Re: [gentoo-user] sys-power/upower with systemd
Am Mon, 23 Jun 2014 20:39:13 -0400 schrieb gottl...@nyu.edu: I think I had first misinterpreted the news msg, but want to be sure I do understand it correctly now. The message ends with All non-systemd users are recommended to choose between: # emerge --oneshot --noreplace 'sys-power/upower-pm-utils' or # emerge --oneshot --noreplace '=sys-power/upower-0.99.0' However, all systemd users are recommended to stay with sys-power/upower. I first read stay with sys-power/upower to mean systemd users should NOT do any of the two options for non-systemd users and let portage do its thing. However, portage want to replace upower with upower-pm-utils, which I am pretty sure is not intended for systemd users. Is the proper reading of the news message, that the systemd users should use the second option available for non-systemd users? Specifically am I to execute # emerge --oneshot --noreplace '=sys-power/upower-0.99.0' ? Um, personally, I think the message is extremely clear: non-systemd users should choose between the first two options, and systemd users should just stick with plain upower, regardless of version (although there is only one ATM, the older one is masked now). thanks in advance, allan HTH -- Marc Joliet -- People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don't - Bjarne Stroustrup signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] sys-power/upower with systemd
On 06/24/2014 10:01:24 AM, Marc Joliet wrote: Am Mon, 23 Jun 2014 20:39:13 -0400 schrieb gottl...@nyu.edu: I think I had first misinterpreted the news msg, but want to be sure I do understand it correctly now. The message ends with All non-systemd users are recommended to choose between: # emerge --oneshot --noreplace 'sys-power/upower-pm-utils' or # emerge --oneshot --noreplace '=sys-power/upower-0.99.0' However, all systemd users are recommended to stay with sys-power/upower. I first read stay with sys-power/upower to mean systemd users should NOT do any of the two options for non-systemd users and let portage do its thing. However, portage want to replace upower with upower-pm-utils, which I am pretty sure is not intended for systemd users. Is the proper reading of the news message, that the systemd users should use the second option available for non-systemd users? Specifically am I to execute # emerge --oneshot --noreplace '=sys-power/upower-0.99.0' ? Um, personally, I think the message is extremely clear: non-systemd users should choose between the first two options, and systemd users should just stick with plain upower, regardless of version (although there is only one ATM, the older one is masked now). Hi, please tell me - what is a systemd user? I have systemd AND openrc installed here and I still don't use systemd as my init system. Am I a systemd user? I ask because I cannot installed some packages, some require upower-0.99.0 others fail with it. Thanks, Helmut
Re: [gentoo-user] sys-power/upower with systemd
Am Tue, 24 Jun 2014 10:08:29 +0200 schrieb Helmut Jarausch jarau...@igpm.rwth-aachen.de: On 06/24/2014 10:01:24 AM, Marc Joliet wrote: Am Mon, 23 Jun 2014 20:39:13 -0400 schrieb gottl...@nyu.edu: I think I had first misinterpreted the news msg, but want to be sure I do understand it correctly now. The message ends with All non-systemd users are recommended to choose between: # emerge --oneshot --noreplace 'sys-power/upower-pm-utils' or # emerge --oneshot --noreplace '=sys-power/upower-0.99.0' However, all systemd users are recommended to stay with sys-power/upower. I first read stay with sys-power/upower to mean systemd users should NOT do any of the two options for non-systemd users and let portage do its thing. However, portage want to replace upower with upower-pm-utils, which I am pretty sure is not intended for systemd users. Is the proper reading of the news message, that the systemd users should use the second option available for non-systemd users? Specifically am I to execute # emerge --oneshot --noreplace '=sys-power/upower-0.99.0' ? Um, personally, I think the message is extremely clear: non-systemd users should choose between the first two options, and systemd users should just stick with plain upower, regardless of version (although there is only one ATM, the older one is masked now). Hi, please tell me - what is a systemd user? I have systemd AND openrc installed here and I still don't use systemd as my init system. Am I a systemd user? I ask because I cannot installed some packages, some require upower-0.99.0 others fail with it. Thanks, Helmut Well, in general, a user of software is to me somebody who actually uses it, and doesn't merely have it installed, doing nothing. So since you don't use it, you... don't use it ;) . In this particular case, my understanding from the previous discussion is that UPower expects certain functionality from systemd at runtime (IIRC it doesn't actually *need* systemd, it just assumes that it takes over the same functionality as pm-utils). So, specifically, a systemd user is to me (and probably to most people) somebody who *boots* with systemd. HTH -- Marc Joliet -- People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don't - Bjarne Stroustrup signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] sys-power/upower with systemd
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 4:28 AM, Marc Joliet mar...@gmx.de wrote: Well, in general, a user of software is to me somebody who actually uses it, and doesn't merely have it installed, doing nothing. So since you don't use it, you... don't use it ;) . It actually isn't a dumb question. Up until now there shouldn't be issues with having both installed, and selecting between them at boot time. Apparently now we're starting to get diverging dependencies, so your system won't work quite right if you boot the wrong init at boot. Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] sys-power/upower with systemd
