gentoo-user] Is my system (really) using nptl
On 10/13/12 04:11, Mark Knecht wrote: Take look here. The answer is, I think, not necessarily. http://www.makelinux.net/alp/032 Hello Mark, Thank you for the link to an excellent book. However, it seems the book is talking about linuxthreads by Xavier Leroy, not nptl. I am well aware that linuxthreads uses LWP's to implement threads and as a result, each thread has a separate, unique pid. I did a few more tests using gdb and my simple app. I am seeing the SIG32 signal and the lack of the manager threads. So everything hints that I am indeed using nptl, but the separate process id's still doesn't make sense... -- Timur
Re: [gentoo-user] Is my system (really) using nptl
Am Samstag, 13. Oktober 2012, 14:15:50 schrieb Timur Aydin: On 10/13/12 04:11, Mark Knecht wrote: Take look here. The answer is, I think, not necessarily. http://www.makelinux.net/alp/032 Hello Mark, Thank you for the link to an excellent book. However, it seems the book is talking about linuxthreads by Xavier Leroy, not nptl. I am well aware that linuxthreads uses LWP's to implement threads and as a result, each thread has a separate, unique pid. I did a few more tests using gdb and my simple app. I am seeing the SIG32 signal and the lack of the manager threads. So everything hints that I am indeed using nptl, but the separate process id's still doesn't make sense... or you made a mistake somewhere in your app. -- #163933
Re: [gentoo-user] Is my system (really) using nptl
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 7:15 AM, Timur Aydin t...@taydin.org wrote: On 10/13/12 04:11, Mark Knecht wrote: Take look here. The answer is, I think, not necessarily. http://www.makelinux.net/alp/032 Hello Mark, Thank you for the link to an excellent book. However, it seems the book is talking about linuxthreads by Xavier Leroy, not nptl. I am well aware that linuxthreads uses LWP's to implement threads and as a result, each thread has a separate, unique pid. I did a few more tests using gdb and my simple app. I am seeing the SIG32 signal and the lack of the manager threads. So everything hints that I am indeed using nptl, but the separate process id's still doesn't make sense... I'm a little late to the conversation...but is there an NPTL-directed sample program somewhere you can use as a baseline? i.e., to be able to say, if this works, I know NPTL does, and I know what an NPTL program looks like at the system level. -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-user] UEFI boot, again
Am 13.10.2012 12:51, schrieb Michael Hampicke: Looks good, could you cross-check if the GUID is correct? My EFI partition is the first one on my ssd, so I use # sgdisk -i1 /dev/sda to check. The value you are looking for is Partition unique GUID - should be the same to what efibootmgr displays (0c67029a-25de-4e23-b2be-6c502742189e) That is the ID of /dev/sda5: # sgdisk -i5 /dev/sda Partition GUID code: C12A7328-F81F-11D2-BA4B-00A0C93EC93B (EFI System) Partition unique GUID: 0C67029A-25DE-4E23-B2BE-6C502742189E First sector: 1296046080 (at 618.0 GiB) Last sector: 1296455679 (at 618.2 GiB) Partition size: 409600 sectors (200.0 MiB) Attribute flags: Partition name: 'EFI System' This is the EFI-system-partition on /dev/sda. Should it point there? In my case sda1 is a Linux RAID partition, which is part of md0, which once was my / (too small now). What I tried to achieve: sda5: EFI system ( - /boot/efi ) gentoo-root on /dev/md3 (consists of sda6 and sdb3) I know this looks like a mess, and somehow it is. But right now I see something else: Boot* GRUB2 HD(5,4d401800,64000,0c67029a-25de-4e23-b2be-6c502742189e)File(\EFI\GRUB2\grubx64.efi) would point at my /dev/sda5 and the file \EFI\GRUB2\grubx64.efi in there, right? After all my fiddling around right now it is named /boot/efi/EFI/grub2/grubx64.efi case-sensitive? Vfat ... ? I just rename it and give it a try ;-) What about that ugly Boot0007 in my listing? S
[gentoo-user] Re: xfce - folder icons gone
On 10/12/2012 11:49 PM, Joseph wrote: On 10/13/12 00:29, Joseph wrote: After todays upgrade my xfce4 folder icons are gone including some file icons with extension txt, ps Including some icons in Application Menu How to restore them? running : USE=thunar emerge -av xfdesktop (log out/in) did not help I have upgraded four desktop machine and everything worked OK, but the following day I --sync the new machine with Internet instead of one of my servers and I've noticed some icons and folders icons are gone. Could one of these packages had to do with it: [ebuild U ] virtual/libffi-3.0.11 [0] [ebuild R ] dev-libs/glib-2.32.4-r1 [ebuild R ] x11-libs/gtk+-2.24.12 [ebuild R ] net-libs/libsoup-2.38.1 [ebuild R ] x11-libs/gtk+-3.4.4 [ebuild U ] x11-libs/vte-0.28.2-r204 [0.28.2-r203] [ebuild N] dev-lang/spidermonkey-1.8.5-r1 [ebuild U ] sys-auth/polkit-0.107-r1 [0.104-r1] [ebuild U ] sys-auth/consolekit-0.4.5_p20120320-r1 [0.4.5_p20120320] [ebuild R ] net-libs/libsoup-gnome-2.38.1 Did you try revdep-rebuild?
