[gentoo-user] tar extract command failed at least partially
All KDE ebuilds, at the unpack stage, say: tar extract command failed at least partially - continuing anyway But otherwise stuff seems to work correctly. This is with tar 1.26. Is this normal or should I file a bug about it?
[gentoo-user] WallMator : Firewall Automator
Hello list! I've made a rudimentary system to do a simultaneous backup/restore of: + ipset + iptables + iproute2 RPDB routing tables At: https://github.com/pepoluan/WallMator Feedback is definitely welcome! Rgds, -- Pandu E Poluan ~ IT Optimizer ~ Visit my Blog: http://pepoluan.posterous.com Google Talk: pepoluan Y! messenger: pepoluan MSN / Live: pepol...@hotmail.com (do not send email here) Skype: pepoluan More on me: My LinkedIn Account My Facebook Account
[gentoo-user] MTA lighter on resource: Exim or Postfix?
Hello again, list! I need to deploy an MTA in the Cloud. Now, RAM is at a premium, so between Exim and Postfix, which one is lighter on resource? Thank you for your inputs. Rgds, -- -- Pandu E Poluan - IT Optimizer My website: http://pandu.poluan.info/
Re: [gentoo-user] MTA lighter on resource: Exim or Postfix?
On Friday 08 April 2011 16:06:51 Pandu Poluan wrote: Hello again, list! I need to deploy an MTA in the Cloud. Now, RAM is at a premium, so between Exim and Postfix, which one is lighter on resource? Thank you for your inputs. Rgds, Without actually testing and seeing which can be best optimized for your usage pattern? I run postfix without problems, but then, I don't have that much of a restriction on memory so I never really looked into it. I think the memory usage also depends on the kind of filtering you use. Postfix has some additional processes that help in reducing the load by filtering connections prior to actually receiving emails. (postscreen) I don't know enough to say how Exim handles that. -- Joost
Re: [gentoo-user] MTA lighter on resource: Exim or Postfix?
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 16:20, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote: On Friday 08 April 2011 16:06:51 Pandu Poluan wrote: Hello again, list! I need to deploy an MTA in the Cloud. Now, RAM is at a premium, so between Exim and Postfix, which one is lighter on resource? Thank you for your inputs. Rgds, Without actually testing and seeing which can be best optimized for your usage pattern? I run postfix without problems, but then, I don't have that much of a restriction on memory so I never really looked into it. I think the memory usage also depends on the kind of filtering you use. Postfix has some additional processes that help in reducing the load by filtering connections prior to actually receiving emails. (postscreen) I don't know enough to say how Exim handles that. Well, the load shouldn't be too heavy. After all, it's meant only to be a (closed) mail relay server. Anyways, it's a direct instruction from the BoD, and you know they always want the server to be deployed yesterday... :-P Rgds, -- Pandu E Poluan ~ IT Optimizer ~ Visit my Blog: http://pepoluan.posterous.com
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
I been reading this howto: http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/index.html It hasn't been updated in several years now. Should I be reading this or is it up to date enough that I wont end up confused because of changes that have occurred since that howto has been updated? I don't want to learn something just to find out that there has been changes and then get my brain turned to soup. Little light bulb here. physical volume is the same as a physical drive? If I understand it correctly, it is the whole thing unpartitioned. I'm hoping for some nice pictures before to long to help explain this some more. lol Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 05:42:59 -0500, Dale wrote: Little light bulb here. physical volume is the same as a physical drive? If I understand it correctly, it is the whole thing unpartitioned. No. A physical volume is an area of disk. It can be the whole disk but it more usually a partition. -- Neil Bothwick Top Oxymorons Number 18: Taped live signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
On Friday 08 April 2011 05:42:59 Dale wrote: I been reading this howto: http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/index.html It hasn't been updated in several years now. Should I be reading this or is it up to date enough that I wont end up confused because of changes that have occurred since that howto has been updated? I don't want to learn something just to find out that there has been changes and then get my brain turned to soup. Not sure about the commands there. The basic theory is, from a quick glance, still valid. That it still mentions LVM1 isn't usefull for you as you'll automatically be using LVM2. (yes, new version came out sometimes in 2.6.x :) ) As for more current howtos: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/LVM http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/lvm2.xml And via a blog posting ( http://www.vm-aware.com/2008/08/how-to-linux-lvm/ ) I found 2 more: http://www.ntlug.org/Articles/LVM http://www.howtoforge.com/linux_lvm Little light bulb here. physical volume is the same as a physical drive? If I understand it correctly, it is the whole thing unpartitioned. Eerh... Nearly there :) Most people use partitions on a physical drive for the physical volumes. I'm hoping for some nice pictures before to long to help explain this some more. lol You ask, wikipedia delivers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_Volume_Manager_%28Linux%29 -- Joost
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
Neil Bothwick wrote: On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 05:42:59 -0500, Dale wrote: Little light bulb here. physical volume is the same as a physical drive? If I understand it correctly, it is the whole thing unpartitioned. No. A physical volume is an area of disk. It can be the whole disk but it more usually a partition. Ooooh. Still some progress tho. lol So, if I was going to use LVM, I create a partition first, either whole drive or part of it then use LVM on that? Then comes in the rest of the stuff that I am still trying to get a grip on. This reminds me of catching a catfish. It's slimy and hard to get a grip on. lol Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
