Linux-Hardware Digest #398, Volume #10 Thu, 3 Jun 99 03:14:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Do Travan 4 tape drives work on Linux? (Philip Hirschhorn)
Re: Windows easy to install? BULLSHIT! ("Brian")
Re: "Kernel size too large" ("Jussi J")
Re: Terabite Plus Filesystems (bill davidsen)
Re: ali chipset (Oliver Hach)
Re: Terabite Plus Filesystems ("Stefan Monnier "
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
Re: Weird Pentium III issue... (Michael Gibson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Philip Hirschhorn)
Subject: Re: Do Travan 4 tape drives work on Linux?
Date: 3 Jun 1999 05:53:47 GMT
Jun Yang ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Hi,
: I am considering buying a Seagate Travan 4 tape drive
: with the EIDE interface. Does it work with RedHat 5.2?
: I checked the Hardware Compatibility HOWTO but didn't
: find the answer for TR4 and QIC-3095, the native format
: of the drive. Anybody who has experience with it?
: Thanks!
I have the Seagate Tapestor 8000, ide version, which is probably the
drive you're looking at. It works beautifully.
Not that you asked, but here's a shell script I use to do either full
or incremental backups of my whole system. This script assumes that
/dev/tape is a symlink to the non-automatically rewinding tape device,
/dev/nht0. You create the directories /var/backups and
/var/backups/files, and put this script in /var/backups; make two
links to it: runfullbackup, and runincbackup.
Good luck,
Phil
============================== Cut Here ==============================
#!/bin/sh
# This script can be called as either
# runfullbackup
# or
# runincbackup
# If we're called as "runfullbackup", then we backup the complete
# filesystem to tape. We write the file directly to tape, since it
# probably wouldn't fit on the disk.
# If we're called as "runincbackup", then we do a listed incremental
# backup of the complete filesystem, creating the file
# $BACKUPFILENAME, and then we copy that file to tape. We leave that
# file where it is, so that we can make a second copy of it to another
# tape, if we so choose.
# These two jobs are so different that they should probably be done in
# different scripts, but putting them into the same script ensures
# that they both use the same filenames for the listfile, logfile,
# etc.
umask 022
BACKUPDIR=/var/backups
LOGFILE=$BACKUPDIR/Backups.log
MESSAGEFILE=$BACKUPDIR/Backups.messages
LISTFILE=$BACKUPDIR/Listfile.lst
LASTBACKFILE=$BACKUPDIR/Lastbackup.date
EXCLUDEFILE=$BACKUPDIR/Exclude.lst
# The following is used only if we're doing an incremental backup:
BACKUPFILENAME=$BACKUPDIR/files/IncrBackup.`date '+%d.%m.%y'`.tgz
NOW=`date`
MACHINE=`hostname`
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
# Figure out what sort of backup we're supposed to do, and do it:
prog_name="`basename $0`"
case $prog_name in
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
runfullbackup)
# This part of the script does a full backup, directory to tape:
# retension the tape twice, and then go to the end of the data:
echo "Retensioning tape, first of two times..."
/bin/mt retension
if [ $? -ne 0 ];then
echo " Error: Unable to retension the tape."
echo " (Is there a tape in the drive?)"
echo " Script exiting"
exit 1
fi
echo "Retensioning tape, second of two times..."
/bin/mt retension
if [ $? -ne 0 ];then
echo " Error: Unable to retension the tape a second time."
echo " Script exiting"
exit 1
fi
echo "Seeking to the end of data on the tape..."
/bin/mt eod
if [ $? -ne 0 ];then
echo " Error: Unable to go to the end of the data."
