Re: [gentoo-user] PosgreSQL - pg_hba.conf localhost access only
On Thu, April 25, 2013 07:48, Joseph wrote: SNIP I just tried as you suggested, the only active line in: pg_hba.conf local all all trust anything else is commented out. I restarted the server but I still can connect to postgresql from another computer via Firefox. Joseph, Let me put it in really simple terms: 1) Firefox is NOT a database client, it can NOT connect to a database 2) Firefox IS a webbrowser, it ONLY connects to a webserver This means, Postgresql will NOT see ANY connection made by Firefox. The website you have running ON TOP OFF apache makes the connection to Postgresql. Eg. it goes like the following: User - Firefox - Apache/website - Postgresql Any of the above can ONLY see their immediate neighbour. -- Joost
Re: [gentoo-user] PosgreSQL - pg_hba.conf localhost access only
On Thu, April 25, 2013 01:48, Joseph wrote: On 04/24/13 22:27, J. Roeleveld wrote: [snip] Thank you for explanation. That is what I'm confused about. When I connect to pstgresql database from the same machine as postgres is running on I can understand. It is a local connection from localhost (127.0.0.1) so everybody is allowed but I don't understand why users on the local network can connect to my machine and login using apache when their IP is different. -- Joseph Joseph. The connection to the database is done by apache. Apache connects from the server where Apache is running. Postgresql does not know nor even care where the connection to apache originates from. It only sees apache connecting to it. If you want to prevent people from accessing the website. You will need to configure the restriction in Apache or in a firewall. A webbrowser will NOT connect directly to the database. With a lot of larger applications this will not even be possible because the database is on a seperate server where the firewall is only allowing the webserver to access the database. Restricting access to a website by setting restrictions on the database server uswd by the website is pointless. -- Joost Roeleveld Thank you, now this is clear, so that pg_hba.conf has a limited use. It has use for connections made TO the database by whichever application needs the connection. Firefox is NOT such an application. So simple statement in apache directory: Allow from localhost will fix the issue. Please check the apache documentation, I believe you also need to add a deny-rule. When it comes to database. How can I limit certain users from certain IP to only one database. Will those users connect DIRECTLY to the database server? I don't thing this is possible via apache! The line: local all alltrust will give access to everybody. How those line in pg_hba.conf should look if I want user from remote computer to access only one database? Is it: local my_database alltrust local others_database allident alex Does ident refers to user who is allow to login into database? Yes, provided the OS can identify the username. Apache will likely connect using apache. How to list users for a particular database? Try using passwords instead of allowing everyone full access to all databases. -- Joost
Re: [gentoo-user] How reliable is ext3?
On 24/04/2013 17:22, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2013-04-24 6:27 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: Here's my pair of MTAs: $ uptime 12:24PM up 1295 days, 13:10, 1 user, load averages: 0.19, 0.20, 0.31 $ uptime 12:24PM up 1925 days, 20:30, 4 users, load averages: 0.90, 0.75, 0.84 Those two just keep on accepting and dealing with mail, they do that a million times a day and according to uptime have been doing it for 10 years. ? Looks like 3.5 years and 5.2 years, respectively... You seriously haven't upgraded your kernel on those machines for 3.5/5.2 years?? Yes, something like that. Politics get involved. But please let's not go there - the pain is too much to bear :-) -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] How reliable is ext3?
On 24/04/2013 16:21, Neil Bothwick wrote: -- Neil Bothwick I have seen things you lusers would not believe. I've seen Sun monitors on fire off the side of the multimedia lab. I've seen NTU lights glitter in the dark near the Mail Gate. All these things will be lost in time, like the root partition last week. Time to die. ^^^ Completely OT of course, but this fortune just totally made my day :-) -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] How reliable is ext3?
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On 24/04/2013 17:22, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2013-04-24 6:27 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: Here's my pair of MTAs: $ uptime 12:24PM up 1295 days, 13:10, 1 user, load averages: 0.19, 0.20, 0.31 $ uptime 12:24PM up 1925 days, 20:30, 4 users, load averages: 0.90, 0.75, 0.84 Those two just keep on accepting and dealing with mail, they do that a million times a day and according to uptime have been doing it for 10 years. ? Looks like 3.5 years and 5.2 years, respectively... You seriously haven't upgraded your kernel on those machines for 3.5/5.2 years?? Yes, something like that. Politics get involved. But please let's not go there - the pain is too much to bear :-) -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com Alan. I wouldn't want to be present when those do get shut down. I wonder if the disks would spin back up as the bearings might have deteriorated by now... -- Joost -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: [gentoo-user] How reliable is ext3?
On 25/04/2013 09:55, J. Roeleveld wrote: Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On 24/04/2013 17:22, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2013-04-24 6:27 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: Here's my pair of MTAs: $ uptime 12:24PM up 1295 days, 13:10, 1 user, load averages: 0.19, 0.20, 0.31 $ uptime 12:24PM up 1925 days, 20:30, 4 users, load averages: 0.90, 0.75, 0.84 Those two just keep on accepting and dealing with mail, they do that a million times a day and according to uptime have been doing it for 10 years. ? Looks like 3.5 years and 5.2 years, respectively... You seriously haven't upgraded your kernel on those machines for 3.5/5.2 years?? Yes, something like that. Politics get involved. But please let's not go there - the pain is too much to bear :-) -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com Alan. I wouldn't want to be present when those do get shut down. I wonder if the disks would spin back up as the bearings might have deteriorated by now... Bingo. You correctly assessed the main technical risk. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: PVSCSI vs LSI Logic Parallel/SAS - WAS: Re: [gentoo-user] Best filesystem for virtualized gentoo mail server - WAS: vmWare HowTo / best practices
On 2013-04-24 10:23 PM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: My Gentoo VMs in the cloud (using VMware's vCloud) uses PV-SCSI. It's stable... but kind of sensitive: Everytime the cloud provider do something with their storage, my VMs become Read-Only. Ouch... so, how do you fix it?
Re: [gentoo-user] How reliable is ext3?
On 2013-04-25 3:47 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On 24/04/2013 17:22, Tanstaafl wrote: You seriously haven't upgraded your kernel on those machines for 3.5/5.2 years?? Yes, something like that. Politics get involved. But please let's not go there - the pain is too much to bear :-) Lol! I feel your pain. I have had experiences with phb's that think like that. Thankfully my current one just leaves those decisions to me, with the caveat that if things break, he gets to yell at me proportionally to the downtime...