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: xfce - folder icons gone
On 10/13/12 06:14, walt wrote: On 10/12/2012 11:49 PM, Joseph wrote: On 10/13/12 00:29, Joseph wrote: After todays upgrade my xfce4 folder icons are gone including some file icons with extension txt, ps Including some icons in Application Menu How to restore them? running : USE=thunar emerge -av xfdesktop (log out/in) did not help I have upgraded four desktop machine and everything worked OK, but the following day I --sync the new machine with Internet instead of one of my servers and I've noticed some icons and folders icons are gone. Could one of these packages had to do with it: [ebuild U ] virtual/libffi-3.0.11 [0] [ebuild R ] dev-libs/glib-2.32.4-r1 [ebuild R ] x11-libs/gtk+-2.24.12 [ebuild R ] net-libs/libsoup-2.38.1 [ebuild R ] x11-libs/gtk+-3.4.4 [ebuild U ] x11-libs/vte-0.28.2-r204 [0.28.2-r203] [ebuild N] dev-lang/spidermonkey-1.8.5-r1 [ebuild U ] sys-auth/polkit-0.107-r1 [0.104-r1] [ebuild U ] sys-auth/consolekit-0.4.5_p20120320-r1 [0.4.5_p20120320] [ebuild R ] net-libs/libsoup-gnome-2.38.1 Did you try revdep-rebuild? Yes, few times. -- Joseph
Re: [gentoo-user] UEFI boot, again
Am 13.10.2012 15:07, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger: Am 13.10.2012 12:51, schrieb Michael Hampicke: Looks good, could you cross-check if the GUID is correct? My EFI partition is the first one on my ssd, so I use # sgdisk -i1 /dev/sda to check. The value you are looking for is Partition unique GUID - should be the same to what efibootmgr displays (0c67029a-25de-4e23-b2be-6c502742189e) That is the ID of /dev/sda5: # sgdisk -i5 /dev/sda Partition GUID code: C12A7328-F81F-11D2-BA4B-00A0C93EC93B (EFI System) Partition unique GUID: 0C67029A-25DE-4E23-B2BE-6C502742189E First sector: 1296046080 (at 618.0 GiB) Last sector: 1296455679 (at 618.2 GiB) Partition size: 409600 sectors (200.0 MiB) Attribute flags: Partition name: 'EFI System' This is the EFI-system-partition on /dev/sda. Should it point there? In my case sda1 is a Linux RAID partition, which is part of md0, which once was my / (too small now). What I tried to achieve: sda5: EFI system ( - /boot/efi ) gentoo-root on /dev/md3 (consists of sda6 and sdb3) I know this looks like a mess, and somehow it is. But right now I see something else: Boot* GRUB2 HD(5,4d401800,64000,0c67029a-25de-4e23-b2be-6c502742189e)File(\EFI\GRUB2\grubx64.efi) would point at my /dev/sda5 and the file \EFI\GRUB2\grubx64.efi in there, right? Yes, correct. Everything so far looks okay to me. So when you book in EFI mode you should get at least a grub shell - even if your grub.cfg is missing or incorrect. But on the other hand, UEFI is a bitch, took me several days in trial and error to get it running when I first tested it (this was with unstable grub then, I even hat to create my own grub image with grub2-mkimage) After all my fiddling around right now it is named /boot/efi/EFI/grub2/grubx64.efi case-sensitive? Vfat ... ? I just rename it and give it a try ;-) vfat is not case sensitive, so this should be no problem. What about that ugly Boot0007 in my listing? Maybe some internal rescue partition or something like that. Looks strange to me too.
Re: [gentoo-user] Is my system (really) using nptl
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 7:09 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann
volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
Am Samstag, 13. Oktober 2012, 14:15:50 schrieb Timur Aydin:
On 10/13/12 04:11, Mark Knecht wrote:
Take look here. The answer is, I think, not necessarily.
http://www.makelinux.net/alp/032
Hello Mark,
Thank you for the link to an excellent book. However, it seems the book
is talking about linuxthreads by Xavier Leroy, not nptl. I am well aware
that linuxthreads uses LWP's to implement threads and as a result, each
thread has a separate, unique pid.
I did a few more tests using gdb and my simple app. I am seeing the
SIG32 signal and the lack of the manager threads. So everything hints
that I am indeed using nptl, but the separate process id's still doesn't
make sense...
or you made a mistake somewhere in your app.
We can only know seeing the code. Timur, this is the little test I
made which creates 5 threads and runs them for 1 minute. In my case,
`ps x` shows only 1 PID, care to give it a try?
--
#include pthread.h
#include unistd.h
#include stdlib.h
#include stdio.h
static pthread_mutex_t mutex = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER;
static int keep_running;
static void*
my_thread(void* data)
{
int id = *((int*)data);
int count = 0;
sleep(id);
printf(Thread %d beginning.\n, count++);
while (keep_running) {
printf(Thread %d: %d.\n, id, count++);
sleep(1);
}
printf(Thread %d exiting.\n, count++);
}
int
main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
keep_running = 1;
pthread_t a, b, c, d, e;
int* arr[] = { NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL };
int i;
for (i = 0; i 5; i++) {
arr[i] = malloc(sizeof(int));
*arr[i] = i;
}
pthread_create(a, NULL, my_thread, arr[0]);
pthread_create(b, NULL, my_thread, arr[1]);
pthread_create(c, NULL, my_thread, arr[2]);
pthread_create(d, NULL, my_thread, arr[3]);
pthread_create(e, NULL, my_thread, arr[4]);
sleep(60);
pthread_mutex_lock(mutex);
keep_running = 0;
pthread_mutex_unlock(mutex);
for (i = 0; i 5; i++)
free(arr[i]);
}
--
Regards.