On Friday 08 April 2011 15:40:18 Dale wrote: Neil Bothwick wrote: On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 05:42:59 -0500, Dale wrote: Little light bulb here. physical volume is the same as a physical drive? If I understand it correctly, it is the whole thing unpartitioned. No. A physical volume is an area of disk. It can be the whole disk but it more usually a partition. Ooooh. Still some progress tho. lol So, if I was going to use LVM, I create a partition first, either whole drive or part of it then use LVM on that? Then comes in the rest of the stuff that I am still trying to get a grip on. Yes. Here's the sequence: 1. Start with some sort of storage device (disk, partition, whatever - it must just be a block device) 2. Run pvcreate on it. This is like making swapspace - it adds a signature to the beginning of the block device so that LVM knows it can use the device 3. Add the pv to a volume group (vg). A vg is a collection of one or more pv's, they are so that you can build big vgs and create volumes larger than any one disk. On desktop with one drive or one RAID device, then vg often only has 1 pv in it 4. Allocate space from the vg. This is a logical volume, it is a block device just like any other and as far as the kernel and you are concerned you use it. mkfs it and mount it just like any other block device. Each of these elements (pv, vg, lv) can be added to, created, extended, reduced and the command systax is much the same for each. What that means exactly depends on what the thing is: PV: creating it starts it from scratch, the LVM data on it is gone. You only extend/reduce a PV if you changed the size of the underlying partition so that LVM know it's true size. VG: You don't really create a VG as such (it's a collection of things, not a single thing). Creating it means adding the first PV to the VG. Extending and reducing a VG means adding and removing PVs from the collection. When you reduce a VG, it's an excellent idea to have migrated all the data on the PV away first :-) LV: Make the LV larger or smaller. This is conceptually exactly the same as modifying a regular partition with fdisk, and you must take the same precautions: Extend: Make the LV bigger then grow the fs on it to use all the space Reduce: Shrink the fs on it then reduce the LV to the same size It's all very simple and logical really. It you grok what create/extend/reduce and so on means for each element then you won't go wrong. People get confused by LVM because tutorials on it, Red Hat training materials[1] and GUI tools try very hard to fudge the concept, hide the bits and present it like the partition, PV, VG, LV and filesystem on it and somehow all the same thing. Which is completely not true of course. [1] Especially Red Hat training materials. These caused more confusion about it than anything else I have ever seen. Including Gnome tools. And that's saying something. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 6:40 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: Neil Bothwick wrote: On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 05:42:59 -0500, Dale wrote: Little light bulb here. physical volume is the same as a physical drive? If I understand it correctly, it is the whole thing unpartitioned. No. A physical volume is an area of disk. It can be the whole disk but it more usually a partition. Ooooh. Still some progress tho. lol So, if I was going to use LVM, I create a partition first, either whole drive or part of it then use LVM on that? Then comes in the rest of the stuff that I am still trying to get a grip on. This reminds me of catching a catfish. It's slimy and hard to get a grip on. lol Dale Dale, As for the 'whole disk' hint, I think what Neil means is that the drive doesn't need to be partitioned at all. I.e., instead of mke2fs -j /dev/sda3 think mke2fs -j /dev/sda - Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
On Friday 08 April 2011 08:40:18 Dale wrote: Neil Bothwick wrote: On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 05:42:59 -0500, Dale wrote: Little light bulb here. physical volume is the same as a physical drive? If I understand it correctly, it is the whole thing unpartitioned. No. A physical volume is an area of disk. It can be the whole disk but it more usually a partition. Ooooh. Still some progress tho. lol So, if I was going to use LVM, I create a partition first, either whole drive or part of it then use LVM on that? Yes. correct. Don't forget to set the partition type to Linux LVM (8e). Then comes in the rest of the stuff that I am still trying to get a grip on. I'm confident you'll get there. This reminds me of catching a catfish. It's slimy and hard to get a grip on. lol So are most fish, I believe... Do you fish with your bare hands? -- Joost
[gentoo-user] Re: WallMator : Firewall Automator
Okay, *don't* pull it yet. There's been some strangeness... I think there's a setting-specific complication... it worked on 2 systems but failed spectacularly on the 3rd. I'm debugging it. Rgds, On 2011-04-08, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: Hello list! I've made a rudimentary system to do a simultaneous backup/restore of: + ipset + iptables + iproute2 RPDB routing tables At: https://github.com/pepoluan/WallMator Feedback is definitely welcome! Rgds, -- Pandu E Poluan ~ IT Optimizer ~ Visit my Blog: http://pepoluan.posterous.com Google Talk: pepoluan Y! messenger: pepoluan MSN / Live: pepol...@hotmail.com (do not send email here) Skype: pepoluan More on me: My LinkedIn Account My Facebook Account -- -- Pandu E Poluan - IT Optimizer My website: http://pandu.poluan.info/
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
Joost Roeleveld wrote: On Friday 08 April 2011 08:40:18 Dale wrote: Neil Bothwick wrote: On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 05:42:59 -0500, Dale wrote: Little light bulb here. physical volume is the same as a physical drive? If I understand it correctly, it is the whole thing unpartitioned. No. A physical volume is an area of disk. It can be the whole disk but it more usually a partition. Ooooh. Still some progress tho. lol So, if I was going to use LVM, I create a partition first, either whole drive or part of it then use LVM on that? Yes. correct. Don't forget to set the partition type to Linux LVM (8e). That would be done in cfdisk I presume. I think that is where I saw that. Then comes in the rest of the stuff that I am still trying to get a grip on. I'm confident you'll get there. One of these days. This reminds me of catching a catfish. It's slimy and hard to get a grip on. lol So are most fish, I believe... Do you fish with your bare hands? -- Joost I love to fish. I have issues with stress which is why I try to avoid it when I can so fishing is good for me plus I like to eat fish. I fish with a rod and a hook but they usually don't like when you start pulling the hook out. He tends to want to get away. That's where the slimy part comes in. I'm not sure where you are from but in some parts of the USA, some bright people do fish with their hands, usually very large catfish too. I saw it on TV and I wish I could catch one of those, even if I would need a new rod. A fish that size would likely break my rod unless I was using the deep sea fishing rod. Those fish weigh 30 lbs and some LOTS more. It's like pulling a teenager out of the water. O_O They are big. OK. Back to LVM. lol Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