Am Tue, 24 Jun 2014 06:09:12 -0400 schrieb Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org: On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 4:28 AM, Marc Joliet mar...@gmx.de wrote: Well, in general, a user of software is to me somebody who actually uses it, and doesn't merely have it installed, doing nothing. So since you don't use it, you... don't use it ;) . It actually isn't a dumb question. I didn't think so, and I gave the definition *I* use. Sorry if I implied otherwise! (My last sentence was in reference to Helmut writing [...] I still don't use systemd as my init system.[...], which I thought was a bit of a silly formulation, given his question :) .) Up until now there shouldn't be issues with having both installed, and selecting between them at boot time. Apparently now we're starting to get diverging dependencies, so your system won't work quite right if you boot the wrong init at boot. Which is where my second paragraph came in, pointing out that - and I'm repeating myself here - that, to my understanding, it's not so much that upower needs systemd, it's that it expects systemd to take over functionality that upower used to provide via pm-utils (hibernation, etc.). So it's a *runtime* problem: if you boot with systemd, you should use plain upower, if not, it depends on whether you need the functionality provided by pm-utils (which only the user of a system can know). Again, this is what I gathered from the previous looong upower discussion. You *can* use the newer upower without systemd, but you'll be missing functionality it used to provide via pm-utils (which is pretty much what Tom Wijsman said in one message). HTH -- Marc Joliet -- People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don't - Bjarne Stroustrup signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] sys-power/upower with systemd
On 24/06/2014 10:08, Helmut Jarausch wrote: On 06/24/2014 10:01:24 AM, Marc Joliet wrote: Am Mon, 23 Jun 2014 20:39:13 -0400 schrieb gottl...@nyu.edu: I think I had first misinterpreted the news msg, but want to be sure I do understand it correctly now. The message ends with All non-systemd users are recommended to choose between: # emerge --oneshot --noreplace 'sys-power/upower-pm-utils' or # emerge --oneshot --noreplace '=sys-power/upower-0.99.0' However, all systemd users are recommended to stay with sys-power/upower. I first read stay with sys-power/upower to mean systemd users should NOT do any of the two options for non-systemd users and let portage do its thing. However, portage want to replace upower with upower-pm-utils, which I am pretty sure is not intended for systemd users. Is the proper reading of the news message, that the systemd users should use the second option available for non-systemd users? Specifically am I to execute # emerge --oneshot --noreplace '=sys-power/upower-0.99.0' ? Um, personally, I think the message is extremely clear: non-systemd users should choose between the first two options, and systemd users should just stick with plain upower, regardless of version (although there is only one ATM, the older one is masked now). Hi, please tell me - what is a systemd user? A systemd user is someone who has systemd installed and *is using it* How can that be unclear? I have systemd AND openrc installed here and I still don't use systemd as my init system. Am I a systemd user? I ask because I cannot installed some packages, some require upower-0.99.0 others fail with it. Thanks, Helmut -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Video audio out of sync mkv mplayer
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 03:16:27PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: On 21/06/2014 15:01, Alexander Kapshuk wrote: What could be amiss there? Thanks. dodgy source files? use the mplayer hotkeys that gets them back in sync I recently had a file, I think it was a TV recording. I re-encoded it with ffmpeg, both audio and video. I think it was here where it complained about litter in the audio stream. In the end the produced MKV had a huge audio offset of several seconds. I used the A/V delay hotkeys, but they had no effect. I could not bring audio and video together, so eventually I ditched the files, no point in keeping them. -- Gruß | Greetings | Qapla’ Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network. I verbs stupid. In my opinion we not verbs. You most sentences without them. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
[gentoo-user] backup hardware setup
Hi, I bought two identical external harddrives, USB 3.0, with 1 TByte each (no SSD - the good ole mechanical ones...;). The intended use is for backup of longer files. The drives will contain the same contents. Currently there are still clean metal (no partitioning, no fs). Data integrity and recoverability (Uhhh...that words looks wrong...) in case of an desaster is more important than speed. What is the recommended way of partitioning ? What filesystem to choose? Thank you very much in advance for any help! Best regards, mcc PS: Running vanilla kernel 3.15.1
Re: [gentoo-user] backup hardware setup
On 06/24/2014 03:43 PM, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Hi, I bought two identical external harddrives, USB 3.0, with 1 TByte each (no SSD - the good ole mechanical ones...;). The intended use is for backup of longer files. The drives will contain the same contents. Currently there are still clean metal (no partitioning, no fs). Data integrity and recoverability (Uhhh...that words looks wrong...) in case of an desaster is more important than speed. What is the recommended way of partitioning ? What filesystem to choose? Thank you very much in advance for any help! Best regards, mcc PS: Running vanilla kernel 3.15.1 I do this using hard links and rsync to only copy changed data. this creates a dated folder structure that i can then rsync / cp using a livecd to baremetal and basically allows best recoverability, imho. so long as the filesystem supports hard links you are golden. you might want btrfs for this for long term storage to help in case of bitrot, but rsync should refresh the file if it is suddenly unreadable (meaning any other hard lnked versoins are also up the swanny) ymmv depending on what it is you are backing up #!/bin/bash echo 'preparing..' date=`date +%Y-%m-%d_%H.%M.%S` workingfolder=/mnt/usb/backupsyncs/myhost1 fromfolder=root@myhost1:/* --exclude=/var/tmp --exclude=/dev --exclude=/mnt --exclude=/opt --exclude=/proc --exclude=/sys --exclude=/usr/portage --exclude=/usr/src echo Date $date echo From $fromfolder echo To$workingfolder echo move current to be dated mv $workingfolder/current $workingfolder/backup-$date echo now syncing into dated folder rsync -vz --partial --modify-window 5 -W --delete -a $fromfolder $workingfolder/backup-$date echo cleaning up..linkcopying dated folder to current cp -al $workingfolder/backup-$date $workingfolder/current