Re: PVSCSI vs LSI Logic Parallel/SAS - WAS: Re: [gentoo-user] Best filesystem for virtualized gentoo mail server - WAS: vmWare HowTo / best practices
On Apr 25, 2013 5:54 PM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 2013-04-24 10:23 PM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: My Gentoo VMs in the cloud (using VMware's vCloud) uses PV-SCSI. It's stable... but kind of sensitive: Everytime the cloud provider do something with their storage, my VMs become Read-Only. Ouch... so, how do you fix it? For the Read-Only problem, a simple reboot suffices. But I made sure to fire an angry email to the Customer Support, telling them in no uncertain terms that the next time they want to do something re: their storage, they contact me first. So, when the time comes for then to do some storage management things, they tell me exactly at what time. I scheduled the VMs to shut down at the agreed time, and turn them back on as soon as they text me that their maintenance had finished. Only one VM I left on, the gatewall VM. And every single time the gatewall VM detected that something is being done on the storage level, and changed to a Read-Only mode. I consider myself lucky that when the 'problem' manifested itself, the VMs are not yet in Production. And no corruption happened. (PS: Strangely enough, the RO switch happens only on Gentoo VMs; the FreeBSD VMs and Debian VMs are unaffected. Maybe because I've pared down each and every Gentoo VM to their bare minimum, so they are much more responsive) Rgds, --
[gentoo-user] Re: OT: emoticon display with Thunderbird
Stroller stroller at stellar.eclipse.co.uk writes: My immediate reaction to this is to suggest creating a PDF. My mail client shows PDFs inline, so this would display quite nicely. You could create the circle using Postscript, then dump the postscript document to PDF; PDFs allow arbitrary paper sizes. Interesting idea. Alternatively, you could draw this as a gif or png using imagemagick or something. The imagemagick examples explain how to draw circles: http://www.imagemagick.org/Usage/draw/#circles I'll experiment on these and some. thanks for your help and input. thx, James
Re: PVSCSI vs LSI Logic Parallel/SAS - WAS: Re: [gentoo-user] Best filesystem for virtualized gentoo mail server - WAS: vmWare HowTo / best practices
On 2013-04-25 7:44 AM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: On Apr 25, 2013 5:54 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2013-04-24 10:23 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote: My Gentoo VMs in the cloud (using VMware's vCloud) uses PV-SCSI. It's stable... but kind of sensitive: Everytime the cloud provider do something with their storage, my VMs become Read-Only. Ouch... so, how do you fix it? For the Read-Only problem, a simple reboot suffices. But I made sure to fire an angry email to the Customer Support, telling them in no uncertain terms that the next time they want to do something re: their storage, they contact me first. Interesting... thanks for the heads up, but since this is on my own host, I won't need to worry about this.
Re: [gentoo-user] PosgreSQL - pg_hba.conf localhost access only
On 04/25/13 09:10, J. Roeleveld wrote: On Thu, April 25, 2013 07:48, Joseph wrote: SNIP I just tried as you suggested, the only active line in: pg_hba.conf local all all trust anything else is commented out. I restarted the server but I still can connect to postgresql from another computer via Firefox. Joseph, Let me put it in really simple terms: 1) Firefox is NOT a database client, it can NOT connect to a database 2) Firefox IS a webbrowser, it ONLY connects to a webserver This means, Postgresql will NOT see ANY connection made by Firefox. The website you have running ON TOP OFF apache makes the connection to Postgresql. Eg. it goes like the following: User - Firefox - Apache/website - Postgresql Any of the above can ONLY see their immediate neighbour. -- Joost So pg_hba.conf only controls direct connections to postgreSQL. Since apache group is in postgres user; apache was given permission to access the database in this case py-passing the setting in pg_hba.conf Is there a way to force sequence: Apache/website - pg_hba.conf - Postgresql -- Joseph
[gentoo-user] Server system date synchronizaion
Hello Everyone, We are trying to sync our server's time with an accurate ntp server, and was wondering which of the many solutions are considered viable. I did see the http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/Time_Synchronization. Our services are quite time sensitive. Thanks in Advance, N.
Re: [gentoo-user] Server system date synchronizaion
Nick Khamis wrote: Hello Everyone, We are trying to sync our server's time with an accurate ntp server, and was wondering which of the many solutions are considered viable. I did see the http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/Time_Synchronization. Our services are quite time sensitive. Thanks in Advance, N. net-misc/ntp net-misc/openntpd net-misc/chrony One of those should work. I think the plain ntp has been around the longest. I couldn't get it to work right on my rig so I switched to chrony. Basically, I would try ntp first then go from there if needed. Hope that helps. Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!
Re: [gentoo-user] Server system date synchronizaion
On 04/25/2013 10:33 AM, Nick Khamis wrote: Hello Everyone, We are trying to sync our server's time with an accurate ntp server, and was wondering which of the many solutions are considered viable. I did see the http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/Time_Synchronization. Our services are quite time sensitive. My best results so far have been to have one node on my network sync to pool.ntp.org, and to have all other nodes on my network sync to that one node. Short of having a stratum 1 time server on my network, that seems to work the best; done that way, my nodes are within a few milliseconds of each other, near as I can figure. For contrast, having all nodes sync to pool.ntp.org results in time variance of up to 2-3 minutes across a dozen or so machines. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Server system date synchronizaion
On 2013-04-25 10:40 AM, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: For contrast, having all nodes sync to pool.ntp.org results in time variance of up to 2-3 minutes across a dozen or so machines. That makes no sense... Not calling you a liar or anything, but it just doesn't make sense. I can see that it might take each system different times to get fully sync'd, but for them to consistently vary by this amount? No, something else is wrong. Are these virtualized servers?
Re: [gentoo-user] Server system date synchronizaion
On 2013-04-25 10:33 AM, Nick Khamis sym...@gmail.com wrote: We are trying to sync our server's time with an accurate ntp server, and was wondering which of the many solutions are considered viable. I did see the http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/Time_Synchronization. Are these virtualized? It makes a difference, and from everything I've read, you don't sync virtualized servers the same as bare metal servers. Our services are quite time sensitive. Ummm... *all* servers are critically time-sensitive.
Re: [gentoo-user] Server system date synchronizaion
On 4/25/13, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On 04/25/2013 10:33 AM, Nick Khamis wrote: Hello Everyone, We are trying to sync our server's time with an accurate ntp server, and was wondering which of the many solutions are considered viable. I did see the http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/Time_Synchronization. Our services are quite time sensitive. My best results so far have been to have one node on my network sync to pool.ntp.org, and to have all other nodes on my network sync to that one node. Short of having a stratum 1 time server on my network, that seems to work the best; done that way, my nodes are within a few milliseconds of each other, near as I can figure. For contrast, having all nodes sync to pool.ntp.org results in time variance of up to 2-3 minutes across a dozen or so machines. Thank you so much for your response. Michael, were you using ntp to sync that initial server? If so, can we get that setup up and running easily? I've been putting the time issue off for way too long... Thanks in Advance, Nick
Re: [gentoo-user] Server system date synchronizaion
Ummm... *all* servers are critically time-sensitive. Yeah... I concur ;)
[gentoo-user] mkfs.reiserfs hangs system?
Just wondering if any of you guys experienced this lately: System hangs when creating a brand-new ReiserFS on a new partition. I've tried using the latest gentoo minimal CD, or the latest SystemRescueCD, both exhibited the same. I'm on an HP DL585 G7 box, by the way, so it's using an AMD CPU. I'd appreciate any suggestions. My Google-fu all expose only old threads. Rgds, --
[gentoo-user] can't mount ext4 fs as est3 or ext3
I get the following in /var/log/messages EXT3-fs (sda5): error: couldn't mount because of unsupported optional features (240) ... EXT4-fs (sda5): couldn't mount as ext2 due to feature incompatibilities ... EXT4-fs (sda5): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null) Here is the entry in fstab /dev/sda5 / ext4noatime,discard 0 1 I am having no difficulty, but seeing the first (error) message every day in logwatch is annoying. Since all my fs are ext4 I could remove ext3 support from the kernel (3.5.4). Is that the recommended procedure? thanks, allan
Re: [gentoo-user] mkfs.reiserfs hangs system?