On Friday 08 April 2011 09:45:48 Dale wrote: Joost Roeleveld wrote: On Friday 08 April 2011 08:40:18 Dale wrote: Neil Bothwick wrote: On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 05:42:59 -0500, Dale wrote: Yes. correct. Don't forget to set the partition type to Linux LVM (8e). That would be done in cfdisk I presume. I think that is where I saw that. Or in fdisk. Basically any decent partitioning tool can do it. Then comes in the rest of the stuff that I am still trying to get a grip on. I'm confident you'll get there. One of these days. :) This reminds me of catching a catfish. It's slimy and hard to get a grip on. lol So are most fish, I believe... Do you fish with your bare hands? -- Joost I love to fish. I have issues with stress which is why I try to avoid it when I can so fishing is good for me plus I like to eat fish. I fish with a rod and a hook but they usually don't like when you start pulling the hook out. Ok... Only time I ever went fishing was in some fishing farm in France. The fish there were quite good at eating the bait of the hooks. It ended up being a timing contest: - Bait on hook - Hook in water for less then a second - Pull out hook If you timed it right, the fish would be hooked. Too quick, and fish wouldn't bite. Too slow, and fish would be gone, with bait He tends to want to get away. That's where the slimy part comes in. I'm not sure where you are from but in some parts of the USA, some bright people do fish with their hands, usually very large catfish too. I saw it on TV and I wish I could catch one of those, even if I would need a new rod. A fish that size would likely break my rod unless I was using the deep sea fishing rod. Those fish weigh 30 lbs and some LOTS more. It's like pulling a teenager out of the water. O_O They are big. That's a small teenager then. Only 30lbs (less then 25 kilos) :) FYI: I'm in the Netherlands, Europe and looking forward to the weekend, hope the weather stays like this (sunny, clear sky, hardly any wind) OK. Back to LVM. lol Oki... -- Joost
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 15:50:03 +0200, Dale wrote about Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS: [snip] Ooooh. Still some progress tho. lol So, if I was going to use LVM, I create a partition first, either whole drive or part of it then use LVM on that? You use pvcreate to create a physical volume from the partition; this formats the partition for LVM use, rather than for a filesystem. When you have enough physical volumes on enough disks -- it's usually one large PV per disk -- you then use vgcreate to amalgamate those physical volumes into a volume group. You can then use lvcreate to allocate logical volumes within that volume group. After that, you use mkfs to format each logical volume, as if it were a partition. You can then add them to /etc/fstab and mount them as needed. Note that the amalgamation of physical volumes into a volume group allows you to do some neat things: you can stripe a logical volume across multiple physical volumes to improve its I/O bandwidth; your volume group is what DASD managers call a concatenation set, which means its effective size is the sum of the physical volume sizes, so you can create a logical volume that is bigger than any of the physical volumes involved. But before you do any of that fancy stuff, get used to using LVM2 as a smarter partition manager. -- Regards, Dave [RLU #314465] *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* dwn...@ntlworld.com (David W Noon) *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
Joost Roeleveld wrote: On Friday 08 April 2011 09:45:48 Dale wrote: He tends to want to get away. That's where the slimy part comes in. I'm not sure where you are from but in some parts of the USA, some bright people do fish with their hands, usually very large catfish too. I saw it on TV and I wish I could catch one of those, even if I would need a new rod. A fish that size would likely break my rod unless I was using the deep sea fishing rod. Those fish weigh 30 lbs and some LOTS more. It's like pulling a teenager out of the water. O_O They are big. That's a small teenager then. Only 30lbs (less then 25 kilos) :) FYI: I'm in the Netherlands, Europe and looking forward to the weekend, hope the weather stays like this (sunny, clear sky, hardly any wind) OK. Back to LVM. lol Oki... -- Joost The part about the teenager was in reference to the LOTS more. They have caught fish that was close to 100 lbs. I have a friend that even where we are has caught fish over 50 or 60 lbs. To me tho, they don't taste good. We have a fish called shad here. They love to clean the hook too. They have learned to come in from the side of the hook and they don't get caught. That's where a small treble hook comes in tho. It doesn't have sides. lol The shads are small but they make good bait. Never heard of anybody eating them tho. They are pretty small. Well, gas is going up. Going to go fill up my car and a couple jugs. Already got my 55 gallon drum full. See, I ain't stupid. :-p Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
Joost Roeleveld wrote: On Thursday 07 April 2011 08:57:40 Dale wrote: Neil Bothwick wrote: On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:21:33 +0200, Joost Roeleveld wrote: I think Dale will probably succeed in breaking it :) Dale, this comment isn't meant as an insult. I honestly think you would be perfect for some QA or Testing job :) But not on any project you wanted to finish on time ;-) Joost, I see your point. This is my life saying. If it wasn't for bad luck, I wouldn't have any luck at all. I hope for the best but expect the worst. You should see my dining room. Full of food stuff just in case. After my last visit to the grocery store, I'm thinking I may not have enough yet. o_O I also have a generator and some gas stored too. I also have a big garden to grow food as well. I may be disabled but I ain't stupid. I just try to keep the bad things that can happen in the back of my mind and keep a plan going, just in case it does hit the fan. The Internet is a mixed blessing. We only see what people type. But have difficulty understanding their personal situation because we don't see it. Up untill the point you mentioned you're disabled, I was like Hmm... I know a few people like that :) I would call that self-sufficient and quite clever. I would like to be able to move somewhere where I could just enjoy life and life of some piece of land. I would not consider you stupid, you've shown, at least in my opinion, that you're not :) I'm sort of wanting to use this as a learning experience. If I can get things set up, working and understand what the heck things do, then I may try some more stuff. Right now, my light bulb is pretty dim on LVM. I don't understand how it works and what the heck those