--
Canek Peláez Valdés
Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Is my system (really) using nptl
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: SNIP We can only know seeing the code. Timur, this is the little test I made which creates 5 threads and runs them for 1 minute. In my case, `ps x` shows only 1 PID, care to give it a try? -- #include pthread.h == #include unistd.h #include stdlib.h #include stdio.h Thanks for the test case. Like you I see only one thread. However the test case wouldn't compile for me without the -pthread option so it makes me wonder what happens to a program like I had pointed to yesterday that uses the old style threading that did create lots of process ids? Possibly an nptl system would still generate lots of ids for that program and that's what he's seeing? Just curious. I don't program but I'm always sort of interested. Cheers, Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] Is my system (really) using nptl
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: SNIP We can only know seeing the code. Timur, this is the little test I made which creates 5 threads and runs them for 1 minute. In my case, `ps x` shows only 1 PID, care to give it a try? -- #include pthread.h == #include unistd.h #include stdlib.h #include stdio.h Thanks for the test case. Like you I see only one thread. However the test case wouldn't compile for me without the -pthread option so it makes me wonder what happens to a program like I had pointed to yesterday that uses the old style threading that did create lots of process ids? Possibly an nptl system would still generate lots of ids for that program and that's what he's seeing? Just curious. I don't program but I'm always sort of interested. You got your answer. NTPL stands for Native POSIX Thread *Library*. As it name says, it is a library (with support in the kernel and in glibc). If you don't use the library (-lpthread), you cannot make use of its advantages. What old style threading did you use for your test case? Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Is my system (really) using nptl
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: SNIP We can only know seeing the code. Timur, this is the little test I made which creates 5 threads and runs them for 1 minute. In my case, `ps x` shows only 1 PID, care to give it a try? -- #include pthread.h == #include unistd.h #include stdlib.h #include stdio.h Thanks for the test case. Like you I see only one thread. However the test case wouldn't compile for me without the -pthread option so it makes me wonder what happens to a program like I had pointed to yesterday that uses the old style threading that did create lots of process ids? Possibly an nptl system would still generate lots of ids for that program and that's what he's seeing? Just curious. I don't program but I'm always sort of interested. You got your answer. NTPL stands for Native POSIX Thread *Library*. As it name says, it is a library (with support in the kernel and in glibc). If you don't use the library (-lpthread), you cannot make use of its advantages. What old style threading did you use for your test case? Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México As for 'old style' I only meant code that did threads but didn't use the POSIX libraries. (I guess...) Actually I hadn't run the test case at the time but was referring to the one I pointed the OP at yesterday: http://www.makelinux.net/alp/032 However it's essentially the same as yours (not as elegant, but functionally similar). However the results shown on that page show different pids for the threads. When I run that same code here I get the same pids: mark@c2stable ~ $ ./pthread2 main thread pid is 5387 child thread pid is 5387 ^C mark@c2stable ~ $ Now, this does make me curious about some things running on my system. Two for instance, Google Chrome and akonadi_agent, have LOTS of pids. I was assuming those were different threads and were demonstrating what the OP was asking about, but now I'm not so sure. How does a single program on an nptl system generate all these different pids? Thanks, Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] Is my system (really) using nptl
On 10/13/2012 02:40 PM, Mark Knecht wrote: Now, this does make me curious about some things running on my system. Two for instance, Google Chrome and akonadi_agent, have LOTS of pids. I was assuming those were different threads and were demonstrating what the OP was asking about, but now I'm not so sure. How does a single program on an nptl system generate all these different pids? If I'm not mistaken, Chrome breaks out different tabs into different processes (which you can see if you open View Background Pages from the menu). I can't say anything about akonadi_agent, though. Thanks, Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] Is my system (really) using nptl
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: SNIP We can only know seeing the code. Timur, this is the little test I made which creates 5 threads and runs them for 1 minute. In my case, `ps x` shows only 1 PID, care to give it a try? -- #include pthread.h == #include unistd.h #include stdlib.h #include stdio.h Thanks for the test case. Like you I see only one thread. However the test case wouldn't compile for me without the -pthread option so it makes me wonder what happens to a program like I had pointed to yesterday that uses the old style threading that did create lots of process ids? Possibly an nptl system would still generate lots of ids for that program and that's what he's seeing? Just curious. I don't program but I'm always sort of interested. You got your answer. NTPL stands for Native POSIX Thread *Library*. As it name says, it is a library (with support in the kernel and in glibc). If you don't use the library (-lpthread), you cannot make use of its advantages. What old style threading did you use for your test case? Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México As for 'old style' I only meant code that did threads but didn't use the POSIX libraries. (I guess...) Actually I hadn't run the test case at the time but was referring to the one I pointed the OP at yesterday: http://www.makelinux.net/alp/032 However it's essentially the same as yours (not as elegant, but functionally similar). However the results shown on that page show different pids for the threads. When I run that same code here I get the same pids: mark@c2stable ~ $ ./pthread2 main thread pid is 5387 child thread pid is 5387 ^C mark@c2stable ~ $ Now, this does make me curious about some things running on my system. Two for instance, Google Chrome and akonadi_agent, have LOTS of pids. I was assuming those were different threads and were demonstrating what the OP was asking about, but now I'm not so sure. How does a single program on an nptl system generate all these different pids? Because Google Chrome is actually LOTS of programs. I don't know about akonadi (don't use KDE), but Chrome doesn't use threads; it uses different process for each tab (and for several plugins, I believe), and it integrates all those process in a single GUI using come kind of IPC. The idea is that if a tab crashes (bad pulgin, rogue JavaScript, etc.), it only crashes the tab, not the whole browser. It saves us from the nightmare that forced us to killall -9 mozilla from time to time some years ago. A thread is a lightweight process; it has its own call stack, but it shares the same memory space as its parent (actually, the thread that created it). The advantages are many: since all