Re: [gentoo-user] firefox profile opens my web-page in https
On 06/23/14 18:08, Mick wrote: On Sunday 22 Jun 2014 22:52:40 Joseph wrote: I run a server and have two firefox profiles. I have ssl enabled. When I open one profile I it opens my web-page in https instead of http When I open another profile it open my webpage in http Why is first profile forcing my opening my servers page in https mode? Has one profile cached and different protocol+URL in the address bar, than the other? Does this persist if you clear the history of the profile? -- Regards, Mick No, it makes no difference. I cleared history and cache. It still tries to open my server page as https instead of http. -- Joseph
Re: [gentoo-user] backup hardware setup
thegeezer thegee...@thegeezer.net [14-06-24 17:16]: On 06/24/2014 03:43 PM, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Hi, I bought two identical external harddrives, USB 3.0, with 1 TByte each (no SSD - the good ole mechanical ones...;). The intended use is for backup of longer files. The drives will contain the same contents. Currently there are still clean metal (no partitioning, no fs). Data integrity and recoverability (Uhhh...that words looks wrong...) in case of an desaster is more important than speed. What is the recommended way of partitioning ? What filesystem to choose? Thank you very much in advance for any help! Best regards, mcc PS: Running vanilla kernel 3.15.1 I do this using hard links and rsync to only copy changed data. this creates a dated folder structure that i can then rsync / cp using a livecd to baremetal and basically allows best recoverability, imho. so long as the filesystem supports hard links you are golden. you might want btrfs for this for long term storage to help in case of bitrot, but rsync should refresh the file if it is suddenly unreadable (meaning any other hard lnked versoins are also up the swanny) ymmv depending on what it is you are backing up #!/bin/bash echo 'preparing..' date=`date +%Y-%m-%d_%H.%M.%S` workingfolder=/mnt/usb/backupsyncs/myhost1 fromfolder=root@myhost1:/* --exclude=/var/tmp --exclude=/dev --exclude=/mnt --exclude=/opt --exclude=/proc --exclude=/sys --exclude=/usr/portage --exclude=/usr/src echo Date $date echo From $fromfolder echo To$workingfolder echo move current to be dated mv $workingfolder/current $workingfolder/backup-$date echo now syncing into dated folder rsync -vz --partial --modify-window 5 -W --delete -a $fromfolder $workingfolder/backup-$date echo cleaning up..linkcopying dated folder to current cp -al $workingfolder/backup-$date $workingfolder/current Hi, thank you for your reply! :) ...I am sure, whether I want btrfs. On the net I found for example this: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTY1MDU with sentences like: The Btrfs file-system changes for the Linux 3.15 kernel mostly deal with bug fixes and performance fixes while some corruption fixes are also expected to come. ...sounds a little different to stable I think... What do you think?
Re: [gentoo-user] backup hardware setup
On 06/24/2014 04:28 PM, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTY1MDU with sentences like: The Btrfs file-system changes for the Linux 3.15 kernel mostly deal with bug fixes and performance fixes while some corruption fixes are also expected to come. ...sounds a little different to stable I think... What do you think? i hear ya, but if all you are doing is something like code i submitted, you have no concerns. even ext4 had an odd corruption bug not too long ago, and that was after it was stable. more importantly there is a wide group of folks using btrfs and active development. I wouldn't bother with ext2 and ext3 -- fsck will take _forever_ and heavens help you if you unplug the usb without unmounting if you are that concerned you might want to make one drive ext4, one drive btrfs (or another pairing of your choice) and you can then guard against the filesystem choice by cycling the disks daily/weekly
[gentoo-user] how to wake up gdm
Hi. If I don't log in to gdm after a few minutes gdm enters a mode where no keystroke seems to wake it up -- I did manage to move the mouse and wake it up, but is there a way to disable the feature (maybe its a screen saver or something), so it does not go to sleep? Thanks in advance for any suggestions. -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici cov...@ccs.covici.com
Re: [gentoo-user] how to wake up gdm
On 06/24/2014 11:51 AM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: Hi. If I don't log in to gdm after a few minutes gdm enters a mode where no keystroke seems to wake it up -- I did manage to move the mouse and wake it up, but is there a way to disable the feature (maybe its a screen saver or something), so it does not go to sleep? Thanks in advance for any suggestions. Something must be going wrong. Basically it's entering powersave mode instead of activating a screen saver like older gnome would. Maybe it's entering suspend/hibernate instead of just putting the display to sleep? Either way, shaking my mouse or pressing a key wakes GDM up fine here.
