Re: Warning about the use of ZFS on kfreebsd-i386 (was: Re: r65817 - in trunk/packages/partman/partman-zfs: check.d debian)
2010/12/5 Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org: To save you some seconds locating the appropriate statement: | The release team can remove source packages - and *all* binaries built | from them - from testing. Per-architecture removals from testing are | not handled by the Release Managers directly, but rather as a result | of the package's state in unstable propagating to testing. So, get the binary removed from unstable, and that'll get propagated to testing. It was removed from unstable on my last upload. According to the text you pasted, when partman-zfs 4 propagates to testing, kfreebsd-i386 binaries will be completely removed. Is this correct? -- Robert Millan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktik8k38etnuuyt3z7jzaaa3u2yre7wbxj=7t0...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Warning about the use of ZFS on kfreebsd-i386 (was: Re: r65817 - in trunk/packages/partman/partman-zfs: check.d debian)
Robert Millan r...@debian.org (06/12/2010): It was removed from unstable on my last upload. No. That doesn't remove it *from the archive*. | $ rmadison partman-zfs -s unstable|grep kfreebsd | partman-zfs | 3 | sid/main/debian-installer | kfreebsd-i386 | partman-zfs | 4 | sid/main/debian-installer | kfreebsd-amd64 Old binaries stay around until ftpmasters remove them, which is why you need to file a bug against ftp.debian.org. Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Warning about the use of ZFS on kfreebsd-i386 (was: Re: r65817 - in trunk/packages/partman/partman-zfs: check.d debian)
2010/12/6 Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org: No. That doesn't remove it *from the archive*. | $ rmadison partman-zfs -s unstable|grep kfreebsd | partman-zfs | 3 | sid/main/debian-installer | kfreebsd-i386 | partman-zfs | 4 | sid/main/debian-installer | kfreebsd-amd64 Old binaries stay around until ftpmasters remove them, which is why you need to file a bug against ftp.debian.org. Thanks for the explanation. I just sent the request. -- Robert Millan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktinqm_kssgnmmgqllcn8icvzrxyndqmutme9w...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Warning about the use of ZFS on kfreebsd-i386 (was: Re: r65817 - in trunk/packages/partman/partman-zfs: check.d debian)
Robert Millan r...@debian.org (05/12/2010): Ok, I disabled partman-zfs on kfreebsd-i386. Need to get rid of it in the archive too, I guess? I don't see any bug against ftp.debian.org to that effect. Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Warning about the use of ZFS on kfreebsd-i386 (was: Re: r65817 - in trunk/packages/partman/partman-zfs: check.d debian)
2010/12/5 Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org: Robert Millan r...@debian.org (05/12/2010): Ok, I disabled partman-zfs on kfreebsd-i386. Need to get rid of it in the archive too, I guess? I don't see any bug against ftp.debian.org to that effect. Actually the request should be sent to -release, but I didn't think of it, so thanks for the reminder. I just sent it. -- Robert Millan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlkti=now5pq1p=o+3pr0g-ezibqhbh30a9erzt3...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Warning about the use of ZFS on kfreebsd-i386 (was: Re: r65817 - in trunk/packages/partman/partman-zfs: check.d debian)
Robert Millan r...@debian.org (05/12/2010): Actually the request should be sent to -release […] No. I wrote ftp.debian.org and I meant it. To save you some seconds locating the appropriate statement: | The release team can remove source packages - and *all* binaries built | from them - from testing. Per-architecture removals from testing are | not handled by the Release Managers directly, but rather as a result | of the package's state in unstable propagating to testing. So, get the binary removed from unstable, and that'll get propagated to testing. Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Warning about the use of ZFS on kfreebsd-i386 (was: Re: r65817 - in trunk/packages/partman/partman-zfs: check.d debian)