Am 25.04.2013 17:25, schrieb Pandu Poluan: Just wondering if any of you guys experienced this lately: System hangs when creating a brand-new ReiserFS on a new partition. I've tried using the latest gentoo minimal CD, or the latest SystemRescueCD, both exhibited the same. I'm on an HP DL585 G7 box, by the way, so it's using an AMD CPU. I'd appreciate any suggestions. My Google-fu all expose only old threads. Are there any error/warnings in dmes or the logs? Maybe the disk is toast? Can you create other file systems?
Re: [gentoo-user] Removing pulseaudio
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 5:19 AM, Alecks Gates aleck...@gmail.com wrote: Not that it likely affects a lot of people, but pulseaudio can transmit sound over the network to other pulseaudio servers -- a possible use case I can think of are media centers, though I'm sure there's more. There's even a guy streaming audio from his Android phone to another computer [1]. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5-phFVfZnQ I did an LTSP cluster wayyy back, and pulseaudio's streaming was helpful in getting sound to run on the right machine :) -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[x] social Response needed: [ ] yes [ ] up to you [x] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [x] none
Re: [gentoo-user] can't mount ext4 fs as est3 or ext3
Am 25.04.2013 16:26, schrieb gottl...@nyu.edu: I get the following in /var/log/messages EXT3-fs (sda5): error: couldn't mount because of unsupported optional features (240) ... EXT4-fs (sda5): couldn't mount as ext2 due to feature incompatibilities ... EXT4-fs (sda5): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null) Here is the entry in fstab /dev/sda5 / ext4noatime,discard 0 1 I am having no difficulty, but seeing the first (error) message every day in logwatch is annoying. Since all my fs are ext4 I could remove ext3 support from the kernel (3.5.4). Is that the recommended procedure? I'm not sure, but I don't think you can mount ext4 as ext2/3 with the discard option (ssd trim) present. Only ext4 does support discard.
Re: [gentoo-user] Removing pulseaudio
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: I think you've hit the nail on the head. Complex setups require complex software... deal with it. An analogy is that an 18-wheeler semi-tractor trailer with a 17-speed manual transmission (plus air brakes that require months of training to manage/use) is much more powerful than a Chevy Sonic hatchback when it comes to hauling huge loads. But for someoneone who merely wants to zip out to the supermarket and buy a week's groceries, the hatchback is much more appropriate. Similarly, PulseAudio may be better at handling complex situations like you describe. The yelling and screaming you're hearing are from the 99% of people whose setups are not complex enough to justify PulseAudio. Making 100% of setups more complex in order to handle the 1% of edge cases is simply wrong. The complexity overhead of pulseaudio is vaaastly overstated here. Yes, as a general principle, adding unneeded complexity is bad. But that takes into account general ideas on the relative tradeoffs of having it there or not. But listen to the happy PA users here who don't feel any problem with their setup. The complexity doesn't bite them. Analogy: 99% of people aren't going to need a11y. But the whole point of installing it by default on most desktop systems is that you can't predict who will need it, and _it does not harm_ (or very little harm) to the people who don't. So your tradeoffs are: A) no a11y unless elected by user: - for the 1%: a11y is a pain to install because the user might not even be able to see the screen (very big pain) - for the 99% use a few megabytes less on their disk. (very small gain) B) a11y for everyone unless elected removed: - for the 1%: they can use the system properly (no pain) - for the 99%: use a few megabytes more on their disk (very small pain) Obviously (B) is a better default choice. Ditto pulseaudio. -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[x] social Response needed: [ ] yes [x] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [x] none
Re: [gentoo-user] mkfs.reiserfs hangs system?
On Apr 25, 2013 10:37 PM, Michael Hampicke m...@hadt.biz wrote: Am 25.04.2013 17:25, schrieb Pandu Poluan: Just wondering if any of you guys experienced this lately: System hangs when creating a brand-new ReiserFS on a new partition. I've tried using the latest gentoo minimal CD, or the latest SystemRescueCD, both exhibited the same. I'm on an HP DL585 G7 box, by the way, so it's using an AMD CPU. I'd appreciate any suggestions. My Google-fu all expose only old threads. Are there any error/warnings in dmes or the logs? Maybe the disk is toast? Can you create other file systems? Can't get to see dmesg, the system locked up tight. I can create an ext4 fs on a different partition, and since the 'disk' is actually a RAID array, if the array is going south, I should see the same problem with ext4, right? Rgds, --
Re: [gentoo-user] can't mount ext4 fs as est3 or ext3
On 25.04.2013 18:26, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: I get the following in /var/log/messages EXT3-fs (sda5): error: couldn't mount because of unsupported optional features (240) ... EXT4-fs (sda5): couldn't mount as ext2 due to feature incompatibilities ... EXT4-fs (sda5): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null) Here is the entry in fstab /dev/sda5 / ext4noatime,discard 0 1 I am having no difficulty, but seeing the first (error) message every day in logwatch is annoying. Since all my fs are ext4 I could remove ext3 support from the kernel (3.5.4). Is that the recommended procedure? Yes, it is. Moreover, it is due to the ext3 legacy code that you are getting the EXT3 error (the first one) in /var/log/messages. Even if you remove ext3 legacy support from kernel, the ext2 and ext3 filesystems will be handled by the new ext4 code. As for the EXT4-fs message, probably it tries to mount the fs as ext2 first but it is not quite consistent for different fs, I'm getting it on some but not getting on others. thanks, allan -- Best wishes, Yuri K. Shatroff
[gentoo-user] Re[2]: [gentoo-user] Re: [gentoo-user] bus error during compilation of gcc
Воскресенье, 21 апреля 2013, 13:27 +01:00 от Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com: On Saturday 20 Apr 2013 20:29:31 the guard wrote: Суббота, 20 апреля 2013, 15:25 -04:00 от Forrest Schultz f.schul...@gmail.com: Doesn't lowering makeopts just reduce the number of parallel compilations? yes, it does. I heard somewhere that bus error is caused by lack of sufficient amount of memory during compilations.I also tried to remove cflags. Simplifying cflags to something like: CFLAGS=-march=native -O2 -pipe may help and also setting makeopts to 1: MAKEOPTS=-j1 but none of the above will help if the problem is due to a bug. Have you done the basics like revdep-rebuild and python-updater? -- Regards, Mick didn't help, Mick
Re: [gentoo-user] PosgreSQL - pg_hba.conf localhost access only
On Thu, April 25, 2013 14:35, Joseph wrote: On 04/25/13 09:10, J. Roeleveld wrote: On Thu, April 25, 2013 07:48, Joseph wrote: SNIP I just tried as you suggested, the only active line in: pg_hba.conf local all all trust anything else is commented out. I restarted the server but I still can connect to postgresql from another computer via Firefox. Joseph, Let me put it in really simple terms: 1) Firefox is NOT a database client, it can NOT connect to a database 2) Firefox IS a webbrowser, it ONLY connects to a webserver This means, Postgresql will NOT see ANY connection made by Firefox. The website you have running ON TOP OFF apache makes the connection to Postgresql. Eg. it goes like the following: User - Firefox - Apache/website - Postgresql Any of the above can ONLY see their immediate neighbour. -- Joost So pg_hba.conf only controls direct connections to postgreSQL. Correct. Since apache group is in postgres user; apache was given permission to access the database in this case py-passing the setting in pg_hba.conf Wrong, Postgresql does not check group-ownership. Your pg_hba.conf file will have a setting that allows Apache to connect. Is there a way to force sequence: Apache/website - pg_hba.conf - Postgresql Postgresql will always read the pg_hba.conf file and use that to determine who can and can not connect directly to Postgresql. -- Joost
Re: [gentoo-user] mkfs.reiserfs hangs system?