Re: [gentoo-user] backup hardware setup
On 24/06/2014 16:43, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Hi, I bought two identical external harddrives, USB 3.0, with 1 TByte each (no SSD - the good ole mechanical ones...;). The intended use is for backup of longer files. The drives will contain the same contents. Currently there are still clean metal (no partitioning, no fs). Data integrity and recoverability (Uhhh...that words looks wrong...) in case of an desaster is more important than speed. What is the recommended way of partitioning ? What filesystem to choose? Thank you very much in advance for any help! Best regards, mcc PS: Running vanilla kernel 3.15.1 You haven't given much in the way of detail, so I assume you have regular needs, nothing fancy, and it's all a bunch of files right? In that case, partitioning and filesystem type are largely irrelevant as long as you don't have corruption. With one caveat: You must always make sure the source drive is intact and ok. If not, and you back it up anyway, then you are already toast (you will overwrite your last backup with new faulty data). There's several approaches to how to do the transfer: If you have say a general fileserver with lots of files that don't change much or often, just rsync everything in one go. There is no optimization you can do that will perform much faster than rsync. If you have a big busy filesystem that changes often and lots, then use lvm (or anything that can make snapshots) and rsync that. If you have a huge database where everything is changing all the time, don't do filesystem copies, use the tools provided by the db vendor. I doubt this is your need as you would have said so, but it's worth mentioning. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] backup hardware setup
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com [14-06-24 19:12]: On 24/06/2014 16:43, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Hi, I bought two identical external harddrives, USB 3.0, with 1 TByte each (no SSD - the good ole mechanical ones...;). The intended use is for backup of longer files. The drives will contain the same contents. Currently there are still clean metal (no partitioning, no fs). Data integrity and recoverability (Uhhh...that words looks wrong...) in case of an desaster is more important than speed. What is the recommended way of partitioning ? What filesystem to choose? Thank you very much in advance for any help! Best regards, mcc PS: Running vanilla kernel 3.15.1 You haven't given much in the way of detail, so I assume you have regular needs, nothing fancy, and it's all a bunch of files right? In that case, partitioning and filesystem type are largely irrelevant as long as you don't have corruption. With one caveat: You must always make sure the source drive is intact and ok. If not, and you back it up anyway, then you are already toast (you will overwrite your last backup with new faulty data). There's several approaches to how to do the transfer: If you have say a general fileserver with lots of files that don't change much or often, just rsync everything in one go. There is no optimization you can do that will perform much faster than rsync. If you have a big busy filesystem that changes often and lots, then use lvm (or anything that can make snapshots) and rsync that. If you have a huge database where everything is changing all the time, don't do filesystem copies, use the tools provided by the db vendor. I doubt this is your need as you would have said so, but it's worth mentioning. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com Hi Alan, thanks for your reply! :) Yes...your are right. I have a lot static (=not changing) data on my harddisk...mostly things like video tutorials (blender), videos of birds I filmed, dokuments and such... They are eating up the space on my systems harddisk. Do I decided to put them on a extern hd and an identical copy on another identical external harddisk. Its mainly a task of updateing the data on the external drives with that what is new (and static and big and falls under what I described above) on my systems harddisk. I will check rsync for that!
Re: [gentoo-user] backup hardware setup
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 11:28 AM, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: ...I am sure, whether I want btrfs. On the net I found for example this: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTY1MDU with sentences like: The Btrfs file-system changes for the Linux 3.15 kernel mostly deal with bug fixes and performance fixes while some corruption fixes are also expected to come. ...sounds a little different to stable I think... I have mixed feelings regarding btrfs. For a disk that is going to be mostly offline, low-activity, long-term storage btrfs has some plusses and minuses, especially since you intend to mirror it (manually or otherwise). The only real minus is that btrfs is still fairly experimental. You could run into problems. However, what you're doing is a very simple use case and the write loads are certainly going to be quite low. Most of the scenarios that cause issues with btrfs are unlikely to come up. Btrfs has a few advantages. I'd say the biggest one is that it checksums everything and can detect silent corruption. For a disk that is just going to sit around for a long time offline that is a big plus - any other filesystem option isn't going to detect any corruption to your archive other than unreadable clusters (or disks). You could get around this by only storing data in a format that already can detect corruption, and then writing scripts to check everything, but you'll be manually copying data across your mirror if you find issues, and that will be really tricky if you're using something like mdadm since there is no easy way to pick which copy it gives you. Btrfs can also mirror your data which guarantees that all of it is replicated. Sure, rsync can do this also, but if for whatever reason something gets changed without updating mtime/ctime/size it won't spot it unless you have it set to hash everything (which is VERY slow so nobody does this). Mdadm would be a better choice, but as I pointed out it can't detect silent corruption, and is hard to recover if you discover it yourself. With btrfs everything is always mirrored (if you set that up) and a simple scrub command periodically will test to make sure everything is fine and restore anything that isn't. I have some old hard drives that I'm using for storage and I use btrfs on them. However, ultimately it isn't anything I can't afford to lose either. There is nothing wrong with ext4+rsync and maybe an occasional recursive diff. You just need to do a bit more with scripting/etc and make sure you stay on top of it, and watch out for gotchas like having the wrong disk mounted/etc. That will be less efficient than mdadm or btrfs since rsync has no idea what has changed without walking the whole tree, but it probably isn't a big deal and minus the automation is probably the most bulletproof option. Just keep in mind it is only bulletproof if you don't miss anything when you set it up - this is relying on you to manage the mirroring/etc and if you drop the ball then data will be at risk. So, I won't enthusiastically recommend btrfs, but it may be worth consideration... Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] backup hardware setup