Quoting Robert Millan (r...@alioth.debian.org): Author: rmh Date: Tue Nov 30 18:34:05 2010 New Revision: 65817 Log: Add partman-zfs/i386 template to warn users who want to use ZFS on i386. Added: trunk/packages/partman/partman-zfs/check.d/zfs_i386 (contents, props changed) Modified: trunk/packages/partman/partman-zfs/check.d/_numbers trunk/packages/partman/partman-zfs/debian/changelog trunk/packages/partman/partman-zfs/debian/partman-zfs.templates I unmarked this for translation. My opinion, indeed, is that if ZFS is unsafe on kfreebsd-i386, then partman-zfs should no tbe kfreebsd-any but only kfreebsd-amd64 As suggested by Robert, I bring this to -bsd as well. My main point was that adding a new debconf template to a D-I package is, at this moment of the release process, not an option. Particularly if that template is about warning users for potential problems. -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Warning about the use of ZFS on kfreebsd-i386 (was: Re: r65817 - in trunk/packages/partman/partman-zfs: check.d debian)
Christian PERRIER bubu...@debian.org (04/12/2010): I unmarked this for translation. My opinion, indeed, is that if ZFS is unsafe on kfreebsd-i386, then partman-zfs should no tbe kfreebsd-any but only kfreebsd-amd64 As suggested by Robert, I bring this to -bsd as well. My main point was that adding a new debconf template to a D-I package is, at this moment of the release process, not an option. Particularly if that template is about warning users for potential problems. Alternative way: keep it available on kfreebsd-i386, but do not make use/propose it from d-i (for a while)? (I didn't check how the integration in d-i is done, so I don't know what it takes to disable it for one architecture, or if that's required as well if kfreebsd-i386 is dropped from partman-zfs' architectures.) Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Warning about the use of ZFS on kfreebsd-i386 (was: Re: r65817 - in trunk/packages/partman/partman-zfs: check.d debian)
Quoting Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org): Christian PERRIER bubu...@debian.org (04/12/2010): I unmarked this for translation. My opinion, indeed, is that if ZFS is unsafe on kfreebsd-i386, then partman-zfs should no tbe kfreebsd-any but only kfreebsd-amd64 As suggested by Robert, I bring this to -bsd as well. My main point was that adding a new debconf template to a D-I package is, at this moment of the release process, not an option. Particularly if that template is about warning users for potential problems. Alternative way: keep it available on kfreebsd-i386, but do not make use/propose it from d-i (for a while)? Well, if partman-zfs is Arch: kfreebsd-amd64, this is exactly what will happen. It doesn't prevent using ZFS on kfreebsd-i386 but the filesystem won't be offered *in D-I* as an option for i386 installs. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ZFS on kFreeBSD
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 03:21:03PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: True, but running out of memory is, in traditional Unix, an irrecove- rable error condition, and if it occurs in the kernel, its only option IS, in fact, to panic. It can also return ENOMEM. Userland doesn't always cope with it gracefuly, but the idea is that it should. -- Robert Millan The DRM opt-in fallacy: Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ZFS on kFreeBSD
Rogério Brito dixit: Personally, I find the following comment from the FreeBSD ZFS tuning guide most scary: Oh please. You don’t have to use it if you don’t want it. But this doesn’t prevent it from being offered to these who do: “We sell rope to hang yourself.” (Someone here mentioned that this is inacceptable for a Linux filesy- stem – excuse me, but where do you see Linux here?) If a file system can cause the kernel to panic due to running out of memory, something is very wrong! Indeed. Not only regarding the efficiency, but also the correctness and reliability of the programs. True, but running out of memory is, in traditional Unix, an irrecove- rable error condition, and if it occurs in the kernel, its only option IS, in fact, to panic. (OOM killers, as Linux has had recently, can be the worse way out, in fact.) While it should probably refuse to operate or rollback or not offer read-write access, this is understandable. Finally, while you don't have to USE it, you may want to have the abi- lity, if not for reading data from a medium using it. bye, //mirabilos -- Yay for having to rewrite other people's Bash scripts because bash suddenly stopped supporting the bash extensions they make use of -- Tonnerre Lombard in #nosec -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ZFS on kFreeBSD