On Thu, April 25, 2013 18:08, Pandu Poluan wrote: On Apr 25, 2013 10:37 PM, Michael Hampicke m...@hadt.biz wrote: Am 25.04.2013 17:25, schrieb Pandu Poluan: Just wondering if any of you guys experienced this lately: System hangs when creating a brand-new ReiserFS on a new partition. I've tried using the latest gentoo minimal CD, or the latest SystemRescueCD, both exhibited the same. I'm on an HP DL585 G7 box, by the way, so it's using an AMD CPU. I'd appreciate any suggestions. My Google-fu all expose only old threads. Are there any error/warnings in dmes or the logs? Maybe the disk is toast? Can you create other file systems? Can't get to see dmesg, the system locked up tight. Does it lock every time you try? Or did you only try once? I can create an ext4 fs on a different partition, Does it work on the SAME partition? Eg. having it touch the same physical parts of the same physical disk? and since the 'disk' is actually a RAID array, if the array is going south, I should see the same problem with ext4, right? Not necessarily, a bad part on 1 disk will also mean a bad part on the raid-array. The array should be able to recover though. Is this hardware raid? Or software? And what type of disks are you using? -- Joost
Re: [gentoo-user] Server system date synchronizaion
On 04/25/2013 10:46 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2013-04-25 10:40 AM, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: For contrast, having all nodes sync to pool.ntp.org results in time variance of up to 2-3 minutes across a dozen or so machines. That makes no sense... Not calling you a liar or anything, but it just doesn't make sense. I can see that it might take each system different times to get fully sync'd, but for them to consistently vary by this amount? No, something else is wrong. Are these virtualized servers? Some are virtualized, some are hosts, some are standalone. When all machines were configured to speak to pool.ntp.org, the variance was high. Obviously more so any time a guest was using its host's clock, and both guest and host were trying to adjust. There was still significant difference even between standalone systems. pool.ntp.org pulls from a huge pool of timeservers, and there is visible variance between more than a few of them. It's a volunteer effort. *shrug* Unfortunately, I don't have the exact variances in my notes. When I used a single standalone to connect to pool.ntp.org, and had all other systems (standalone, virtualized and guest) connect to that standalone system, virtually all variance went away. The stability of having a single local time source for all but one local machine to sync against overcame the instability caused by having host and guest ntp clients stacked. Of course, ideally, you want VM guests to rely on the VM host for their clock, and have the VM host configured with a good time source. And you would want all bare iron configured to talk to a small pool of tightly synchronized time servers. And if you can trust your layer 2 (or secure your layer 3 with, e.g. ipsec), you may further benefit from setting up a multicast time source. Further, ideally, you want a stratum 1 time server locally. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] mkfs.reiserfs hangs system?
Am 25.04.2013 18:08, schrieb Pandu Poluan: Are there any error/warnings in dmes or the logs? Maybe the disk is toast? Can you create other file systems? Can't get to see dmesg, the system locked up tight. I can create an ext4 fs on a different partition, and since the 'disk' is actually a RAID array, if the array is going south, I should see the same problem with ext4, right? That was my guess, that if it is indeed a hardware error, you would get the same error when trying to create a different fs on the same partition. A total system lock is strange. Do you have to physically reset the machine, or does SysRq Key still work? I'm still guessing that it is a hardware related problem. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Server system date synchronizaion
On 04/25/2013 11:02 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2013-04-25 10:33 AM, Nick Khamis sym...@gmail.com wrote: We are trying to sync our server's time with an accurate ntp server, and was wondering which of the many solutions are considered viable. I did see the http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/Time_Synchronization. Are these virtualized? It makes a difference, and from everything I've read, you don't sync virtualized servers the same as bare metal servers. Our services are quite time sensitive. Ummm... *all* servers are critically time-sensitive. Some are more critical than others. If you're primarily worried about kerberos, variance of up to a couple minutes will likely go unnoticed. If you're dumping logs into splunk, and need second-precision timestamps to be comparable to each other across a multi-campus network, that's a different degree of time-sensitive. If you're using a distributed filesystem with time-sensitive conflict resolution algorithms, you could easily start caring down to sub-millisecond ranges. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Server system date synchronizaion
On Thursday 25 April 2013 08:09 PM, Dale wrote: Nick Khamis wrote: Hello Everyone, We are trying to sync our server's time with an accurate ntp server, and was wondering which of the many solutions are considered viable. I did see the http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/Time_Synchronization. Our services are quite time sensitive. Thanks in Advance, N. net-misc/ntp net-misc/openntpd net-misc/chrony One of those should work. I think the plain ntp has been around the longest. I couldn't get it to work right on my rig so I switched to chrony. Basically, I would try ntp first then go from there if needed. Hope that helps. Dale :-) :-) You forgot busybox-ntpd smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Removing pulseaudio
On 25.04.2013 19:48, Mark David Dumlao wrote: On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: I think you've hit the nail on the head. Complex setups require complex software... deal with it. An analogy is that an 18-wheeler semi-tractor trailer with a 17-speed manual transmission (plus air brakes that require months of training to manage/use) is much more powerful than a Chevy Sonic hatchback when it comes to hauling huge loads. But for someoneone who merely wants to zip out to the supermarket and buy a week's groceries, the hatchback is much more appropriate. Similarly, PulseAudio may be better at handling complex situations like you describe. The yelling and screaming you're hearing are from the 99% of people whose setups are not complex enough to justify PulseAudio. Making 100% of setups more complex in order to handle the 1% of edge cases is simply wrong. The complexity overhead of pulseaudio is vaaastly overstated here. Yes, as a general principle, adding unneeded complexity is bad. But that takes into account general ideas on the relative tradeoffs of having it there or not. But listen to the happy PA users here who don't feel any problem with their setup. The complexity doesn't bite them. That is not a good argument. If it were that easy, then why not just install everything -- or even simply untar all software -- at once? People say that HDDs are big now. And that would do for 99% users, wouldn't it? Instead, you're still messing with all that package managing stuff... As for the complexity of PA, one must distinguish the PA architecture complexity, its installation complexity and the complexity of managing this stuff for the user (not mentioning usage complexity which is probably negligible). I wouldn't care for the architecture complexity (although I assume it to be too complex) but what I do care about is its bad manageability. If it were to install just a package, or just remove one package, then everyone would be satisfied, including those who need the functionality. But apparently it isn't so; either all audio software is to use PA, or none at all. Analogy: 99% of people aren't going to need a11y. But the whole point of installing it by default on most desktop systems is that you can't predict who will need it, and _it does not harm_ (or very little harm) to the people who don't. So your tradeoffs are: A) no a11y unless elected by user: - for the 1%: a11y is a pain to install because the user might not even be able to see the screen (very big pain) - for the 99% use a few megabytes less on their disk. (very small gain) B) a11y for everyone unless elected removed: - for the 1%: they can use the system properly (no pain) - for the 99%: use a few megabytes more on their disk (very small pain) Obviously (B) is a better default choice. Ditto pulseaudio. Well if PA is that great then why really not do like you suggest? Probably, the problem is not a few megabytes more on their disk but that PA is just not a good alternative? And eventually is there a real big unsolvable problem for one to *install* PA when he needs? Does one really end up with black screen or another kinda PITA without PA? If not, then it's not a good analogy? But as I feel it, the talk is about choice, not PA nor complexity. I just *don't want* it. I probably don't see any harm with various akonadis and nepomuks in KDE (actually, I did see much harm, but that's another story) but I simply don't want'em. As a result (of all those useless-for-me pieces of great code removed) I have Gentoo running KDE times faster than e.g. OpenSUSE, but even without that, it's my choice and if I don't perceive or measure these times faster I believe in them. Why should I care that there is a 99% majority of users who say that some stuff are harmless or they need them on their PCs, if *I* don't need it on *my* PC? -- Here I means one. If free software is going to be really free, then it is not expected to make assumptions about what I need or what 99% users need, nor to make its use unavoidable. It is expected to provide a means to use it, as well a means to not use it. -- Best wishes, Yuri K. Shatroff