threads in the same process share the same memory space, they can easily and quickly communicate between each other. The tradeoff is that if one thread crashes, the whole program does (AFAIK, someone please correct me if I'm wrong). A process has its own call stack and its own memory space; and while it can share file descriptors with its parent (the process where it was created), including pipes, it cannot easily and quickly communicate with a process different from its parent (hence little wonders like dbus, whose job is precisely to provice Inter Process Communication [IPC] between different processes). For threads in Linux/Unix you usually use POSIX threads, although there are alternatives. For processes you use fork; everytime you use ls or cp in a terminal, or launch a program using KDE or GNOME, your shell or desktops forks a new process for it. Up until very recently most programs used threads to do several things at once; some years ago apache started to do a hybrid approach, where it forks or launches threads dependign on the load of the system, other server programs followed it. AFAIK, Google Chrome was the first desktop program in Linux which uses several processes runnning under the same GUI. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Is my system (really) using nptl
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: SNIP We can only know seeing the code. Timur, this is the little test I made which creates 5 threads and runs them for 1 minute. In my case, `ps x` shows only 1 PID, care to give it a try? [snip] Now, this does make me curious about some things running on my system. Two for instance, Google Chrome and akonadi_agent, have LOTS of pids. I was assuming those were different threads and were demonstrating what the OP was asking about, but now I'm not so sure. How does a single program on an nptl system generate all these different pids? Because Google Chrome is actually LOTS of programs. I don't know about akonadi (don't use KDE), but Chrome doesn't use threads; it uses different process for each tab (and for several plugins, I believe), and it integrates all those process in a single GUI using come kind of IPC. The idea is that if a tab crashes (bad pulgin, rogue JavaScript, etc.), it only crashes the tab, not the whole browser. It saves us from the nightmare that forced us to killall -9 mozilla from time to time some years ago. A thread is a lightweight process; it has its own call stack, but it shares the same memory space as its parent (actually, the thread that created it). The advantages are many: since all threads in the same process share the same memory space, they can easily and quickly communicate between each other. The tradeoff is that if one thread crashes, the whole program does (AFAIK, someone please correct me if I'm wrong). You got the semantics right. (We could quibble on tradeoffs, but that's more a question of style and scenario...) (Well, I'm not certain that POSIX thinks of threads as parents to each other. That would seem silly to me, but that may be because I come to multithreaded programming from Windows, where threads belong to a process, not to each other. Your main thread could terminate, but the process would continue to exist until all threads terminated, or until ExitProcess() or TerminateProcess() were called.) A process has its own call stack and its own memory space; and while it can share file descriptors with its parent (the process where it was created), including pipes, it cannot easily and quickly communicate with a process different from its parent (hence little wonders like dbus, whose job is precisely to provice Inter Process Communication [IPC] between different processes). There are *numerous* IPC mechanisms available on Linux. For starters, there are sockets (domain, IPv4, IPv6, et al), named pipes, signals, mmap()'d files, messaging, etc. One IPC mechanism that's fairly common on both Windows and Linux is for two processes to mmap() a block of memory (could be 4KB, could be 40MB, whatever.) by creating an anonymous file. On Linux, this is usually done in /dev/shm/, IIRC. On Windows, you can use a physical file or one of a few different ways. When one process writes to the chunk of its address space mapped to that file, the other process can immediately see those changes. All that remains is sending the other process a signal or some other driving mechanism to wake it up and have it look at that region for updates. dbus is only a 'little wonder' in that it provides protocol constraints and language bindings, which isn't really relevant when we're talking about same-address-space vs separate-address-space threading models. For threads in Linux/Unix you usually use POSIX threads, although there are alternatives. For processes you use fork; everytime you use ls or cp in a terminal, or launch a program using KDE or GNOME, your shell or desktops forks a new process for it. Up until very recently most programs used threads to do several things at once; some years ago apache started to do a hybrid approach, where it forks or launches threads dependign on the load of the system, other server programs followed it. Apache has several Multi-Processing-Modules. mpm_worker spawns threads within a common process, and each thread handles a different client. mpm_prefork spawns processes, where each process handles a different client. I'm not aware of any mpm which flips between 'worker' and 'process'. Which mode the administrator chooses depends on his needs. While mpm_worker would be more efficient, almost everybody uses mpm_prefork (or the similar mpm_itk), because modules like mod_php aren't necessarily safe to run in a multithreaded fashion. (It's not necessarily the module's fault, but rather that some of the language extensions aren't written for it.) AFAIK, Google Chrome was the first desktop program in Linux which uses several
RE: [gentoo-user] Re: xfce - folder icons gone
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2012 08:01:57 -0600 From: syscon...@gmail.com To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: xfce - folder icons gone On 10/13/12 06:14, walt wrote: On 10/12/2012 11:49 PM, Joseph wrote: On 10/13/12 00:29, Joseph wrote: After todays upgrade my xfce4 folder icons are gone including some file icons with extension txt, ps Including some icons in Application Menu How to restore them? running : USE=thunar emerge -av xfdesktop (log out/in) did not help I have upgraded four desktop machine and everything worked OK, but the following day I --sync the new machine with Internet instead of one of my servers and I've noticed some icons and folders icons are gone. Could one of these packages had to do with it: [ebuild U ] virtual/libffi-3.0.11 [0] [ebuild R ] dev-libs/glib-2.32.4-r1 [ebuild R ] x11-libs/gtk+-2.24.12 [ebuild R ] net-libs/libsoup-2.38.1 [ebuild R ] x11-libs/gtk+-3.4.4 [ebuild U ] x11-libs/vte-0.28.2-r204 [0.28.2-r203] [ebuild N] dev-lang/spidermonkey-1.8.5-r1 [ebuild U ] sys-auth/polkit-0.107-r1 [0.104-r1] [ebuild U ] sys-auth/consolekit-0.4.5_p20120320-r1 [0.4.5_p20120320] [ebuild R ] net-libs/libsoup-gnome-2.38.1 Did you try revdep-rebuild? Yes, few times. -- Joseph look into ~/.gtkrc (gtk-icon-theme-name)
Re: [gentoo-user] Is my system (really) using nptl