* Jerome Warnier: While the current status of Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is interesting, I was quite disappointed there is no ZFS support in it (at least any related tools). Any plans to enable this support? Is ZFS producton-ready? On Solaris, Sun recommends to reformat and restore from backup should your system panic on boot: -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ZFS on kFreeBSD
* Florian Weimer: * Jerome Warnier: While the current status of Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is interesting, I was quite disappointed there is no ZFS support in it (at least any related tools). Any plans to enable this support? Is ZFS producton-ready? On Solaris, Sun recommends to reformat and restore from backup should your system panic on boot: Uhm, here's the quote from the FAQ: | What can I do if ZFS file system panics on every boot? | | ZFS is designed to survive arbitrary hardware failures through the | use of redundancy (mirroring or RAID-Z). Unfortunately, certain | failures in non-replicated configurations can cause ZFS to panic | when trying to load the pool. This is a bug, and will be fixed in | the near future [...] http://opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/faq/#zfspanic I don't think we would consider this acceptable for Linux file systems... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ZFS on kFreeBSD
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Florian Weimer wrote: [...] Is ZFS producton-ready? On Solaris, Sun recommends to reformat and restore from backup should your system panic on boot: Personally, I find the following comment from the FreeBSD ZFS tuning guide most scary: To use ZFS, at least 1GB of memory is recommended (for all architectures) but more is helpful as ZFS needs *lots* of memory. Depending on your workload, it may be possible to use ZFS on systems with less memory, but it requires careful tuning to avoid panics from memory exhaustion in the kernel. (http://wiki.freebsd.org/ZFSTuningGuide) If a file system can cause the kernel to panic due to running out of memory, something is very wrong! - -- ┌─── ｄｇ＠ｃｏｗｌａｒｋ．ｃｏｍ ─ http://www.cowlark.com ─ │ │ People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who │ know we don't. --- Bjarne Stroustrup -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iD8DBQFKu+mSf9E0noFvlzgRAjniAJkB+/VyHYCsemNr1mesnJhleUj5eACdHh8k jdgtz2jOy0yLvLKV+d6fAgg= =2FZW -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ZFS on kFreeBSD
Hi, David.
On Sep 24 2009, David Given wrote:
Personally, I find the following comment from the FreeBSD ZFS tuning
guide most scary:
To use ZFS, at least 1GB of memory is recommended (for all architectures)
but more is helpful as ZFS needs *lots* of memory. Depending on your
workload, it may be possible to use ZFS on systems with less memory, but
it requires careful tuning to avoid panics from memory exhaustion in the
kernel.
(http://wiki.freebsd.org/ZFSTuningGuide)
Wow, 1GB of memory! That's about 4 times more than the maximum that some
of my systems here are able to cope with.
The days of really slim design have (unfortunately) ended, it seems.
The video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtCW-axRJV8 shows just what
some people were able to do with computers that were *much* weaker than
what we have today (both in terms of computing power as well as space).
And the irony: the video of the program (even when stored with
high-end codecs like H.264 and AAC) is about 15 times bigger than the
program together with its documentation.
I sincerely miss those days.
If a file system can cause the kernel to panic due to running out of
memory, something is very wrong!
Indeed. Not only regarding the efficiency, but also the correctness and
reliability of the programs.