Re: [gentoo-user] PosgreSQL - pg_hba.conf localhost access only
On 04/25/13 18:57, J. Roeleveld wrote: So pg_hba.conf only controls direct connections to postgreSQL. Correct. Since apache group is in postgres user; apache was given permission to access the database in this case py-passing the setting in pg_hba.conf Wrong, Postgresql does not check group-ownership. Your pg_hba.conf file will have a setting that allows Apache to connect. Is there a way to force sequence: Apache/website - pg_hba.conf - Postgresql Postgresql will always read the pg_hba.conf file and use that to determine who can and can not connect directly to Postgresql. -- Joost I've tired with this line: local clinic sql-ledger trust I can connect to clinic database form localhost and any box on the network. It works OK But I when I tried to further limit the database to a single IP, postgresql refused to start. local clinic sql-ledger10.0.0.100/32 trust -- Joseph
Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] How reliable is ext3?
Therefore Ext2 is a perfect match: * it is so old, that I guess by now most bugs have been found and squashed; * it is so old, that virtually any Linux (or Windows, FreeBSD, or most other knows OS's) are able to at least read it; * it is so old, that by now I bet there are countless recovery tools; * it is so simple (compared with others), that someone could just re-implement a reader for it, or recovery tools; Any feedback about the Ext2 for backups? (Hope I'm not wrong on this one...) Unexpectedly ext4 is actually rather good for embedded when compared to JFS etc.. However I have been considering using ext2 on my home partitions for the very reason you guess upon (it is easily recoverable by testdisk rather than carving out inodes, in fact ext4 was known to have this issue but traded it for other benefits when it was designed). I will have to look into the performance differences but thinking about it now as my IO is usually net or usb then I can't see it being relevant. -- ___ 'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface' (Doug McIlroy) ___
Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] Removing pulseaudio
Am 23.04.2013 22:59, schrieb William Hubbs: On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 09:49:19AM +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote: Feel free to remove PA if you don't need it. I really don't see any scope for Lennart to make all of alsa redundant anytime soon (unlike udev...) Of course from many threads from a pro audio user called Ralf, Gentoo users and so a fraction of Linux users are the only ones lucky enough to be able to do that *easily* whilst keeping packages they want, especially Gnome ones! Im not a gnome user as of yet, but I can tell you that the day is coming (Gnome 3.8 I believe) when gnome will not work without PA, so you will have to install it if you want newer Gnome. William That's true, gnome3.8 will require you to install pulseaudio-2 Are you sure, I know there have been a couple of times in the past where Gnome has leaned towards Linux only but they have always steered clear eventually. I know of one guy who runs a network of hundreds of Gnome/OpenBSD machines that may wish to know about that as I think he is already getting fed up with the increasing amount of code he has to write in order to keep the port working. -- ___ 'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface' (Doug McIlroy) ___
Re: [Bulk] [gentoo-user] Re: [Bulk] Re: Removing pulseaudio
So are you saying plugs are no longer required or that they are only needed for certain apps that take over the audio device. I don't even know exactly what ALSA plugs are, and ALSA has worked perfectly for all these years, so yeah, whatever an ALSA plug is, either it is not required anymore, or it is handled automagically by ALSA. Just did a quick Google to refresh my memory and I used plug:dmix as the device file name in order to prevent apps hogging the sound card. From Wikipedia A card's interface is a description of an ALSA protocol for accessing the card; possible interfaces include: hw, plughw, default, and plug:dmix. The hw interface provides direct access to the kernel device, but no software mixing or stream adaptation support. The plughw and default enable sound output where the hw interface would produce an error. -- ___ 'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface' (Doug McIlroy) ___
Re: [gentoo-user] Removing pulseaudio
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:48:07PM +0800, Mark David Dumlao wrote Analogy: 99% of people aren't going to need a11y. But the whole point of installing it by default on most desktop systems is that you can't predict who will need it, and _it does not harm_ (or very little harm) to the people who don't. On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 07:32:24PM +, Alan Mackenzie wrote Hello, Gentoo. [...deletia...] (ii) I was having problems with the last 1-2 seconds being cut off audio streams from news sites. [...deletia...] So, I grasped the nettle, put in a negative pulseaudio use flag, unmerged pa and alsa-plugins, then rebuilt the 14 packages which needed it. Surprisingly, everything still works. I now get those last seconds from my news streams. :-) On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 10:48:14AM -0400, Michael Mol wrote PA kinda worked in this scenario, up until I physically interacted with the USB audio device. If I plugged into that, *everything* would suddenly route through the USB audio device, despite my careful routing of different applications to different audio sources. [...deletia...] You know the sad thing, though? ALSA would support that configuration very well, too. It has enough internal routing and mixing logic that it'd work. And a Google search turns up a lot more cases. So your tradeoffs are: A) no a11y unless elected by user: - for the 1%: a11y is a pain to install How painfull is it to add pulseaudio to USE in make.conf and then emerge --changed-use world because the user might not even be able to see the screen (very big pain) Are you seriously arguing that a linux system will black-screen at bootup due to lack of pulseaudio? B) a11y for everyone unless elected removed: - for the 1%: they can use the system properly (no pain) - for the 99%: use a few megabytes more on their disk (very small pain) That is a strawman argument that avoids the question. This is *NOT* about a few megabytes of disk space. It's about an extra layer on top of the system, chewing up memory, slowing it down, and interacting with other software to cause problems. *THAT* is what it's about. New Windows machines tend to come with so many craplets that programs like PC Decrapifier http://www.pcdecrapifier.com/ are necessary. Android smartphones come stuffed with their garbage, and they have to be rooted to get rid of it. One reason I chose linux, and especially Gentoo, is that it allows me to avoid stuff I don't want/need. Thanks to USE=-* plus judicious USE flags, I've got an almost-6-year-old Dell with a Core Duo CPU and an onboard Intel GPU running NHL GameCentreLive. Think of USE=-* plus ICEWM as my version of Linux Decrapifier. -- Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org I don't run desktop environments; I run useful applications
Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] Removing pulseaudio
Am 25.04.2013 22:10, schrieb Kevin Chadwick: Am 23.04.2013 22:59, schrieb William Hubbs: On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 09:49:19AM +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote: Feel free to remove PA if you don't need it. I really don't see any scope for Lennart to make all of alsa redundant anytime soon (unlike udev...) Of course from many threads from a pro audio user called Ralf, Gentoo users and so a fraction of Linux users are the only ones lucky enough to be able to do that *easily* whilst keeping packages they want, especially Gnome ones! Im not a gnome user as of yet, but I can tell you that the day is coming (Gnome 3.8 I believe) when gnome will not work without PA, so you will have to install it if you want newer Gnome. William That's true, gnome3.8 will require you to install pulseaudio-2 Are you sure, I know there have been a couple of times in the past where Gnome has leaned towards Linux only but they have always steered clear eventually. I know of one guy who runs a network of hundreds of Gnome/OpenBSD machines that may wish to know about that as I think he is already getting fed up with the increasing amount of code he has to write in order to keep the port working. Yes I'm sure, I have gnome 3.8 installed on my machine. gnome-settings-daemon and gnome-shell have hard deps on pulseaudio. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Removing pulseaudio