On 10/13/12 19:15, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: We can only know seeing the code. Timur, this is the little test I made which creates 5 threads and runs them for 1 minute. In my case, `ps x` shows only 1 PID, care to give it a try? I have re-read all messages and I noticed Canek writing about the 'ps x' output. I was using htop to watch what's happening. When I used 'ps x', I indeed saw just a single process. Looked around google for the difference between the two, and sure enough, htop by default shows all threads in a process, but ps does not. You have to supply special flags to ps to have it show the threads. So I started focusing on the pid's that htop is showing for my simple app's threads. When I try to locate them under /proc/..., they don't exist. Further search in google and indeed, the pid's shown for threads aren't really process id's in the traditional sense and there is no folder under /proc for them. My app has pid 12397 and one of the threads has pid 12404. To look up the thread pid, one needs to look under /proc/12397/task/12404. So, mystery (for me) solved. Thanks for all the replies! -- Timur
Re: [gentoo-user] Is my system (really) using nptl
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: [snip] (Well, I'm not certain that POSIX thinks of threads as parents to each other. Hence the reason I put parent in quotes, and I specified actually, the thread that created it. There are *numerous* IPC mechanisms available on Linux. For starters, there are sockets (domain, IPv4, IPv6, et al), named pipes, signals, mmap()'d files, messaging, etc. Yeah, none of them easy and quickly to use, or at least not if you compare it with shared memory. When one process writes to the chunk of its address space mapped to that file, the other process can immediately see those changes. All that remains is sending the other process a signal or some other driving mechanism to wake it up and have it look at that region for updates. Yup, certainly neither easy nor quick. dbus is only a 'little wonder' in that it provides protocol constraints and language bindings, which isn't really relevant when we're talking about same-address-space vs separate-address-space threading models. You right, of course; it has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Is just that I *really* like dbus, and I preferred it over almost any other IPC mechanism in Linux. AFAIK, Google Chrome was the first desktop program in Linux which uses several processes runnning under the same GUI. Absolutely not. I used to play a game called 'realtimebattle' OK, I will rephrase it: Google Chrome is the first *relevant* desktop program in Linux which uses several processes runnning under the same GUI. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
[gentoo-user] new machine : start-up time
Regulars will remember the threads re the machine I built recently. I thought they mb interested in the start-up time now all is working : Gigabyte BIOS 10 s , Linux Lilo prompt - login prompt 8 s , 'startx' - GUI ready 4 s : total 22 s + entering userid+password ; I start the I/net connection (Dhcpcd) manually from the GUI ( 15 s ). I assume most of the speed is attributable to the SSD, perhaps a bit to the 1600 MHz memory; of course, Gentoo shares the honors; my desktop manager is Fluxbox I start apps on desktops manually. -- ,, SUPPORT ___//___, Philip Webb ELECTRIC /] [] [] [] [] []| Cities Centre, University of Toronto TRANSIT`-O--O---' purslowatchassdotutorontodotca
Re: [gentoo-user] Is my system (really) using nptl
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 23:13:31 +0300 Timur Aydin t...@taydin.org wrote: On 10/13/12 19:15, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: We can only know seeing the code. Timur, this is the little test I made which creates 5 threads and runs them for 1 minute. In my case, `ps x` shows only 1 PID, care to give it a try? I have re-read all messages and I noticed Canek writing about the 'ps x' output. I was using htop to watch what's happening. When I used 'ps x', I indeed saw just a single process. Looked around google for the difference between the two, and sure enough, htop by default shows all threads in a process, but ps does not. You have to supply special flags to ps to have it show the threads. So I started focusing on the pid's that htop is showing for my simple app's threads. When I try to locate them under /proc/..., they don't exist. Further search in google and indeed, the pid's shown for threads aren't really process id's in the traditional sense and there is no folder under /proc for them. My app has pid 12397 and one of the threads has pid 12404. To look up the thread pid, one needs to look under /proc/12397/task/12404. So, mystery (for me) solved. Thanks for all the replies! Yes, you got it. When htop claims it's showing PIDs, it's actually lying; in fact it's showing the TIDs (thread ids), and they're different even for multiple threads within the same thread group. (For processes with just a single thread however, TID and PID are equal) Regards, aranea signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] new machine : start-up time
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Philip Webb purs...@ca.inter.net wrote: Regulars will remember the threads re the machine I built recently. I thought they mb interested in the start-up time now all is working : Gigabyte BIOS 10 s , Linux Lilo prompt - login prompt 8 s , 'startx' - GUI ready 4 s : total 22 s + entering userid+password ; I start the I/net connection (Dhcpcd) manually from the GUI ( 15 s ). I assume most of the speed is attributable to the SSD, perhaps a bit to the 1600 MHz memory; of course, Gentoo shares the honors; my desktop manager is Fluxbox I start apps on desktops manually. Toshiba Portégé Z830, with an iCore 5 at 1.60GHz, 6 GB of memory, and a tiny 128 GB SSD. It takes 12 seconds from GRUB to GDM, and from the time I enter my password and my GNOME 3 desktop is ready it takes another 6 seconds, so 18 seconds in total (plus how much it takes for me to click in my user and enter my password). Like you, I attribute most of the speed gain to the SSD. The rest is systemd. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] new machine : start-up time
Am Samstag, 13. Oktober 2012, 15:40:43 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Philip Webb purs...@ca.inter.net wrote: Regulars will remember the threads re the machine I built recently. I thought they mb interested in the start-up time now all is working : Gigabyte BIOS 10 s , Linux Lilo prompt - login prompt 8 s , 'startx' - GUI ready 4 s : total 22 s + entering userid+password ; I start the I/net connection (Dhcpcd) manually from the GUI ( 15 s ). I assume most of the speed is attributable to the SSD, perhaps a bit to the 1600 MHz memory; of course, Gentoo shares the honors; my desktop manager is Fluxbox I start apps on desktops manually. Toshiba Portégé Z830, with an iCore 5 at 1.60GHz, 6 GB of memory, and a tiny 128 GB SSD. It takes 12 seconds from GRUB to GDM, and from the time I enter my password and my GNOME 3 desktop is ready it takes another 6 seconds, so 18 seconds in total (plus how much it takes for me to click in my user and enter my password). Like you, I attribute most of the speed gain to the SSD. The rest is systemd. Regards. from hitting SPACE to desktop: less than 4s. Suspend-to-ram. Who cares about boot times? (for the record: from grub to kdm login ca 10sec. Without systemd). -- #163933
Re: [gentoo-user] new machine : start-up time