┌─── ｄｇ＠ｃｏｗｌａｒｋ．ｃｏｍ ─ http://www.cowlark.com ─
Heh, a very smart way of preventing spam, huh? Nice idea. I'll steal
it. :-)
Regards,
--
Rogério Brito : rbr...@{mackenzie,ime.usp}.br : GPG key 1024D/7C2CAEB8
http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito : http://meusite.mackenzie.com.br/rbrito
Projects: algorithms.berlios.de : lame.sf.net : vrms.alioth.debian.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ZFS on kFreeBSD
While the current status of Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is interesting, I was quite disappointed there is no ZFS support in it (at least any related tools). Any plans to enable this support? End of http://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2009/08/msg00130.html: If we still have more time I think we should probably have the following things working: - ZFS support. Kernel support should be there with the next kernel upload, but there is still all the userland libs/tools to package. - Keyboard configuration with console-setup. Or, what would it take to do it? I know pretty well the packaging in Debian, but not the specifics of GNU/kFreeBSD (ports, etc...). In general, it should be possible to create package zfsutils similarly as is already ufsutils. Fou our specifics, take a look at our SVN repository http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/glibc-bsd/trunk/, namely freebsd-libs, freebsd-util. Start with target get-orig-source in debian/rules. IMHO, for ZFS we should target 8.x kernel series. Any help is welcome. Petr -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ZFS on kFreeBSD
Hello, Petr Salinger petr.salin...@seznam.cz writes: Fou our specifics, take a look at our SVN repository http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/glibc-bsd/trunk/, namely freebsd-libs, freebsd-util. Start with target get-orig-source in debian/rules. Out of curiosity, is there any plan to get the kFreeBSD port into upstream (E)Glibc? Thanks, Ludo’. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ZFS on kFreeBSD
Am Montag, 21. September 2009 09:15:04 schrieb Petr Salinger: While the current status of Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is interesting, I was quite disappointed there is no ZFS support in it (at least any related tools). Any plans to enable this support? End of http://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2009/08/msg00130.html: If we still have more time I think we should probably have the following things working: - ZFS support. Kernel support should be there with the next kernel upload, but there is still all the userland libs/tools to package. - Keyboard configuration with console-setup. What about the GELI-tools for disk-encryption? Disk encrpytion is very important for all kinds of setups from portable to file-server. I know both many Debianers and many FreeBSD-users that encrypt all their systems and would not use an OS that doesn't provide disk-encryption. Kernel-Support is already there, only the tools are missing (which is only the geli command actually). Geli has very good performance (hardware accelerated if available) and is file system agnostic. That means the FreeBSD-kernel is the only kernel that provides stable ZFS+encryption. That might make Debian GNU/kFreeBSD appeal to more people (and I could use it on my Laptop ;) )! Thanks, Hannes Or, what would it take to do it? I know pretty well the packaging in Debian, but not the specifics of GNU/kFreeBSD (ports, etc...). In general, it should be possible to create package zfsutils similarly as is already ufsutils. Fou our specifics, take a look at our SVN repository http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/glibc-bsd/trunk/, namely freebsd-libs, freebsd-util. Start with target get-orig-source in debian/rules. IMHO, for ZFS we should target 8.x kernel series. Any help is welcome. Petr -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ZFS on kFreeBSD
Petr Salinger a écrit : While the current status of Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is interesting, I was quite disappointed there is no ZFS support in it (at least any related tools). Any plans to enable this support? End of http://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2009/08/msg00130.html: If we still have more time I think we should probably have the following things working: - ZFS support. Kernel support should be there with the next kernel upload, but there is still all the userland libs/tools to package. - Keyboard configuration with console-setup. Or, what would it take to do it? I know pretty well the packaging in Debian, but not the specifics of GNU/kFreeBSD (ports, etc...). In general, it should be possible to create package zfsutils similarly as is already ufsutils. ZFS on GNU/kFreeBSD works when using the userland tools from plain FreeBSD. Unfortunately zfsutils is not that easy to package, given the source code is located in various places in the SVN tree, especially the OpenSolaris parts. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ZFS on kFreeBSD
Hannes a écrit : Am Montag, 21. September 2009 09:15:04 schrieb Petr Salinger: While the current status of Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is interesting, I was quite disappointed there is no ZFS support in it (at least any related tools). Any plans to enable this support? End of http://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2009/08/msg00130.html: If we still have more time I think we should probably have the following things working: - ZFS support. Kernel support should be there with the next kernel upload, but there is still all the userland libs/tools to package. - Keyboard configuration with console-setup. What about the GELI-tools for disk-encryption? Disk encrpytion is very important for all kinds of setups from portable to file-server. I know both many Debianers and many FreeBSD-users that encrypt all their systems and would not use an OS that doesn't provide disk-encryption. Kernel-Support is already there, only the tools are missing (which is only the geli command actually). Geli has very good performance (hardware accelerated if available) and is file system agnostic. That means the FreeBSD-kernel is the only kernel that provides stable ZFS+encryption. That might make Debian GNU/kFreeBSD appeal to more people (and I could use it on my Laptop ;) )! That's the same, someone has to package it. freebsd-utils looks like the best place to add it. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