On 25/04/2013 17:48, Mark David Dumlao wrote: On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: I think you've hit the nail on the head. Complex setups require complex software... deal with it. An analogy is that an 18-wheeler semi-tractor trailer with a 17-speed manual transmission (plus air brakes that require months of training to manage/use) is much more powerful than a Chevy Sonic hatchback when it comes to hauling huge loads. But for someoneone who merely wants to zip out to the supermarket and buy a week's groceries, the hatchback is much more appropriate. Similarly, PulseAudio may be better at handling complex situations like you describe. The yelling and screaming you're hearing are from the 99% of people whose setups are not complex enough to justify PulseAudio. Making 100% of setups more complex in order to handle the 1% of edge cases is simply wrong. The complexity overhead of pulseaudio is vaaastly overstated here. And you are vastly overstating the desirability of having pulseaudio enforced on users without very good cause and seem to have underestimated how deep that rabbit hole goes. As others have stated, how many more such packages are there that can be argued to have them on a system? A good first grab would be the number of packages where the users are =1% and =99% It does no harm and might be useful for some is simply not a valid reason to enforce a package on all users, especially when said package is the latest johnny-come-lately from a wunderkind with a proven reputation for writing invasive code[1] and where the package in question is merely the most recent between 4 valid choices, all of which accomplish the basic action. The world out there is always vastly more complex than you imagine and your[2] system, or all systems of which you have knowledge, can never be considered representative. What is good for you is seldom good for all. I'm not rejecting pulseaudio. It solves a problem that exists and for those that need it PA is a boon. I'm saying that there is no cause for making PA mandatory, or even for having any sound capabilities on a desktop machine at all. [1] invasive here means invasive, it does not imply good, bad, indifferent or any other description of quality. Merely that Poetering's code is invasive and disruptive. [2] you here can just as easily mean any one of the 7 billion humans we've created so far Yes, as a general principle, adding unneeded complexity is bad. But that takes into account general ideas on the relative tradeoffs of having it there or not. But listen to the happy PA users here who don't feel any problem with their setup. The complexity doesn't bite them. Analogy: 99% of people aren't going to need a11y. But the whole point of installing it by default on most desktop systems is that you can't predict who will need it, and _it does not harm_ (or very little harm) to the people who don't. So your tradeoffs are: A) no a11y unless elected by user: - for the 1%: a11y is a pain to install because the user might not even be able to see the screen (very big pain) - for the 99% use a few megabytes less on their disk. (very small gain) B) a11y for everyone unless elected removed: - for the 1%: they can use the system properly (no pain) - for the 99%: use a few megabytes more on their disk (very small pain) Obviously (B) is a better default choice. Ditto pulseaudio. -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[x] social Response needed: [ ] yes [x] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [x] none -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
[gentoo-user] Re: Removing pulseaudio
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 09:31:43PM +0400, Yuri K. Shatroff wrote: On 25.04.2013 19:48, Mark David Dumlao wrote: On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: I think you've hit the nail on the head. Complex setups require complex software... deal with it. An analogy is that an 18-wheeler semi-tractor trailer with a 17-speed manual transmission (plus air brakes that require months of training to manage/use) is much more powerful than a Chevy Sonic hatchback when it comes to hauling huge loads. But for someoneone who merely wants to zip out to the supermarket and buy a week's groceries, the hatchback is much more appropriate. Similarly, PulseAudio may be better at handling complex situations like you describe. The yelling and screaming you're hearing are from the 99% of people whose setups are not complex enough to justify PulseAudio. Making 100% of setups more complex in order to handle the 1% of edge cases is simply wrong. Exactly. If you think you have to make 100% of cases more complex just to handle an edge 1%, YDIW. No ifs nor buts about it. The complexity overhead of pulseaudio is vaaastly overstated here. Yes, as a general principle, adding unneeded complexity is bad. But that takes into account general ideas on the relative tradeoffs of having it there or not. But listen to the happy PA users here who don't feel any problem with their setup. The complexity doesn't bite them. As for the complexity of PA, one must distinguish the PA architecture complexity, its installation complexity and the complexity of managing this stuff for the user (not mentioning usage complexity which is probably negligible). I wouldn't care for the architecture complexity (although I assume it to be too complex) but what I do care about is its bad manageability. If it were to install just a package, or just remove one package, then everyone would be satisfied, including those who need the functionality. But apparently it isn't so; either all audio software is to use PA, or none at all. Analogy: 99% of people aren't going to need a11y. But the whole point of installing it by default on most desktop systems is that you can't predict who will need it, and _it does not harm_ (or very little harm) to the people who don't. So your tradeoffs are: A) no a11y unless elected by user: - for the 1%: a11y is a pain to install because the user might not even be able to see the screen (very big pain) - for the 99% use a few megabytes less on their disk. (very small gain) B) a11y for everyone unless elected removed: - for the 1%: they can use the system properly (no pain) - for the 99%: use a few megabytes more on their disk (very small pain) Obviously (B) is a better default choice. Ditto pulseaudio. That's assuming it were simply a case of a few megabytes of disk space. But as pointed out, it's also a case of upstream wanting everyone to change the way they do things across the board, in the name of convenience. It doesn't seem like these convenience layers really make anyone's life easier in the longer-term. Instead of working behind the scenes so that existing methods function more capably, everyone has to change their code to a new API, whose developers wouldn't know an ABI-promise if it smacked them on the head, and all users have to change their setups. Hardly making everyone's life easier, and breaking userspace as if it were lucrative. Further, they appear to have a tendency to break when you want to do something unusual, or as most people think of it, use your machine as you see fit. That's a problem common to all idiot-box software, when they try to guess and don't listen. If I wanted that, I wouldn't have fled Windows development over a decade ago. Well if PA is that great then why really not do like you suggest? Probably, the problem is not a few megabytes more on their disk but that PA is just not a good alternative? And eventually is there a real big unsolvable problem for one to *install* PA when he needs? Does one really end up with black screen or another kinda PITA without PA? If not, then it's not a good analogy? Precisely. But as I feel it, the talk is about choice, not PA nor complexity. I just *don't want* it. I probably don't see any harm with various akonadis and nepomuks in KDE (actually, I did see much harm, but that's another story) but I simply don't want'em. As a result (of all those useless-for-me pieces of great code removed) I have Gentoo running KDE times faster than e.g. OpenSUSE, but even without that, it's my choice and if I don't perceive or measure these times faster I believe in them. I'm with you there: after I removed semantic-craptop, my KDE came back to me :-) I went a bit further and removed the nubkit stuff, and things actually work a lot better. It was hard giving up kmail[1] but once I'd overcome that barrier, losing nubkit was a
[gentoo-user] Re: How reliable is ext3?