echo " Script exiting"
exit 1
fi
# Find the present block number, and delete all non-digits
# from the output of "mt tell" so that we have only the number:
/bin/mt tell > /dev/null 2>&1
while [ $? -ne 0 ]
do
echo " Error: Unable to read current block of tape."\
| tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
echo " Will sleep 10 seconds, and try again." | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
sleep 10
/bin/mt tell > /dev/null 2>&1
done
BLOCKNO=`/bin/mt tell | tr -d -c 0123456789`
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
echo | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
echo "Beginning full backup of $MACHINE, $NOW" | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
# Remove the listed-incremental record file so that
# a full backup will be done:
rm -f $LISTFILE
tar -czvX $EXCLUDEFILE\
-V "Full backup of $MACHINE on $NOW"\
--listed-incremental=$LISTFILE\
-f /dev/tape\
--totals\
/ >> $MESSAGEFILE 2>&1
echo "Full backup of $MACHINE, $NOW" >> $LOGFILE
echo " (gzipped tarfile) beginning at block $BLOCKNO" >> $LOGFILE
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
echo $NOW > $LASTBACKFILE
# Find the block number that follows the date we've written:
/bin/mt tell > /dev/null 2>&1
while [ $? -ne 0 ]
do
echo " Error: Unable to read current block at end of backup."\
| tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
echo " Will sleep 10 seconds, and try again." | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
sleep 10
/bin/mt tell > /dev/null 2>&1
done
NEWBLOCKNO=`/bin/mt tell | tr -d -c 0123456789`
echo " Next backup will begin at block $NEWBLOCKNO" >> $LOGFILE
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
# Go back to the beginning of the newly written file,
# and run a compare.
echo "Seeking to beginning of new file before comparing..."
/bin/mt seek $BLOCKNO
/bin/mt tell > /dev/null 2>&1
while [ $? -ne 0 ]
do
echo " Error: Can't compare new backup yet; tape busy."\
| tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
echo " Will sleep 10 seconds, and try again." | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
sleep 10
/bin/mt tell > /dev/null 2>&1
done
echo | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
echo "Beginning compare of new backup: `date`" | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
# cd to / so that the paths will match up right:
cd /
/bin/tar --compare -z -f /dev/tape >> $MESSAGEFILE 2>&1
echo "Compare of new backup completed: `date`" | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
echo "Putting tape offline..." | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
/bin/mt offline
while [ $? -ne 0 ]
do
echo " Error: Unable to put tape offline."\
| tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
echo " Will sleep 10 seconds, and try again." | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
sleep 10
/bin/mt offline
done
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
echo "Backup script complete." | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
exit 0
;;
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
runincbackup)
# This part of the script does an incremental backup
if [ -f $BACKUPFILENAME ]
then
echo "$BACKUPFILENAME already exists; script exiting"\
| tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
exit 1;
fi
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
if [ -f $LASTBACKFILE ]; then
THEN=`cat $LASTBACKFILE`
else
THEN="I don't know when"
fi
echo | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
echo "Beginning listed incremental backup from $THEN to $NOW"\
| tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
tar -czvX $EXCLUDEFILE\
--listed-incremental=$LISTFILE\
-V "Listed incremental backupof abigail from $THEN to $NOW"\
-f $BACKUPFILENAME\
--totals\
/ >> $MESSAGEFILE 2>&1
echo "Incremental backup of $MACHINE (gzipped tarfile):" >> $LOGFILE
echo " From $THEN to $NOW" >> $LOGFILE
echo $NOW > $LASTBACKFILE
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
# Do a compare to check the backup file contents:
# cd to / so that the paths will match up right:
cd /
echo "Beginning compare of new backup, `date`" | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
/bin/tar --compare -z -f $BACKUPFILENAME >> $MESSAGEFILE 2>&1
echo "Compare of new backup completed." | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
# Copy the backup file to tape:
# retension the tape twice, and then go to the end of the data:
echo "Retensioning tape, first of two times..."
/bin/mt retension
if [ $? -ne 0 ];then
echo " Error: Unable to retension the tape."
echo " (Is there a tape in the drive?)"
echo " Script exiting"
exit 1
fi
echo "Retensioning tape, second of two times..."
/bin/mt retension
if [ $? -ne 0 ];then
echo " Error: Unable to retension the tape a second time."
echo " Script exiting"
exit 1
fi
echo "Seeking to the end of data on the tape..."
/bin/mt eod
if [ $? -ne 0 ];then
echo " Error: Unable to go to the end of the data."