commands do. I'll have my light bulb moment eventually. Since I don't have the new drive ordered yet, I got time to read, listen and try to grasp it all. The beginning of wisdom is admitting you don't have it ;) Just a old dog trying to learn new tricks. lol I'm lousy at training dogs (or other animals), but lets see if I can make LVM, or at least the way I use it, a bit clearer. If anything isn't clear, please ask. We've already discussed the benefits of using it in a previous thread. So I'll just skip those for now. With LVM, you end up with 1 or more VGs (Volume Group) Each VG consists of 1 or more PV (Physical Volume) Each VG can contain 1 or more LV (Logical Volume) In simple graphic: PV- VG- LV A PV is either an entire physical disk or a partition on a physical disk. This is why they're called Physical Volume A VG is a collection of Physical Volumes. The size of this depends equals the total size of all the PVs in this group. An LV is a partition on this Volume Group. Now, here comes the nice part. It is possible to extend a VG and LV. A VG is extended by adding a PV. It can also be reduced in size by removing a PV. NOTE: when removing a PV, ensure it is not used. (Tools exist for this) An LV can be extended as long as the VG has room for this. No movement of LVs is necessary, just like files on a filesystem, they get spread over available space. NOTE: Yes, this does lead to fragmentation (Tools exist to assist in defragmenting LVM) You can also reduce the size of an LV. (Again, make sure reducing the LV in size does not lead to loss of data) On top of an LV, any filesystem (Ext2/3/4, Reiserfs, XFS, JFS,) can be placed. Once an LV is created, the filesystem tools can simply access it just like any other block device (eg. physical disk) When selecting a filesystem to put on top of an LV, do check wether or not it at least supports increasing the size after creation. Most filesystems in use do support this even while the filesystem is mounted. Reducing the size of the filesystem is, in my use, less common. And I tend to simply copy data to a temporary location when I do need to reduce the size. I hope the above makes it a bit clearer on how it works. The actual commands for creating and managing an LVM-system, I'll leave for another time if and when they are needed. -- Joost I'm going to give this a stab here. I go buy a new drive. I use cfdisk to make it ready for LVM, the 8E thingy. I then tell LVM to make it a Physical Volume, either in whole or in part. I then tell LVM to make it a Volume Group and if I already had a drive using LVM I could then add the new drive to it. After that, I create Logical Volumes and put file systems on it for use sort of like the old partitions. Am I sort of getting on the right track? Did someone mention a GUI for this? ^-^ Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
Apparently, though unproven, at 18:25 on Friday 08 April 2011, Dale did opine thusly: I'm going to give this a stab here. I go buy a new drive. I use cfdisk to make it ready for LVM, the 8E thingy. Yes I then tell LVM to make it a Physical Volume, either in whole or in part. Yes I then tell LVM to make it a Volume Group No. You add the PV to a Volume Group (which will be created if necessary) and if I already had a drive using LVM I could then add the new drive to it. Yes. After that, I create Logical Volumes and put file systems on it for use sort of like the old partitions. Yes. Once you have made the LV, you then do this: mkfs /dev/mapper/whatever instead of mkfs /dev/sda1 The kernel sees /dev/mapper/whatever as just another block device (aka something it can mkfs) Am I sort of getting on the right track? Spot on Did someone mention a GUI for this? ^-^ Piffle. GUIs for LVM confuse the issue. Stay away from them like the plague. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] MTA lighter on resource: Exim or Postfix?
On 4/8/2011 2:06 AM, Pandu Poluan wrote: Hello again, list! I need to deploy an MTA in the Cloud. Now, RAM is at a premium, so between Exim and Postfix, which one is lighter on resource? Thank you for your inputs. For light relaying both are about the same. I'd give the edge to Postfix in a heavy use ISP system because it's not a monolithic process like Exim. kashani
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
Alan McKinnon wrote: Apparently, though unproven, at 18:25 on Friday 08 April 2011, Dale did opine thusly: I'm going to give this a stab here. I go buy a new drive. I use cfdisk to make it ready for LVM, the 8E thingy. Yes I then tell LVM to make it a Physical Volume, either in whole or in part. Yes I then tell LVM to make it a Volume Group No. You add the PV to a Volume Group (which will be created if necessary) Yea, I didn't type that in the way I meant it. PV is the bottom level, then VG goes on top of that then the LV. I think I am typing that in right. Basically, I create the PV first, then the VG then the LV. scratches head a bit I think I get it but may need better wording. and if I already had a drive using LVM I could then add the new drive to it. Yes. After that, I create Logical Volumes and put file systems on it for use sort of like the old partitions. Yes. Once you have made the LV, you then do this: mkfs /dev/mapper/whatever instead of mkfs /dev/sda1 The kernel sees /dev/mapper/whatever as just another block device (aka something it can mkfs) So when I get ready to make a file system, say ext3, then it would be mkfs.ext3 /dev/mapper/whatever. Then it would be ready to put stuff on. Am I sort of getting on the right track? Spot on Did someone mention a GUI for this? ^-^ Piffle. GUIs for LVM confuse the issue. Stay away from them like the plague. That is likely a good idea too. I get used to the GUI then if the GUI can't work, maybe X won't come up or something, then I have no idea where to start. Good advice. Thanks. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
Apparently, though unproven, at 19:39 on Friday 08 April 2011, Dale did opine thusly: [snip] Yea, I didn't type that in the way I meant it. PV is the bottom level, then VG goes on top of that then the LV. I think I am typing that in right. Basically, I create the PV first, then the VG then the LV. scratches head a bit I think I get it but may need better wording. Nah, you got it already ;-) The kernel sees /dev/mapper/whatever as just another block device (aka something it can mkfs) So when I get ready to make a file system, say ext3, then it would be mkfs.ext3 /dev/mapper/whatever. Then it would be ready to put stuff on. Yup. You'll have to poke around /dev/ a bit to see how your udev does it today but you got the gist of it -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
[gentoo-user] mutt $index_format syntax
Hello list,
Could anyone tell me where I could find an explanation of mutt
$index_format syntax. I read mutt manual, but it's not enough for me.