On 24/06/2014 19:32, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com [14-06-24 19:12]: On 24/06/2014 16:43, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Hi, I bought two identical external harddrives, USB 3.0, with 1 TByte each (no SSD - the good ole mechanical ones...;). The intended use is for backup of longer files. The drives will contain the same contents. Currently there are still clean metal (no partitioning, no fs). Data integrity and recoverability (Uhhh...that words looks wrong...) in case of an desaster is more important than speed. What is the recommended way of partitioning ? What filesystem to choose? Thank you very much in advance for any help! Best regards, mcc PS: Running vanilla kernel 3.15.1 You haven't given much in the way of detail, so I assume you have regular needs, nothing fancy, and it's all a bunch of files right? In that case, partitioning and filesystem type are largely irrelevant as long as you don't have corruption. With one caveat: You must always make sure the source drive is intact and ok. If not, and you back it up anyway, then you are already toast (you will overwrite your last backup with new faulty data). There's several approaches to how to do the transfer: If you have say a general fileserver with lots of files that don't change much or often, just rsync everything in one go. There is no optimization you can do that will perform much faster than rsync. If you have a big busy filesystem that changes often and lots, then use lvm (or anything that can make snapshots) and rsync that. If you have a huge database where everything is changing all the time, don't do filesystem copies, use the tools provided by the db vendor. I doubt this is your need as you would have said so, but it's worth mentioning. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com Hi Alan, thanks for your reply! :) Yes...your are right. I have a lot static (=not changing) data on my harddisk...mostly things like video tutorials (blender), videos of birds I filmed, dokuments and such... They are eating up the space on my systems harddisk. Do I decided to put them on a extern hd and an identical copy on another identical external harddisk. Its mainly a task of updateing the data on the external drives with that what is new (and static and big and falls under what I described above) on my systems harddisk. I will check rsync for that! That changes things just a little bit - I thought your two drives were going to be one for live and one for backup. Do you intend to move these files off your main drive onto the identical externals, or just copy the files? I would have those two external drives using different filesystems, just in case as they are your only copy and external drives are fragile in use and in storage. Exact fs type doesn't really matter - ext4 and xfs, or ext* and btrfs, it's all good. Just do make sure you don't use rsync with --delete for this :-) -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] how to wake up gdm
Michael Cook mc...@mackal.net wrote: On 06/24/2014 11:51 AM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: Hi. If I don't log in to gdm after a few minutes gdm enters a mode where no keystroke seems to wake it up -- I did manage to move the mouse and wake it up, but is there a way to disable the feature (maybe its a screen saver or something), so it does not go to sleep? Thanks in advance for any suggestions. Something must be going wrong. Basically it's entering powersave mode instead of activating a screen saver like older gnome would. Maybe it's entering suspend/hibernate instead of just putting the display to sleep? Either way, shaking my mouse or pressing a key wakes GDM up fine here. Hmmm, this last time, even shaking the mouse did nothing, I had to restart gdm and gdm always leaves behind several processes which I must kill for things to work again. -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici cov...@ccs.covici.com
Re: [gentoo-user] backup hardware setup
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com [14-06-24 20:00]: On 24/06/2014 19:32, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com [14-06-24 19:12]: On 24/06/2014 16:43, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Hi, I bought two identical external harddrives, USB 3.0, with 1 TByte each (no SSD - the good ole mechanical ones...;). The intended use is for backup of longer files. The drives will contain the same contents. Currently there are still clean metal (no partitioning, no fs). Data integrity and recoverability (Uhhh...that words looks wrong...) in case of an desaster is more important than speed. What is the recommended way of partitioning ? What filesystem to choose? Thank you very much in advance for any help! Best regards, mcc PS: Running vanilla kernel 3.15.1 You haven't given much in the way of detail, so I assume you have regular needs, nothing fancy, and it's all a bunch of files right? In that case, partitioning and filesystem type are largely irrelevant as long as you don't have corruption. With one caveat: You must always make sure the source drive is intact and ok. If not, and you back it up anyway, then you are already toast (you will overwrite your last backup with new faulty data). There's several approaches to how to do the transfer: If you have say a general fileserver with lots of files that don't change much or often, just rsync everything in one go. There is no optimization you can do that will perform much faster than rsync. If you have a big busy filesystem that changes often and lots, then use lvm (or anything that can make snapshots) and rsync that. If you have a huge database where everything is changing all the time, don't do filesystem copies, use the tools provided by the db vendor. I doubt this is your need as you would have said so, but it's worth mentioning. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com Hi Alan, thanks for your reply! :) Yes...your are right. I have a lot static (=not changing) data on my harddisk...mostly things like video tutorials (blender), videos of birds I filmed, dokuments and such... They are eating up the space on my systems harddisk. Do I decided to put them on a extern hd and an identical copy on another identical external harddisk. Its mainly a task of updateing the data on the external drives with that what is new (and static and big and falls under what I described above) on my systems harddisk. I will check rsync for that! That changes things just a little bit - I thought your two drives were going to be one for live and one for backup. Do you intend to move these files off your main drive onto the identical externals, or just copy the files? I would have those two external drives using different filesystems, just in case as they are your only copy and external drives are fragile in use and in storage. Exact fs type doesn't really matter - ext4 and xfs, or ext* and btrfs, it's all good. Just do make sure you don't use rsync with --delete for this :-) -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com Yes, I will delete the data from my systems drive... You wrote: I would have those two external drives using different filesystems Different to what? Different to the fs on the system drive? Both external drives use different filesystems? All three use different filesystems? And how can this help, if the drives are fragile? (I understand fragile as mechanical not robust (sorry I am no native english speaker)) I will use this mobile disks not really as the word mobile implies. They will only travel manually between a secure place and my PC. When in use, they will rest on the floor of the room (so they can not be dropped) and _under_ the case of my PC (ole school big tower metal case with a gap between the bottom of the case and the floor of the room.)
[gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Re: [Gentoo-User] emerge --sync likely to kill SSD?
Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org schrieb: On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 7:44 AM, Kai Krakow hurikha...@gmail.com wrote: I don't see where you could lose the volume management features. You just add device on top of the bcache device after you initialized the raw device with a bcache superblock and attached it. The rest works the same, just that you use bcacheX instead of sdX devices. Ah, didn't realize you could attach/remove devices to bcache later. Presumably it handles device failures gracefully, ie exposing them to the underlying filesystem so that it can properly recover? I'm not sure if multiple partitions can share the same cache device partition but more or less that's it: Initialize bcache, then attach your backing devices, then add those bcache devices to your btrfs. I don't know how errors are handled, tho. But as with every caching technique (even in ZFS) your data is likely toast if the cache device dies in the middle of action. Thus, you should put bcache on LVM RAID if you are going to use it for write caching (i.e. write-back mode). Read caching should be okay (write-through mode). Bcache is a little slower than other flash-cache implementations because it only reports data as written back to the FS if it reached stable storage (which can be the cache device, tho, if you are using write-back mode). It was also designed with unexpected reboots in mind, read. It will replay transactions from its log on reboot. This means, you can have unstable data conditions on the raw device which is why you should never try to use that directly, e.g. from a rescue disk. But since bcache wraps the partition with its own superblock this mistake should be impossible. I'm not sure how graceful device failures are handled. I suppose in write- back mode you can get into trouble because it's too late for bcache to tell the FS that there is a write error when it already confirmed that stable storage has been hit. Maybe it will just keep the data around so you could swap devices or will report the error next time when data is written to that location. It probably interferes with btrfs RAID logic on that matter. The only problem with doing stuff like this at a lower level (both write and read caching) is that it isn't RAID-aware. If you write 10GB of data, you use 20GB of cache to do it if you're mirrored, because the cache doesn't know about mirroring. Yes, it will write double the data to the cache then - but only if btrfs also did actually read both copies (which it probably does not because it has checksums and does not need to compare data, and lets just ignore the case that another process could try to read the same data from the other raid member later, that case should become optimized-out by the OS cache). Otherwise both caches should work pretty individually with their own set of data depending on how btrfs uses each device individually. Remember that btrfs raid is not a block-based raid where block locations would match 1:1 on each device. Btrfs raid can place one mirror of data in two completely different locations on each member device (which is actually a good thing in case block errors accumulate in specific locations for a faulty model of a disk). In case of write caching it will of course cache double the data (because both members will be written to). But I think that's okay for the same reasons, except it will wear your cache device faster. But in that case I suggest to use individual SSDs for each btrfs member device anyways. It's not optimal, I know. Could be useful to see some best practices and pros/cons on that topic (individual cache device per btrfs member vs. bcache on LVM RAID with bcache partitions on the RAID for all members). I think the best strategy depends on if you are write-most or read-most. Thanks for mentioning. Interesting thoughts. ;-) Offhand I'm not sure if there are any performance penalties as well around the need for barriers/etc with the cache not being able to be relied on to do the right thing in terms of what gets written out - also, the data isn't redundant while it is on the cache, unless you mirror the cache. This is partialy what I outlined above. I think in case of write-caching, there is no barriers pass-thru needed. Bcache will confirm the barriers and that's all the FS needs to know (because bcache is supervising the FS, all requests go through the bcache layer, no direct access to the backing device). Of course, it's then bcache's job to ensure everything gets written out correctly in the background (whenever it feels to do so). But it can use its own write-barriers to ensure that for the underlying device - that's nothing the FS has to care about. Performance should be faster anyway because, well, you are writing to a faster device - that is what bcache is all about, isn't it? ;-) I don't think write-barriers for read caching are needed, at least not from point of view of the FS. The
Re: [gentoo-user] how to wake up gdm
On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 11:51:40 -0400 cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: Hi. If I don't log in to gdm after a few minutes gdm enters a mode where no keystroke seems to wake it up -- I did manage to move the mouse and wake it up, but is there a way to disable the feature (maybe its a screen saver or something), so it does not go to sleep? Thanks in advance for any suggestions. Are you sure that you need gdm at all? The startx command from the console already after login there works just fine. The only thing you need is to put something like export XDG_MENU_PREFIX=gnome- exec gnome-session into your ~/.xinitrc file. Those lines was needed for my Gnome2. Gnome3 may need something different. But I do not care any more, as I migrated to xfce4. :)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: Re: [Gentoo-User] emerge --sync likely to kill SSD?