On 04/24/2013 03:22 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote: We can't blame any of the software for this That, from a sysadmin? Any more of that kind of talk and I'll recommend that your bofh certificate be revoked!
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How reliable is ext3?
On 26/04/2013 00:43, walt wrote: On 04/24/2013 03:22 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote: We can't blame any of the software for this That, from a sysadmin? Any more of that kind of talk and I'll recommend that your bofh certificate be revoked! Take a ticket and get in line :-) There's 570 users plus managers/execs without number in front of you in that queue! These days I'm not so much a sysadmin anymore. I'm now one of the new breed, one of those terrible awful things that strike fear into the heart of Unix-lovers everywhere: I now do DevOps shudder -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Server system date synchronizaion
On 25/04/13 23:07, Nick Khamis wrote: Ummm... *all* servers are critically time-sensitive. Yeah... I concur ;) Define critical! - to my mind if its critical you should be running your own atomic clock, and something like a pps system to distribute it ... or somewhere in the middle a local gps receiver for time lock. Or do you mean reasonably accurate, but closely synced local systems? My interest after having a stable ntp based hierarchy for years is in trying to get the same using a cisco router and VMs' - not easy so far! When I used an ancient netgear adsl, and a linux firewall/ntp server it was very good, now ... Does anyone know a good guide to using time sync in VM's, for both windows and linux (gentoo) guests using libvirt? Especially for guests that are resumed, or the whole virtualisation system is hibernated? (ntp refuses to resync after guest pause/save/restore/resume (known problem), even with tinker panic 0 My current setup is complicated by using a cisco router (adsl) as the localnet master via local (ISP/University) time servers - its rather inaccurate so while the machines are often locked, its in rather relative terms :) ghost#sh ntp ass address ref clock st when poll reach delay offset disp +~130.95.128.36210.9.192.50 24464 37711.9 -844.4 213.6 +~116.66.162.4 130.234.255.832 864 37748.7 -907.5 213.3 +~203.0.178.19143.128.117.84 22364 37712.2 -891.0 213.3 ~192.168.48.1 134.115.4.33 3 9h3964017.3 -616.8 16000. *~27.54.95.11 218.100.43.70 24264 37712.7 -846.7 221.4 +~202.127.210.36 223.255.185.2 23164 37762.2 -845.3 211.2 +~130.102.128.23 132.163.4.101 23864 37777.3 -850.4 212.4 * master (synced), # master (unsynced), + selected, - candidate, ~ configured ghost# asterisk ~ # ntpq -p remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter == ghost.lan.local 27.54.95.11 3 u 64 64 3771.386 2838.19 513.843 asterisk
Re: [gentoo-user] Server system date synchronizaion
Nilesh Govindrajan wrote: On Thursday 25 April 2013 08:09 PM, Dale wrote: Nick Khamis wrote: Hello Everyone, We are trying to sync our server's time with an accurate ntp server, and was wondering which of the many solutions are considered viable. I did see the http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/Time_Synchronization. Our services are quite time sensitive. Thanks in Advance, N. net-misc/ntp net-misc/openntpd net-misc/chrony One of those should work. I think the plain ntp has been around the longest. I couldn't get it to work right on my rig so I switched to chrony. Basically, I would try ntp first then go from there if needed. Hope that helps. Dale :-) :-) You forgot busybox-ntpd Didn't forget, didn't know about it. ;-) I just listed the ones I have heard of and either tried or was told about. Let's see if I can remember it for next time tho. :-) Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!
Re: [gentoo-user] Server system date synchronizaion
On 26/04/2013 01:42, William Kenworthy wrote: Does anyone know a good guide to using time sync in VM's, for both windows and linux (gentoo) guests using libvirt? Especially for guests that are resumed, or the whole virtualisation system is hibernated? (ntp refuses to resync after guest pause/save/restore/resume (known problem), even with tinker panic 0 That's not a bug, it's by design. If ntpd detects the clock is out by more than X seconds [1], it will not try to correct the difference, concluding that something is wrong and a human must decide. It can't easily tell the difference between a resumed guest (or even that it was resumed at all) and a severe problem. We fixed this by taking the easy route of least resistance; 1. run ntpdate on startup/restart once before ntpd starts 2. start ntpd as normal 3. a colleague wrote a $MAGIC_HOOK to detect resumed guests that runs ntpdate once True, it's a brutal solution and uses a baseball bat where some finesse might be less ugly, but it suits our needs just fine. [1] I forget what X is and am too lazy to look it up. Is it 30 seconds or thereabouts? -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Server system date synchronizaion
On 4/25/2013 19:50, Alan McKinnon wrote: On 26/04/2013 01:42, William Kenworthy wrote: Does anyone know a good guide to using time sync in VM's, for both windows and linux (gentoo) guests using libvirt? Especially for guests that are resumed, or the whole virtualisation system is hibernated? (ntp refuses to resync after guest pause/save/restore/resume (known problem), even with tinker panic 0 That's not a bug, it's by design. If ntpd detects the clock is out by more than X seconds [1], it will not try to correct the difference, concluding that something is wrong and a human must decide. It can't easily tell the difference between a resumed guest (or even that it was resumed at all) and a severe problem. We fixed this by taking the easy route of least resistance; 1. run ntpdate on startup/restart once before ntpd starts 2. start ntpd as normal 3. a colleague wrote a $MAGIC_HOOK to detect resumed guests that runs ntpdate once True, it's a brutal solution and uses a baseball bat where some finesse might be less ugly, but it suits our needs just fine. [1] I forget what X is and am too lazy to look it up. Is it 30 seconds or thereabouts? When first started, the daemon normally polls the servers listed in the configuration file at 64-s intervals. In order to allow a sufficient number of samples for the NTP algorithms to reliably discriminate between correctly operating servers and possible intruders, at least four valid messages from the majority of servers and peers listed in the configuration file is required before the daemon can set the local clock. However, if the difference between the client time and server time is greater than the panic threshold, which defaults to 1000 s, the daemon will send a message to the system log and shut down without setting the clock. [0] [0] - http://doc.ntp.org/4.1.1/debug.htm -- staticsafe O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org Please don't top post - http://goo.gl/YrmAb Don't CC me! I'm subscribed to whatever list I just posted on.