For example, I don't understand what does -15.15 mean (in default value
%4C %Z %{%b %d} %-15.15L (%4l) %s ), why there are no width values
for each column, what do constructions %{another %s} mean.
--
Regards,
Alex
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: revdep-rebuild Not Fixing Broken Links
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Brennan Shacklett bp.shackl...@gmail.comwrote: I think that package is there, but I'll check this weekend. I didn't feel like carrying my laptop today. It would be nice if I just had to install it, but I would think revdep-rebuild should pull it in . . . or doesn't revdep-rebuild work that way? revdep-rebuild will only rebuild the package with the broken link. It won't pull in anything (unless the ebuild pulls something else in), so revdep-rebuild can't fix an issue that needs another package that the ebuild doesn't depend on. --Brennan Shacklett Moreover, you may want to run emerge -a --depclean, which just might flush the package(s) with broken links. I run that manually once in a while, but regularly clean a bunch of other things with a script I call cleanup, -#!/bin/bash -dispatch-conf -revdep-rebuild -lafilefixer --justfixit -perl-cleaner all -locale-gen --keep --quiet You have to be prepared to respond to dispatch-conf, but the others run to completion by themselves. -- Kevin O'Gorman, PhD
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: revdep-rebuild Not Fixing Broken Links
On Friday 08 April 2011 19:51:10 Kevin O'Gorman wrote: I run that manually once in a while, but regularly clean a bunch of other things with a script I call cleanup, -#!/bin/bash -dispatch-conf -revdep-rebuild -lafilefixer --justfixit -perl-cleaner all The last one is now an option in /etc/make.conf under FEATURES: fixlafiles -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
Alan McKinnon wrote: Apparently, though unproven, at 19:39 on Friday 08 April 2011, Dale did opine thusly: [snip] Yea, I didn't type that in the way I meant it. PV is the bottom level, then VG goes on top of that then the LV. I think I am typing that in right. Basically, I create the PV first, then the VG then the LV. scratches head a bit I think I get it but may need better wording. Nah, you got it already ;-) The kernel sees /dev/mapper/whatever as just another block device (aka something it can mkfs) So when I get ready to make a file system, say ext3, then it would be mkfs.ext3 /dev/mapper/whatever. Then it would be ready to put stuff on. Yup. You'll have to poke around /dev/ a bit to see how your udev does it today but you got the gist of it root@fireball / # pvcreate /dev/sdb Physical volume /dev/sdb successfully created root@fireball / # Step one done. It didn't puke on my keyboard. lol Now to see what else I can get into. Not going to put anything important on it tho. Just a temporary thing right now. Just getting my feet wet. Dale :-) :-)
[gentoo-user] 4k disk block problem
Hello, After reading up on the issue, It has beensuggested to use this formating for a 2T drive, regardless of manufacturer: fdisk -c -S 56 -u /dev/sda OK, so why not use this: fdisk -c -S 64 -u /dev/sda Yes, I trying to prepared my disks (2) 2T seagates for a Raid 1 array Ok so once I do that, I going with just boot, root and swap on this first system. I've read to use type 'fb' in fdisk,(OK) but do I still mark both boot partitions as bootable? What is the best page to follow to test the LVM2 and mdadm stuff, before attempting to use the Raid 1 dual disk setup for the gentoo workstation install? James
Re: [gentoo-user] mutt $index_format syntax
On 2011/04/08 02:40PM, Alexey Mishustin wrote:
For example, I don't understand what does -15.15 mean (in default value
%4C %Z %{%b %d} %-15.15L (%4l) %s )
The -15.15 is the same as the printf(3) format. The minus sign means
left align the field, the first number is the minimum field width, and
the dot specifies that the next number is the precision, which for a
string is the max number of characters to print.
E.g -15.20 would be a left aligned field atleast 15 characters wide,
expanding upto 20 total, if the string is long enough. But that could
make things unaligned, so just keep the values the same.
why there are no width values for each column,
%4C - message number (width 4)
%Z- Status flags (always 3 characters)
%{%b %d} - (see below) Short month name, 2 digit day (constant width)
%-15.15L - Address (width 15)
(%4l) - # of lines in the message (width 4)
%s- Subject (last field, width unimportant)
what do constructions %{another %s} mean.