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Kai Krakow hurikha...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not sure if multiple partitions can share the same cache device partition but more or less that's it: Initialize bcache, then attach your backing devices, then add those bcache devices to your btrfs. Ah, if you are stuck with one bcache partition per cached device then that will be fairly painful to manage. Yes, it will write double the data to the cache then - but only if btrfs also did actually read both copies (which it probably does not because it has checksums and does not need to compare data, and lets just ignore the case that another process could try to read the same data from the other raid member later, that case should become optimized-out by the OS cache). I didn't realize you were proposing read caching only. If you're only caching reads then obviously that is much safer. I think with btrfs in raid1 mode with only two devices you can tell it to prefer a particular device for reading in which case you could just bcache that drive. It would only read from the other drive if the cache failed. However, I don't think btrfs lets you manually arrange drives into array-like structures. It auto-balances everything which is usually a plus, but if you have 30 disks you can't tell it to treat them as 6x 5-disk RAID5s vs one 30-disk raid5 (I think). Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] backup hardware setup
On 24/06/2014 20:34, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com [14-06-24 20:00]: On 24/06/2014 19:32, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com [14-06-24 19:12]: On 24/06/2014 16:43, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Hi, I bought two identical external harddrives, USB 3.0, with 1 TByte each (no SSD - the good ole mechanical ones...;). The intended use is for backup of longer files. The drives will contain the same contents. Currently there are still clean metal (no partitioning, no fs). Data integrity and recoverability (Uhhh...that words looks wrong...) in case of an desaster is more important than speed. What is the recommended way of partitioning ? What filesystem to choose? Thank you very much in advance for any help! Best regards, mcc PS: Running vanilla kernel 3.15.1 You haven't given much in the way of detail, so I assume you have regular needs, nothing fancy, and it's all a bunch of files right? In that case, partitioning and filesystem type are largely irrelevant as long as you don't have corruption. With one caveat: You must always make sure the source drive is intact and ok. If not, and you back it up anyway, then you are already toast (you will overwrite your last backup with new faulty data). There's several approaches to how to do the transfer: If you have say a general fileserver with lots of files that don't change much or often, just rsync everything in one go. There is no optimization you can do that will perform much faster than rsync. If you have a big busy filesystem that changes often and lots, then use lvm (or anything that can make snapshots) and rsync that. If you have a huge database where everything is changing all the time, don't do filesystem copies, use the tools provided by the db vendor. I doubt this is your need as you would have said so, but it's worth mentioning. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com Hi Alan, thanks for your reply! :) Yes...your are right. I have a lot static (=not changing) data on my harddisk...mostly things like video tutorials (blender), videos of birds I filmed, dokuments and such... They are eating up the space on my systems harddisk. Do I decided to put them on a extern hd and an identical copy on another identical external harddisk. Its mainly a task of updateing the data on the external drives with that what is new (and static and big and falls under what I described above) on my systems harddisk. I will check rsync for that! That changes things just a little bit - I thought your two drives were going to be one for live and one for backup. Do you intend to move these files off your main drive onto the identical externals, or just copy the files? I would have those two external drives using different filesystems, just in case as they are your only copy and external drives are fragile in use and in storage. Exact fs type doesn't really matter - ext4 and xfs, or ext* and btrfs, it's all good. Just do make sure you don't use rsync with --delete for this :-) -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com Yes, I will delete the data from my systems drive... You wrote: I would have those two external drives using different filesystems Different to what? Different to the fs on the system drive? Both external drives use different filesystems? All three use different filesystems? Different to each other And how can this help, if the drives are fragile? (I understand fragile as mechanical not robust (sorry I am no native english speaker)) If one drive is say btrfs and the other say ext4 and you hit a corruption bug in btrfs, then you still have an uncorrupted ext4 copy I will use this mobile disks not really as the word mobile implies. They will only travel manually between a secure place and my PC. When in use, they will rest on the floor of the room (so they can not be dropped) and _under_ the case of my PC (ole school big tower metal case with a gap between the bottom of the case and the floor of the room.) External drives have a much higher failure rate than internal drives. people don't expect them to fail or be dropped or accidentally plugged in in the wrong order and the wrong one to be mkfs'ed (until it does happen). These are real risks that you can't ignore whereas with a good internal drive you can often get away with it. So it only make sense to take sensible precautions that cost you very little, especially considering these two drives will be your only copy. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Video audio out of sync mkv mplayer
On Tuesday 24 Jun 2014 13:19:32 Frank Steinmetzger wrote: On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 03:16:27PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: On 21/06/2014 15:01, Alexander Kapshuk wrote: What could be amiss there? Thanks. dodgy source files? use the mplayer hotkeys that gets them back in sync I recently had a file, I think it was a TV recording. I re-encoded it with ffmpeg, both audio and video. I think it was here where it complained about litter in the audio stream. In the end the produced MKV had a huge audio offset of several seconds. I used the A/V delay hotkeys, but they had no effect. I could not bring audio and video together, so eventually I ditched the files, no point in keeping them. You may want to try -async 2 next time you re-encode them, or set it to do more than one pass. -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] how to wake up gdm
Gevisz gev...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 11:51:40 -0400 cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: Hi. If I don't log in to gdm after a few minutes gdm enters a mode where no keystroke seems to wake it up -- I did manage to move the mouse and wake it up, but is there a way to disable the feature (maybe its a screen saver or something), so it does not go to sleep? Thanks in advance for any suggestions. Are you sure that you need gdm at all? The startx command from the console already after login there works just fine. The only thing you need is to put something like export XDG_MENU_PREFIX=gnome- exec gnome-session into your ~/.xinitrc file. Those lines was needed for my Gnome2. Gnome3 may need something different. But I do not care any more, as I migrated to xfce4. :) I have tried that in the past, I may do that instead. Thanks. -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici cov...@ccs.covici.com
Re: [gentoo-user] backup hardware setup
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: External drives have a much higher failure rate than internal drives. people don't expect them to fail or be dropped or accidentally plugged in in the wrong order and the wrong one to be mkfs'ed (until it does happen). These are real risks that you can't ignore whereas with a good internal drive you can often get away with it. ++ Don't ignore the potential for logical errors. If you have some script that magically rsyncs stuff then don't make the mistake of moving data over and rsyncing the old copy over the new, or mounting the devices in a manner that isn't robust when udev changes all your device labels, and so on. That seems like the most likely way your data is going to get scrambled, unless you have them both in your car and end up in a crash. That was one of the reasons I went with btrfs for my offline copy. If it unmounts, then I know I have two copies of everything. If it mounts, I know it found both mirrors. If I scrub and there are no errors, then I know both copies are good. You can do that in other ways, but make sure you actually catch the failure modes. Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] backup hardware setup
On 06/24/2014 09:52 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: Don't ignore the potential for logical errors. If you have some script that magically rsyncs stuff then don't make the mistake of moving data over and rsyncing the old copy over the new, or mounting the devices in a manner that isn't robust when udev changes all your device labels, and so on. That seems like the most likely way your data is going to get scrambled, unless you have them both in your car and end up in a crash. That was one of the reasons I went with btrfs for my offline copy. cunning, i like it. i like it so much i think i will do this myself If it unmounts, then I know I have two copies of everything. If it mounts, I know it found both mirrors. If I scrub and there are no errors, then I know both copies are good. You can do that in other ways, but make sure you actually catch the failure modes. Rich
[gentoo-user] smartctrl drive error @60%
Howdy, I run this test every once in a while. How bad is this: root@fireball / # smartctl -l selftest /dev/sdc smartctl 6.1 2013-03-16 r3800 [x86_64-linux-3.14.0-gentoo] (local build) Copyright (C) 2002-13, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke, www.smartmontools.org === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1 Num Test_DescriptionStatus Remaining LifeTime(hours) LBA_of_first_error # 1 Extended offlineCompleted: read failure 60% 16365 2905482560 # 2 Extended offlineCompleted: read failure 60% 16352 2905482560 # 3 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 8044 - # 4 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 3121 - And better yet, is there any way to tell it to not use that part and finish the test? It seems it stopped when it got to that, or I think it did. Thoughts? Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!