Re: [gentoo-user] Server system date synchronizaion
On 26/04/13 07:57, staticsafe wrote: On 4/25/2013 19:50, Alan McKinnon wrote: On 26/04/2013 01:42, William Kenworthy wrote: Does anyone know a good guide to using time sync in VM's, for both windows and linux (gentoo) guests using libvirt? Especially for guests that are resumed, or the whole virtualisation system is hibernated? (ntp refuses to resync after guest pause/save/restore/resume (known problem), even with tinker panic 0 That's not a bug, it's by design. If ntpd detects the clock is out by more than X seconds [1], it will not try to correct the difference, concluding that something is wrong and a human must decide. It can't easily tell the difference between a resumed guest (or even that it was resumed at all) and a severe problem. We fixed this by taking the easy route of least resistance; 1. run ntpdate on startup/restart once before ntpd starts 2. start ntpd as normal 3. a colleague wrote a $MAGIC_HOOK to detect resumed guests that runs ntpdate once True, it's a brutal solution and uses a baseball bat where some finesse might be less ugly, but it suits our needs just fine. [1] I forget what X is and am too lazy to look it up. Is it 30 seconds or thereabouts? When first started, the daemon normally polls the servers listed in the configuration file at 64-s intervals. In order to allow a sufficient number of samples for the NTP algorithms to reliably discriminate between correctly operating servers and possible intruders, at least four valid messages from the majority of servers and peers listed in the configuration file is required before the daemon can set the local clock. However, if the difference between the client time and server time is greater than the panic threshold, which defaults to 1000 s, the daemon will send a message to the system log and shut down without setting the clock. [0] [0] - http://doc.ntp.org/4.1.1/debug.htm Keep reading :) Check out tinker panic o I mentioned, or the -g argument to ntpd The docs say its a once only adjustment in one place, but I am not sure thats actually the case. BillK
Re: [gentoo-user] mkfs.reiserfs hangs system?
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: Can't get to see dmesg, the system locked up tight. I can create an ext4 fs on a different partition, and since the 'disk' is actually a RAID array, if the array is going south, I should see the same problem with ext4, right? I am guessing that mkreiserfs happens to touch parts of the disk that mke2fs doesn't, and that the system hangs because the disk becomes unresponsive. I will predict that mkntfs, which by default zeroes out the partition, will fail similarly? -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[x] social Response needed: [ ] yes [x] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [x] none
Re: [gentoo-user] Removing pulseaudio
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 1:31 AM, Yuri K. Shatroff yks-...@yandex.ru wrote: On 25.04.2013 19:48, Mark David Dumlao wrote: On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: I think you've hit the nail on the head. Complex setups require complex software... deal with it. An analogy is that an 18-wheeler semi-tractor trailer with a 17-speed manual transmission (plus air brakes that require months of training to manage/use) is much more powerful than a Chevy Sonic hatchback when it comes to hauling huge loads. But for someoneone who merely wants to zip out to the supermarket and buy a week's groceries, the hatchback is much more appropriate. Similarly, PulseAudio may be better at handling complex situations like you describe. The yelling and screaming you're hearing are from the 99% of people whose setups are not complex enough to justify PulseAudio. Making 100% of setups more complex in order to handle the 1% of edge cases is simply wrong. The complexity overhead of pulseaudio is vaaastly overstated here. Yes, as a general principle, adding unneeded complexity is bad. But that takes into account general ideas on the relative tradeoffs of having it there or not. But listen to the happy PA users here who don't feel any problem with their setup. The complexity doesn't bite them. That is not a good argument. If it were that easy, then why not just install everything -- or even simply untar all software -- at once? People say that HDDs are big now. And that would do for 99% users, wouldn't it? Instead, you're still messing with all that package managing stuff... There is a a very huge difference between all software at once and one particular small package with a proven use. I wouldn't care for the architecture complexity (although I assume it to be too complex) but what I do care about is its bad manageability. If it were to install just a package, or just remove one package, then everyone would be satisfied, including those who need the functionality. But apparently it isn't so; either all audio software is to use PA, or none at all. BEEEP. Wrong. The same niggles that allow ALSA to multi-audio without pulseaudio are magically not erased by installing pulseaudio. It's just that - what's the point? If you can adjust the volume of M.A.R.S A Ridiculous Shooter independently of the volume of your flash plugin, why would you want to exempt vlc or thunderbird from the same? Well if PA is that great then why really not do like you suggest? Probably, the problem is not a few megabytes more on their disk but that PA is just not a good alternative? Haven't heard any reason to think otherwise, pun intended. Even with projects that hate pulseaudio's guts and don't want to play with them, I can make them be happy with pasuspender. And eventually is there a real big unsolvable problem for one to *install* PA when he needs? Does one really end up with black screen or another kinda PITA without PA? If not, then it's not a good analogy. But as I feel it, the talk is about choice, not PA nor complexity. I just *don't want* it. The analogy isn't that the desktop is broken without PA. The analogy was only to show that there are tradeoffs that go into considering added complexity, which were blindly being considered as a set-in-stone rule for designing systems. I'm sorry, that's a terrible rule to live by when designing systems for real people. It's just a guideline. You _must_ consider the tradeoffs. There is no substitute for considering the tradeoffs Now obviously with gentoo, we already have a choice to put it in or not, so I'm guessing you're evaluating non-gentoo choices to put it in by default. So you're effectively criticizing gnobuntudora. The gnobuntudora choice to include it by default makes sense, because they are often catering to environments where even mentioning the package manager to the average user is already too technical for them. So in their calculus, the 99% who don't need it don't suffer, but the 1% who need it do and will suffer. You haven't demonstrated that you've given the same depth of considerations to this. -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[x] social Response needed: [ ] yes [x] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [x] none
Re: [gentoo-user] mkfs.reiserfs hangs system?
On Apr 26, 2013 9:46 AM, Mark David Dumlao madum...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: Can't get to see dmesg, the system locked up tight. I can create an ext4 fs on a different partition, and since the 'disk' is actually a RAID array, if the array is going south, I should see the same problem with ext4, right? I am guessing that mkreiserfs happens to touch parts of the disk that mke2fs doesn't, and that the system hangs because the disk becomes unresponsive. I will predict that mkntfs, which by default zeroes out the partition, will fail similarly? -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[x] social Response needed: [ ] yes [x] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [x] none Okay, everybody, thanks for all the input! Since this is a server in my office, I couldn't test until I arrive in my office. I'm now (just) arrived in my office, and I will try the following: 1. Create Reiserfs on a different partition, and 2. Create a different fs on the problematic partition. I'll report back with what happened. Rgds, --
[gentoo-user] How to run Firefox Beta?
I downloaded Firefox Beta official tbz2 from mozilla.org and extract into ~ But, ldd libxul.so says libasound.so.2 not found, even though /usr/lib where libasound.so.2 exists is in LD_LIBRARY_PATH. How to run it? smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [gentoo-user] How to run Firefox Beta?
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:57 PM, Nilesh Govindrajan m...@nileshgr.com wrote: I downloaded Firefox Beta official tbz2 from mozilla.org and extract into ~ But, ldd libxul.so says libasound.so.2 not found, even though /usr/lib where libasound.so.2 exists is in LD_LIBRARY_PATH. How to run it? Are you running amd64 Gentoo and did you download the 32 bit Firefox? You might have to install some emul packages. -- Alecks Gates