From the online manual [1], %{format} passes the date (in the sender's
time zone) to strftime(3), so you could use %{%Y-%m-%d} for example,
or just %D to use the setting from date_format.
Perhaps tricky to read, but very flexible. Hope that helps.
Regards,
Vincent.
[1] http://www.mutt.org/doc/manual/manual-6.html#index_format
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
Dale wrote: root@fireball / # pvcreate /dev/sdb Physical volume /dev/sdb successfully created root@fireball / # Step one done. It didn't puke on my keyboard. lol Now to see what else I can get into. Not going to put anything important on it tho. Just a temporary thing right now. Just getting my feet wet. Dale :-) :-) More progress. root@fireball / # ls -al /dev/mapper/ total 0 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 80 Apr 8 15:56 . drwxr-xr-x 16 root root4400 Apr 8 15:56 .. crw-rw 1 root root 10, 236 Apr 8 04:39 control lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 7 Apr 8 15:56 sdb--vg-test - ../dm-0 root@fireball / # pvdisplay --- Physical volume --- PV Name /dev/sdb VG Name sdb-vg PV Size 232.83 GiB / not usable 2.58 MiB Allocatable yes PE Size 4.00 MiB Total PE 59604 Free PE 46804 Allocated PE 12800 PV UUID kopUKm-lXy1-7tiq-FuQ2-Xhs5-tGqN-Ls4R1v root@fireball / # vgdisplay --- Volume group --- VG Name sdb-vg System ID Formatlvm2 Metadata Areas1 Metadata Sequence No 2 VG Access read/write VG Status resizable MAX LV0 Cur LV1 Open LV 0 Max PV0 Cur PV1 Act PV1 VG Size 232.83 GiB PE Size 4.00 MiB Total PE 59604 Alloc PE / Size 12800 / 50.00 GiB Free PE / Size 46804 / 182.83 GiB VG UUID 5OSiWZ-rWza-uKJ2-rVMO-f38G-NBHx-dmAE1K root@fireball / # lvdisplay --- Logical volume --- LV Name/dev/sdb-vg/test VG Namesdb-vg LV UUIDmixhOb-La6D-BwG4-Uz3l-P0ci-oGg5-YI3mN8 LV Write Accessread/write LV Status available # open 0 LV Size50.00 GiB Current LE 12800 Segments 1 Allocation inherit Read ahead sectors auto - currently set to 256 Block device 254:0 root@fireball / # I'm still trying to figure out how the naming part works tho. Now to mount it and put something on it. See if it works. Let me know if something doesn't look right. Otherwise, I'll keep playing around with it. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
On Fri, April 8, 2011 11:01 pm, Dale wrote: Dale wrote: root@fireball / # pvcreate /dev/sdb Physical volume /dev/sdb successfully created root@fireball / # Step one done. It didn't puke on my keyboard. lol Now to see what else I can get into. Not going to put anything important on it tho. Just a temporary thing right now. Just getting my feet wet. Dale :-) :-) More progress. root@fireball / # ls -al /dev/mapper/ total 0 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 80 Apr 8 15:56 . drwxr-xr-x 16 root root4400 Apr 8 15:56 .. crw-rw 1 root root 10, 236 Apr 8 04:39 control lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 7 Apr 8 15:56 sdb--vg-test - ../dm-0 Looks good :) root@fireball / # pvdisplay --- Physical volume --- PV Name /dev/sdb VG Name sdb-vg PV Size 232.83 GiB / not usable 2.58 MiB Allocatable yes PE Size 4.00 MiB Total PE 59604 Free PE 46804 Allocated PE 12800 PV UUID kopUKm-lXy1-7tiq-FuQ2-Xhs5-tGqN-Ls4R1v Looks fine root@fireball / # vgdisplay --- Volume group --- VG Name sdb-vg System ID Formatlvm2 Metadata Areas1 Metadata Sequence No 2 VG Access read/write VG Status resizable MAX LV0 Cur LV1 Open LV 0 Max PV0 Cur PV1 Act PV1 VG Size 232.83 GiB PE Size 4.00 MiB Total PE 59604 Alloc PE / Size 12800 / 50.00 GiB Free PE / Size 46804 / 182.83 GiB VG UUID 5OSiWZ-rWza-uKJ2-rVMO-f38G-NBHx-dmAE1K Looks ok, 50GB of 232.83 assigned root@fireball / # lvdisplay --- Logical volume --- LV Name/dev/sdb-vg/test VG Namesdb-vg LV UUIDmixhOb-La6D-BwG4-Uz3l-P0ci-oGg5-YI3mN8 LV Write Accessread/write LV Status available # open 0 LV Size50.00 GiB Current LE 12800 Segments 1 Allocation inherit Read ahead sectors auto - currently set to 256 Block device 254:0 Here is the 50GB... root@fireball / # I'm still trying to figure out how the naming part works tho. Now to mount it and put something on it. See if it works. Naming part, there are 2 ways of finding it. 1: /dev/VolumeGroupName/LogicalVolumeName 2: /dev/mapper/VolumeGroupName-LogicalVolumeName You included a - in your VG-name, this is replaced with -- under /dev/mapper/ Let me know if something doesn't look right. Otherwise, I'll keep playing around with it. Looks fine so far, don't forget to put a filesystem on /dev/sdb-vg/test to be able to mount it somewhere :) -- Joost
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
Apparently, though unproven, at 23:01 on Friday 08 April 2011, Dale did opine
thusly:
Dale wrote:
root@fireball / # pvcreate /dev/sdb
Physical volume /dev/sdb successfully created
root@fireball / #
Step one done. It didn't puke on my keyboard. lol
Now to see what else I can get into. Not going to put anything
important on it tho. Just a temporary thing right now. Just getting
my feet wet.