[gentoo-user] Re: firefox profile opens my web-page in https
On 06/24/2014 08:25 AM, Joseph wrote: On 06/23/14 18:08, Mick wrote: On Sunday 22 Jun 2014 22:52:40 Joseph wrote: I run a server and have two firefox profiles. I have ssl enabled. When I open one profile I it opens my web-page in https instead of http When I open another profile it open my webpage in http Why is first profile forcing my opening my servers page in https mode? Has one profile cached and different protocol+URL in the address bar, than the other? Does this persist if you clear the history of the profile? -- Regards, Mick No, it makes no difference. I cleared history and cache. It still tries to open my server page as https instead of http. Different profiles can have different firefox add-ons enabled. Might be worth comparing the list of add-ons in each profile. You can also run firefox -safe-mode to disable extensions and see if it makes any difference.
Re: [gentoo-user] smartctrl drive error @60%
On 25 June 2014 01:09:03 CEST, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: Howdy, I run this test every once in a while. How bad is this: root@fireball / # smartctl -l selftest /dev/sdc smartctl 6.1 2013-03-16 r3800 [x86_64-linux-3.14.0-gentoo] (local build) Copyright (C) 2002-13, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke, www.smartmontools.org === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1 Num Test_DescriptionStatus Remaining LifeTime(hours) LBA_of_first_error # 1 Extended offlineCompleted: read failure 60% 16365 2905482560 # 2 Extended offlineCompleted: read failure 60% 16352 2905482560 # 3 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 8044 - # 4 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00% 3121 - And better yet, is there any way to tell it to not use that part and finish the test? It seems it stopped when it got to that, or I think it did. Thoughts? Dale :-) :-) Dale, Not sure how to get it to go past. Think that is in the firmware of the disk. I would start with making a backup first. -- Joost -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: [gentoo-user] smartctrl drive error @60%
J. Roeleveld wrote:
On 25 June 2014 01:09:03 CEST, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
Howdy,
I run this test every once in a while. How bad is this:
root@fireball / # smartctl -l selftest /dev/sdc
smartctl 6.1 2013-03-16 r3800 [x86_64-linux-3.14.0-gentoo] (local
build)
Copyright (C) 2002-13, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke,
www.smartmontools.org
=== START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION ===
SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1
Num Test_DescriptionStatus Remaining
LifeTime(hours) LBA_of_first_error
# 1 Extended offlineCompleted: read failure 60%
16365 2905482560
# 2 Extended offlineCompleted: read failure 60%
16352 2905482560
# 3 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00%
8044 -
# 4 Extended offlineCompleted without error 00%
3121 -
And better yet, is there any way to tell it to not use that part and
finish the test? It seems it stopped when it got to that, or I think
it
did.
Thoughts?
Dale
:-) :-)
Dale,
Not sure how to get it to go past. Think that is in the firmware of the disk.
I would start with making a backup first.
--
Joost
That's a 3TB drive. I don't have anything big enough to back it up to.
Is there anyway to find out if this error is really serious or just a
run of the mill type error? I would think that if it was a run of the
mill error the drive would handle the error itself and I wouldn't even
see it. Something like marking the area as bad and just not trying to
use it anymore, even for the test.
Thanks. Any advice is appreciated. I need a hard drive guru. ;-)
Here is additional info:
root@fireball / # hdparm -i /dev/sdc
/dev/sdc:
Model=ST3000DM001-9YN166, FwRev=CC4C, SerialNo=Z1F0PKT5
Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw15uSec Fixed DTR10Mbs RotSpdTol.5% }
RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=0, SectSize=0, ECCbytes=4
BuffType=unknown, BuffSize=unknown, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=16
CurCHS=16383/16/63, CurSects=16514064, LBA=yes, LBAsects=5860533168
IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:120,w/IORDY:120}, tDMA={min:120,rec:120}
PIO modes: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
DMA modes: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2
UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 udma4 udma5 *udma6
AdvancedPM=yes: unknown setting WriteCache=enabled
Drive conforms to: unknown: ATA/ATAPI-4,5,6,7
* signifies the current active mode
root@fireball / #
Dale
:-) :-)
--
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how
you interpreted my words!