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Philip Webb purs...@ca.inter.net wrote: Regulars will remember the threads re the machine I built recently. I thought they mb interested in the start-up time now all is working : Gigabyte BIOS 10 s , Linux Lilo prompt - login prompt 8 s , 'startx' - GUI ready 4 s : total 22 s + entering userid+password ; I start the I/net connection (Dhcpcd) manually from the GUI ( 15 s ). I assume most of the speed is attributable to the SSD, perhaps a bit to the 1600 MHz memory; of course, Gentoo shares the honors; my desktop manager is Fluxbox I start apps on desktops manually. Toshiba Portégé Z830, with an iCore 5 at 1.60GHz, 6 GB of memory, and a tiny 128 GB SSD. It takes 12 seconds from GRUB to GDM, and from the time I enter my password and my GNOME 3 desktop is ready it takes another 6 seconds, so 18 seconds in total (plus how much it takes for me to click in my user and enter my password). Like you, I attribute most of the speed gain to the SSD. The rest is systemd. Damn, is GNOME fat. I booted to text console (disabled GDM), and I also disabled plymouth. From GRUB2 to login prompt it takes less than 6 seconds, so the really slow part is starting GDM and then switching to GNOME 3. The BIOS is pretty fast, it takes 4 seconds from power on to the GRUB2 menu. The fast part (GRUB2-login prompt) is because of systemd. GNOME 3 needs a lot of optimization, it seems. Also, plymouth slow things a little, and it hides the login prompt, so it's difficult to measure for how much. However, it's really pretty ;) Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] new machine : start-up time
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: Am Samstag, 13. Oktober 2012, 15:40:43 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Philip Webb purs...@ca.inter.net wrote: Regulars will remember the threads re the machine I built recently. I thought they mb interested in the start-up time now all is working : Gigabyte BIOS 10 s , Linux Lilo prompt - login prompt 8 s , 'startx' - GUI ready 4 s : total 22 s + entering userid+password ; I start the I/net connection (Dhcpcd) manually from the GUI ( 15 s ). I assume most of the speed is attributable to the SSD, perhaps a bit to the 1600 MHz memory; of course, Gentoo shares the honors; my desktop manager is Fluxbox I start apps on desktops manually. Toshiba Portégé Z830, with an iCore 5 at 1.60GHz, 6 GB of memory, and a tiny 128 GB SSD. It takes 12 seconds from GRUB to GDM, and from the time I enter my password and my GNOME 3 desktop is ready it takes another 6 seconds, so 18 seconds in total (plus how much it takes for me to click in my user and enter my password). Like you, I attribute most of the speed gain to the SSD. The rest is systemd. Regards. from hitting SPACE to desktop: less than 4s. I agree. My laptop wakes up from suspension in less than that (around 1 second, actually). My desktop in about the same, 3 or 4 seconds. Suspend-to-ram. Who cares about boot times? (for the record: from grub to kdm login ca 10sec. Without systemd). Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: xfce - folder icons gone
On 10/13/12 21:53, Christian Ehrich wrote: Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2012 08:01:57 -0600 From: syscon...@gmail.com To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: xfce - folder icons gone On 10/13/12 06:14, walt wrote: On 10/12/2012 11:49 PM, Joseph wrote: On 10/13/12 00:29, Joseph wrote: After todays upgrade my xfce4 folder icons are gone including some file icons with extension txt, ps Including some icons in Application Menu How to restore them? running : USE=thunar emerge -av xfdesktop (log out/in) did not help I have upgraded four desktop machine and everything worked OK, but the following day I --sync the new machine with Internet instead of one of my servers and I've noticed some icons and folders icons are gone. look into ~/.gtkrc (gtk-icon-theme-name) In home directory I don't have file .gtkrc neither on a system that is working correctly nor on the broken one. locate gtkrc /etc/gimp/2.0/gtkrc /etc/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /home/joseph/.gimp-2.6/gtkrc /home/joseph/etc/gimp/2.0/gtkrc /home/joseph/etc/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gtk/gtkrc.h /usr/include/gtk-3.0/gtk/deprecated/gtkrc.h /usr/portage/gnome-extra/gnome-screensaver/files/gnome-screensaver-3.4.2-gtkrc.patch /usr/portage/x11-libs/gtk+/files/gtkrc /usr/portage/x11-themes/gtk-engines-cleanice/files/cleanice-2-gtkrc /usr/share/doc/thunar-1.4.0/README.gtkrc.bz2 /usr/share/gimp/2.0/themes/Default/gtkrc /usr/share/gimp/2.0/themes/Small/gtkrc /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/pygtk/class-gtkrcstyle.html /usr/share/gtksourceview-2.0/language-specs/gtkrc.lang /usr/share/themes/Default/gtk-2.0-key/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Emacs/gtk-2.0-key/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Raleigh/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-4.0/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-4.2/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-4.4/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-4.6/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-b5/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-basic/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-cadmium/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-curve/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-dawn/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-dusk/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-kde2/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-kolors/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-light/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-orange/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-redmondxp/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-saltlake/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-smooth/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-stellar/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/Xfce-winter/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /usr/share/themes/bubble/gtk-2.0/gtkrc /var/lib/cfg-update/backups/etc/gimp/2.0/._new-cfg_gtkrc /var/lib/cfg-update/backups/etc/gtk-2.0/._new-cfg_gtkrc -- Joseph
Re: [gentoo-user] Want to start open source development
On 10/10/2012 6:45 AM, karan garg wrote: Hi all, I have been an open-source enthusiast since 2010 and using Linux as my operating system for last 2 years. However, now I want to take an active part in open-source development and contribute to the society under an expert guidance. I am an RHCE and have a basic understanding of a fair few things like database, c, c++, ruby, shell scripting, etc. I would really consider it an honor if you would guide me. The biggest challenge to contributing to open source is often to understand the social/cultural aspects. Lots of people have useful patches and publish them somewhere, but nothing happens unless they figure out how to interface with the relevant community, and present their innovations in a way that meets that community's needs and standards. There is also a question of marketing your improvements. Bear in mind that every open source project wants to maintain some sense of reliability and stability. So your contributions will be evaluated not only on the merits of what they improve, but also what they might break, how difficult they might be to maintain going forward, how consistent your coding style is with the existing conventions, and so forth. You'll need to explain why your patches are good/helpful. Don't expect people to read them carefully enough to figure it out for themselves -- give them a clear summary of what you are up to and what are the merits. Try not to undertake anything too ambitious. If you do have an ambitious plan, split it into small phases so that