Dale
:-) :-)
More progress.
root@fireball / # ls -al /dev/mapper/
total 0
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 80 Apr 8 15:56 .
drwxr-xr-x 16 root root4400 Apr 8 15:56 ..
crw-rw 1 root root 10, 236 Apr 8 04:39 control
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 7 Apr 8 15:56 sdb--vg-test - ../dm-0
root@fireball / # pvdisplay
--- Physical volume ---
PV Name /dev/sdb
VG Name sdb-vg
PV Size 232.83 GiB / not usable 2.58 MiB
Allocatable yes
PE Size 4.00 MiB
Total PE 59604
Free PE 46804
Allocated PE 12800
PV UUID kopUKm-lXy1-7tiq-FuQ2-Xhs5-tGqN-Ls4R1v
root@fireball / # vgdisplay
--- Volume group ---
VG Name sdb-vg
System ID
Formatlvm2
Metadata Areas1
Metadata Sequence No 2
VG Access read/write
VG Status resizable
MAX LV0
Cur LV1
Open LV 0
Max PV0
Cur PV1
Act PV1
VG Size 232.83 GiB
PE Size 4.00 MiB
Total PE 59604
Alloc PE / Size 12800 / 50.00 GiB
Free PE / Size 46804 / 182.83 GiB
VG UUID 5OSiWZ-rWza-uKJ2-rVMO-f38G-NBHx-dmAE1K
root@fireball / # lvdisplay
--- Logical volume ---
LV Name/dev/sdb-vg/test
VG Namesdb-vg
LV UUIDmixhOb-La6D-BwG4-Uz3l-P0ci-oGg5-YI3mN8
LV Write Accessread/write
LV Status available
# open 0
LV Size50.00 GiB
Current LE 12800
Segments 1
Allocation inherit
Read ahead sectors auto
- currently set to 256
Block device 254:0
root@fireball / #
I'm still trying to figure out how the naming part works tho. Now to
mount it and put something on it. See if it works.
Naming can vary a lot depending on udev rules. There will be one canonical
name and one or more other things that symlink to it.
Likely the canonical stuff will be /dev/mapper/.
and the symlinks will be in /dev/sdb-vg/.
cd and ls will see you right :-)
Let me know if something doesn't look right. Otherwise, I'll keep
playing around with it.
Cool. So now you have a 250G PV, and it's the the only PV in it's volume
group. You've made a 50G LV called test
Cool so far. Now make a few more LVs (check the man pages, I'm doing this from
memory):
lvcreate -L 20G -n test2 sdb-vg
lvcreate -L 30G -n test3 sdb-vg
mkfs them:
mkfs.your_choice /dev/sdb-vg/test{,2,3}
mount points:
mkdir /mnt/test{,2,3}
mount them:
mount /dev/sdb-vg/test /mnt/test
Whoop-dee-doo. Now you can copy stuff there and do whatever you do with
filesystems. Let's assume you have music on the first one test. Let's also
assume you get more music and it's more than 50G; say you need another 20.
Easy-peasy, grow the filesystem, grow the LV:
lvextend -L +20G /dev/sdb-vg/test
resize2fs /dev/sdb-vg/test
That's it. Nothing more. Without LVM, you'd be off down to the 'puter store
looking to buy 70 CDs to do that :-)
It's important to remember that once you've made /dev/sdb into a PV, you will
never touch that device again. You will especially never fdisk or mkfs it -
all that is done on the block device that LVM gives you - /dev/sdb-vg/test
--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
J. Roeleveld wrote: On Fri, April 8, 2011 11:01 pm, Dale wrote: root@fireball / # I'm still trying to figure out how the naming part works tho. Now to mount it and put something on it. See if it works. Naming part, there are 2 ways of finding it. 1: /dev/VolumeGroupName/LogicalVolumeName 2: /dev/mapper/VolumeGroupName-LogicalVolumeName You included a - in your VG-name, this is replaced with -- under /dev/mapper/ Let me know if something doesn't look right. Otherwise, I'll keep playing around with it. Looks fine so far, don't forget to put a filesystem on /dev/sdb-vg/test to be able to mount it somewhere :) -- Joost The naming I was talking about was sort of like a label. I wanted to use test, where I might use say data in real use, but ended up with this: root@fireball / # df Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on SNIP /dev/mapper/sdb--vg-test 51606140184268 48800432 1% /mnt/temp root@fireball / # I don't mind the sdb--vg part tho. I guess that sort of points to what all is needed to get to that point. Might come in handy if I needed to remove something tho. Sort of tells me what is what. I did try to mount it before putting a file system on it. I sort of missed that part somewhere. I knew it needed it, just forgot to do it. Mount sort of puked on my keyboard to remind me. lol Whew !! Progress. Oh, someone posted a link to a site that had pictures. That helped a good bit. It needed more detail tho. I'm going to do some google image searches and see what I can find. Thanks much. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
On Fri, 8 Apr 2011 20:38:21 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: So when I get ready to make a file system, say ext3, then it would be mkfs.ext3 /dev/mapper/whatever. Then it would be ready to put stuff on. Yup. You'll have to poke around /dev/ a bit to see how your udev does it today but you got the gist of it Normally, each LV appears as /dev/vgname/lvname, which is slightly easier to work with than /dev/mapper/vgname-lvname. As for GUIs, they have two problems. They hide the working from you, which is counter-productive, and all the current ones suck. -- Neil Bothwick Welcome to the world of Windows 95. Stay a while -- stay foooreveeer. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
On Fri, 8 Apr 2011 23:23:20 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Cool so far. Now make a few more LVs (check the man pages, I'm doing this from memory): lvcreate -L 20G -n test2 sdb-vg lvcreate -L 30G -n test3 sdb-vg A little time saver, if you have only one VG, set $LVM_VG_NAME to its name and you can leave the VG name out of any lv* commands. -- Neil Bothwick Criminal Lawyer is a redundancy. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