people can evaluate your work without being overwhelmed by it. In general, expect your contributions to be met with skepticism, especially the first few times you contribute. If people criticize your work, try not to take it personally. Often people will say I think you're an idiot when they mean I think your code makes an idiotic mistake, so, seriously, if you feel offended, think for a second what is this person really trying to tell me? Usually there is some way to answer their concerns by revising and resubmitting your patches. Remember that (almost) every project is somebody's baby, which they spent a lot of time an effort creating. They have every right to be a bit protective -- and of course sometimes egos do get involved. In general, most of the barriers you might encounter trying to make a contribution at the office apply equally -- sometimes more than equally -- to open source development. However, if you stick to it, the rewards can be tremendous, both spiritually and in the professional domain, where you will have bragging rights, forever, if you manage to make a meaningful contribution. By no means do I wish to discourage you -- in fact, I'd say the best way to answer your question is to just go for it. You'll learn as you go, probably after a few embarrassing mistakes. Keep a stiff upper-lip, be humble, and don't hurry too much, and you'll do fine -- there's a reason so many people contribute to open-source: it really is quite a rewarding endeavor. -gmt
Re: [gentoo-user] new machine : start-up time
Am Samstag, 13. Oktober 2012, 15:57:31 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Philip Webb purs...@ca.inter.net wrote: Regulars will remember the threads re the machine I built recently. I thought they mb interested in the start-up time now all is working : Gigabyte BIOS 10 s , Linux Lilo prompt - login prompt 8 s , 'startx' - GUI ready 4 s : total 22 s + entering userid+password ; I start the I/net connection (Dhcpcd) manually from the GUI ( 15 s ). I assume most of the speed is attributable to the SSD, perhaps a bit to the 1600 MHz memory; of course, Gentoo shares the honors; my desktop manager is Fluxbox I start apps on desktops manually. Toshiba Portégé Z830, with an iCore 5 at 1.60GHz, 6 GB of memory, and a tiny 128 GB SSD. It takes 12 seconds from GRUB to GDM, and from the time I enter my password and my GNOME 3 desktop is ready it takes another 6 seconds, so 18 seconds in total (plus how much it takes for me to click in my user and enter my password). Like you, I attribute most of the speed gain to the SSD. The rest is systemd. Damn, is GNOME fat. I booted to text console (disabled GDM), and I also disabled plymouth. From GRUB2 to login prompt it takes less than 6 seconds, so the really slow part is starting GDM and then switching to GNOME 3. The BIOS is pretty fast, it takes 4 seconds from power on to the GRUB2 menu. The fast part (GRUB2-login prompt) is because of systemd. I doubt that, -- #163933
Re: [gentoo-user] new machine : start-up time
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: Am Samstag, 13. Oktober 2012, 15:57:31 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Philip Webb purs...@ca.inter.net wrote: Regulars will remember the threads re the machine I built recently. I thought they mb interested in the start-up time now all is working : Gigabyte BIOS 10 s , Linux Lilo prompt - login prompt 8 s , 'startx' - GUI ready 4 s : total 22 s + entering userid+password ; I start the I/net connection (Dhcpcd) manually from the GUI ( 15 s ). I assume most of the speed is attributable to the SSD, perhaps a bit to the 1600 MHz memory; of course, Gentoo shares the honors; my desktop manager is Fluxbox I start apps on desktops manually. Toshiba Portégé Z830, with an iCore 5 at 1.60GHz, 6 GB of memory, and a tiny 128 GB SSD. It takes 12 seconds from GRUB to GDM, and from the time I enter my password and my GNOME 3 desktop is ready it takes another 6 seconds, so 18 seconds in total (plus how much it takes for me to click in my user and enter my password). Like you, I attribute most of the speed gain to the SSD. The rest is systemd. Damn, is GNOME fat. I booted to text console (disabled GDM), and I also disabled plymouth. From GRUB2 to login prompt it takes less than 6 seconds, so the really slow part is starting GDM and then switching to GNOME 3. The BIOS is pretty fast, it takes 4 seconds from power on to the GRUB2 menu. The fast part (GRUB2-login prompt) is because of systemd. I doubt that, Install systemd and do the test; I got the numbers to prove it. systemd is consistently faster than OpenRC (which doesn't even properly support parallel starting of services), sometimes several times faster. Luca Barbato mentioned about a way to make OpenRC use busybox in reentrant mode; the difference in speed in that case should be less. However, the fact is that OpenRC doesn't support parallel start of services; it said so in its own documentation: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=391945#c10 rc_parallel has never officially been declared a stable feature (see the comments in rc.conf regarding this). So no matter how fast the scripts could execute (which anyway will be slower than small highly optimized C programs), the lack of proper parallelization will make OpenRC slower than systemd. So doubt as much as you want. It doesn't change the fact that (in this particular issue), you are wrong. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: xfce - folder icons gone
On 10/13/12 21:53, Christian Ehrich wrote: look into ~/.gtkrc (gtk-icon-theme-name) Solved, Something in Application Menu -- Setting -- Appearance was not correctly set :-/ -- Joseph
Re: [gentoo-user] new machine : start-up time
Am Samstag, 13. Oktober 2012, 16:40:45 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: Am Samstag, 13. Oktober 2012, 15:57:31 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Philip Webb purs...@ca.inter.net wrote: Regulars will remember the threads re the machine I built recently. I thought they mb interested in the start-up time now all is working : Gigabyte BIOS 10 s , Linux Lilo prompt - login prompt 8 s , 'startx' - GUI ready 4 s : total 22 s + entering userid+password ; I start the I/net connection (Dhcpcd) manually from the GUI ( 15 s ). I assume most of the speed is attributable to the SSD, perhaps a bit to the 1600 MHz memory; of course, Gentoo shares the honors; my desktop manager is Fluxbox I start apps on desktops manually. Toshiba Portégé Z830, with an iCore 5 at 1.60GHz, 6 GB of memory, and a tiny 128 GB SSD. It takes 12 seconds from GRUB to GDM, and from the time I enter my password and my GNOME 3 desktop is ready it takes another 6 seconds, so 18 seconds in total (plus how much it takes for me to click in my user and enter my password). Like you, I attribute most of the speed gain to the SSD. The rest is systemd. Damn, is GNOME fat. I booted to text console (disabled GDM), and I also disabled plymouth. From GRUB2 to login prompt it takes less than 6 seconds, so the really slow part is starting GDM and then switching to GNOME 3. The BIOS is pretty fast, it takes 4 seconds from power on to the GRUB2 menu. The fast part (GRUB2-login prompt) is because of systemd. I doubt that, Install systemd and do the test; I got the numbers to prove it. systemd is consistently faster than OpenRC (which doesn't even properly support parallel starting of services), sometimes several times faster. Luca Barbato mentioned about a way to make OpenRC use busybox in reentrant mode; the difference in speed in that case should be less. However, the fact is that OpenRC doesn't support parallel start of services; it said so in its own documentation: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=391945#c10 rc_parallel has never officially been declared a stable feature (see the comments in rc.conf regarding this). So no matter how fast the scripts could execute (which anyway will be slower than small highly optimized C programs), the lack of proper parallelization will make OpenRC slower than systemd. So doubt as much as you want. It doesn't change the fact that (in this particular issue), you are wrong. and since I use openrc with parallel startup, I just doubt it even more. The place where I lose time is starting of my five md-raids. And that is something not even systemd can speed up. -- #163933