Neil Bothwick wrote: On Fri, 8 Apr 2011 23:23:20 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Cool so far. Now make a few more LVs (check the man pages, I'm doing this from memory): lvcreate -L 20G -n test2 sdb-vg lvcreate -L 30G -n test3 sdb-vg A little time saver, if you have only one VG, set $LVM_VG_NAME to its name and you can leave the VG name out of any lv* commands. I'll have more than one before long so may as well learn the long way. Neat to know tho. I'm hoping for about a 2Tb or maybe a 1.5Tb drive. That should last me a while but I'm going to put my current 750Gb on there too. My new rig is still growing. lol Dale :-) :-)
FEATURE: fixlafiles (was: [gentoo-user] Re: revdep-rebuild Not Fixing Broken Links)
On Fri, Apr 08 2011, Mick wrote: On Friday 08 April 2011 19:51:10 Kevin O'Gorman wrote: I run that manually once in a while, but regularly clean a bunch of other things with a script I call cleanup, -#!/bin/bash -dispatch-conf -revdep-rebuild -lafilefixer --justfixit -perl-cleaner all The last one is now an option in /etc/make.conf under FEATURES: fixlafiles This sounds great! Outside of some extra time in emerging is there any reason *not* to add fixlafiles to FEATURES? thanks, allan
[gentoo-user] .config file for gentoo guest on vmware workstation 7.1.4
Hi All, I'm getting the usual cant boot root device error on my gentoo guest. AFAICT i've built all the relevant scsi adapter and filesystem drivers into the kernel. Most of the info on the web is a bit old and talks about other vmware versions - can someone share a working .config? The guest is using 2.6.38, Cheers
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 5:22 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Quick question about LVM. I have a 750Gb drive that has miscellaneous stuff on it. Stuff likes videos, music, pictures, ISO files and a few other things. It's not full yet but it is working on it. I have my OS on sda. The large drive is on sdc. If I buy another drive it should be sdd. I think this is possible from what I have read but want to make sure. Could I put sdc and sdd on LVM but the OS remain as it is with LVM not involved at all? Basically, my OS stays just like it is and is not touched my LVM at all but the two larger drives are managed by LVM. I want to do it this way because I don't trust LVM enough to put my OS on. Just my personal opinion on LVM. If there is a better solution to link two large drives, I'm open to those ideas as well. LVM is all I can think of is why I mention it. Thanks. Dale :-) :-) I know I'm late to the game with a reply, but a couple of months ago, I setup a data box running Gentoo in the following configuration: OS drive: 250 GB PATA LVM2 data drives: 2 x WD Caviar Black 3 TB, raid1, LVM2 Had to partition those drives using parted, though. If that setup works fine -- and it does -- you'll have no issues.
Re: [gentoo-user] .config file for gentoo guest on vmware workstation 7.1.4
I had a working .config. Unfortunately, I left it at office. The main 'trap' usually would be the SCSI Driver. If you're using PVSCSI, go into SCSI RAID, then SCSI Low Level Driver, then select VMware PVSCSI as built-in, not module. If you're using LSI Logic, select Fusion MPT instead. Don't forget to emerge grub and edit /boot/grub/menu.lst (and please excuse my top-posting. Gmail mobile can only top post; it hides the message being replied, and automatically appends the message after mine) Rgds, On 2011-04-09, Adam Carter adamcart...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I'm getting the usual cant boot root device error on my gentoo guest. AFAICT i've built all the relevant scsi adapter and filesystem drivers into the kernel. Most of the info on the web is a bit old and talks about other vmware versions - can someone share a working .config? The guest is using 2.6.38, Cheers -- -- Pandu E Poluan - IT Optimizer My website: http://pandu.poluan.info/
Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
OK. I learned something. Check this out: root@fireball / # df Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on SNIP /dev/mapper/sdb--vg-test 51606140 48910048 74652 100% /mnt/temp root@fireball / # This is what I am doing here. As I posted a while ago, I created a 50Gb LV. I attempted to copy about 75Gbs to it which filled it up but I wanted to make sure it would. lol Then I used lvextend -L100G /dev/mapper/sdb--vg-test to make it larger. I read I could do the same thing with lvresize but the example I was reading showed lvextend. This is what I got now: root@fireball / # lvdisplay --- Logical volume --- LV Name/dev/sdb-vg/test VG Namesdb-vg LV UUIDmixhOb-La6D-BwG4-Uz3l-P0ci-oGg5-YI3mN8 LV Write Accessread/write LV Status available # open 1 LV Size100.00 GiB Current LE 25600 Segments 1 Allocation inherit Read ahead sectors auto - currently set to 256 Block device 254:0 root@fireball / # So, according to that it is 100Gbs which is what I wanted. Thing was, it didn't work. So, h. Light bulb moment. Resize the file system silly. After that, success. So, I created something that wasn''t big enough, filled it up, made it bigger, fixed the file system and now it is working. All while online too. That is the weird part. Still not comfy putting a OS on it but it is cool so far. Dale :-) :-)