Re: [gentoo-user] new machine : start-up time
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: Am Samstag, 13. Oktober 2012, 16:40:45 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: Am Samstag, 13. Oktober 2012, 15:57:31 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Philip Webb purs...@ca.inter.net wrote: Regulars will remember the threads re the machine I built recently. I thought they mb interested in the start-up time now all is working : Gigabyte BIOS 10 s , Linux Lilo prompt - login prompt 8 s , 'startx' - GUI ready 4 s : total 22 s + entering userid+password ; I start the I/net connection (Dhcpcd) manually from the GUI ( 15 s ). I assume most of the speed is attributable to the SSD, perhaps a bit to the 1600 MHz memory; of course, Gentoo shares the honors; my desktop manager is Fluxbox I start apps on desktops manually. Toshiba Portégé Z830, with an iCore 5 at 1.60GHz, 6 GB of memory, and a tiny 128 GB SSD. It takes 12 seconds from GRUB to GDM, and from the time I enter my password and my GNOME 3 desktop is ready it takes another 6 seconds, so 18 seconds in total (plus how much it takes for me to click in my user and enter my password). Like you, I attribute most of the speed gain to the SSD. The rest is systemd. Damn, is GNOME fat. I booted to text console (disabled GDM), and I also disabled plymouth. From GRUB2 to login prompt it takes less than 6 seconds, so the really slow part is starting GDM and then switching to GNOME 3. The BIOS is pretty fast, it takes 4 seconds from power on to the GRUB2 menu. The fast part (GRUB2-login prompt) is because of systemd. I doubt that, Install systemd and do the test; I got the numbers to prove it. systemd is consistently faster than OpenRC (which doesn't even properly support parallel starting of services), sometimes several times faster. Luca Barbato mentioned about a way to make OpenRC use busybox in reentrant mode; the difference in speed in that case should be less. However, the fact is that OpenRC doesn't support parallel start of services; it said so in its own documentation: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=391945#c10 rc_parallel has never officially been declared a stable feature (see the comments in rc.conf regarding this). So no matter how fast the scripts could execute (which anyway will be slower than small highly optimized C programs), the lack of proper parallelization will make OpenRC slower than systemd. So doubt as much as you want. It doesn't change the fact that (in this particular issue), you are wrong. and since I use openrc with parallel startup, I just doubt it even more. So you know better than the devs. I'm sure you believe so; good luck with that. I would do the test, though; otherwise you are talking about beliefs, not facts. The place where I lose time is starting of my five md-raids. And that is something not even systemd can speed up. That may be true, but until someone does the benchmark we don't know. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Synaptics driver freezes my kernel
On 10/9/2012 4:57 AM, Helmut Jarausch wrote: Hi, I'm using kernel 3.6.1-gentoo (which claims to have fixed a synaptics modules bug) with xorg-server-1.11.4-r1 (I can't use a more recent one because my ATI graphics card is too old for ati-drivers 12.4) and xf86-input-synaptics-1.6.2. After a few minutes, it segfaults the kernel == hard reset. Without synaptics the system is rock stable (for many hours at least). Has anybody made a similar experience or know about a bug fix? Many thanks for hint, Helmut. It's been working for me for ages ... in fact for years, I maintained a bug with an ebuild for it before it even went into the kernel. Never seen it cause a crash, ever. Are you sure synaptics caused your reset? Unless you have changed the defaults, last I checked, a linux kernel panic would not cause a hard reset, but a freeze (or what looks like one from an X11 gui). -gmt
Re: [gentoo-user] Is my system (really) using nptl
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: [snip] (Well, I'm not certain that POSIX thinks of threads as parents to each other. Hence the reason I put parent in quotes, and I specified actually, the thread that created it. There are *numerous* IPC mechanisms available on Linux. For starters, there are sockets (domain, IPv4, IPv6, et al), named pipes, signals, mmap()'d files, messaging, etc. Yeah, none of them easy and quickly to use, or at least not if you compare it with shared memory. I assume you mean 'shared memory' in the 'many threads to an address space', not the /dev/shm sense. When one process writes to the chunk of its address space mapped to that file, the other process can immediately see those changes. All that remains is sending the other process a signal or some other driving mechanism to wake it up and have it look at that region for updates. Yup, certainly neither easy nor quick. In C (or C++, or any language capable of directly manipulating mmapped regions), that's about as dead simple as it gets. Nothing else comes close to that degree of efficiency for that degree of simplicity. dbus is only a 'little wonder' in that it provides protocol constraints and language bindings, which isn't really relevant when we're talking about same-address-space vs separate-address-space threading models. You right, of course; it has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Is just that I *really* like dbus, and I preferred it over almost any other IPC mechanism in Linux. I know how much you like dbus. :) I just didn't care for the implication that it was the only mechanism of note. There are other extraordinarily important mechanisms. AFAIK, Google Chrome was the first desktop program in Linux which uses several processes runnning under the same GUI. Absolutely not. I used to play a game called 'realtimebattle' OK, I will rephrase it: Google Chrome is the first *relevant* desktop program in Linux which uses several processes runnning under the same GUI. Chrome was certainly the first *web browser* to take fault segmentation through separate processes that far. Before Chrome, Firefox used a separate process to thunk between the 32-bit Flash plugin and the 64-bit Firefox process on amd64 machines. Sticking with Desktop systems (so, not touching on SCADA), and sticking with Linux (so, not discussing the extensive use of ActiveX and OLE on Windows), we're left looking for some other multiprocess desktop applications. Here's a quick list of reasonably well-known ones: * VLC, ffmpeg and xine, which all used the xshm extension as a shared memory IPC mechanism to push video data rapidly to the X server (a separate process) * Everything in GNOME that ever used CORBA. I presume there was something similar for performing RPC calls within the KDE setup. -- :wq