echo " Script exiting"
exit 1
fi
# Find the present block number, and delete all non-digits
# from the output of "mt tell" so that we have only the number:
/bin/mt tell > /dev/null 2>&1
while [ $? -ne 0 ]
do
echo " Error: Unable to read current block of tape."\
| tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
echo " Will sleep 10 seconds, and try again." | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
sleep 10
/bin/mt tell > /dev/null 2>&1
done
BLOCKNO=`/bin/mt tell | tr -d -c 0123456789`
echo "Beginning to copy $BACKUPFILENAME to tape" >> $LOGFILE
echo " beginning at block $BLOCKNO" >> $LOGFILE
echo "Beginning to copy $BACKUPFILENAME to tape, `date`"\
| tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
cp $BACKUPFILENAME /dev/tape
/bin/mt tell > /dev/null 2>&1
while [ $? -ne 0 ]
do
echo " Error: Unable to read current block at end of backup."\
| tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
echo " Will sleep 10 seconds, and try again." | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
sleep 10
/bin/mt tell > /dev/null 2>&1
done
NEWBLOCKNO=`/bin/mt tell | tr -d -c 0123456789`
echo " Next backup will begin at block $NEWBLOCKNO" >> $LOGFILE
echo | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
# Go back to the beginning of the newly written file on tape
# and run a compare.
echo "Seeking to beginning of new file before comparing..."
/bin/mt seek $BLOCKNO
/bin/mt tell > /dev/null 2>&1
while [ $? -ne 0 ]
do
echo " Error: Can't compare new backup yet; tape busy."\
| tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
echo " Will sleep 10 seconds, and try again." | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
sleep 10
/bin/mt tell > /dev/null 2>&1
done
echo "Beginning compare of new backup." | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
cmp $BACKUPFILENAME /dev/tape >> $MESSAGEFILE 2>&1
echo "Compare of new backup completed." | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
echo "Putting tape offline..." | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
/bin/mt offline
while [ $? -ne 0 ]
do
echo " Error: Unable to put tape offline."\
| tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
echo " Will sleep 10 seconds, and try again." | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
sleep 10
/bin/mt offline
done
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
echo "Backup script complete." | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
echo | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
exit 0
;;
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
# --------------------------------------------------------------------
*)
echo "Unrecognized backup type; script exiting" | tee -a $MESSAGEFILE
exit 1;
;;
esac
--
======================================================================
Philip Hirschhorn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
======================================================================
------------------------------
From: "Brian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Windows easy to install? BULLSHIT!
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 21:52:30 GMT
What crap!
You mean you didn't have to screw around with different
driver disks? And reboot for every bit of hardware W95
found?
That is all baking a new kernel is for in Linux, in most
cases.
Windows 95 sux ass big time when it comes to installing on
contemporary hardware! You can be assured of about 10
reboots to get things running; I know!
Just one guy's opinion.
Brian
Thlayli wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Daniele Bernardini
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>>After that I installed SuSE Linux and it worked right away
out
>>of the box I needed just to recompile the kernel with
specific
>>settings for my machine and setup Xwindows (40 mins in
all) et voila'.
>
>I like this part. If you had to recompile the kernel, then
it didn't work
>"right out of the box".
>
>You've told your story, now here's mine:
>
>This computer came with Windows 3.1 preloaded. I have
installed Windows 95,
>Windows NT 4.0, OS/2 3.0, and four variants of Linux
(Slackware
>2.something-or-other and 3.5, Red Hat 4.2 and 5.0). The
only OS that worked
>properly right out of the box was Windows 95.
>
>YMMV.
>
>--
>Thlayli
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.geocities.com/~thlayli23x/home.html
>
>This message printed on 100% recycled electrons (40%
post-consumer)
>
>*** Replace "theglobe.com" with "usa.net" to email me ***
------------------------------
From: "Jussi J" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,aus.computers.linux
Subject: Re: "Kernel size too large"
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 09:12:42 +0300
Craig Sharpe kirjoitti viestiss� <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Hi
>
>looked at the sectors of my HD it comes up with two error messages
>saying " Use bzImage or modules". I took the advice and ran "make
Instead of make zImage use make bzImage
Jussi
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (bill davidsen)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.admin.misc,comp.sys.sun.admin,comp.sys.hp.misc
Subject: Re: Terabite Plus Filesystems
Date: 2 Jun 1999 22:01:18 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jake Maizel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| We are building a system that needs to handle a huge number of files
| that are 500KB-1MB in size (1-2TB total). Our only constraint right now
| is the desire to use intel-based hardware for the host computers for
| cost purposes.
At the risk of getting blasted here, have you looked at SCO? Their
UNIXware stuff has a large number of filesystem types, and I think you
would find them at least worthy of evaluation.
| My question really is regarding which OS would best
| handle a filesystem of this size. We are using lots of unix and NT so
| we don't have a bias one way but we don't have experience with any OS
| using a filesystem this big. What we are considering for hardware are
| HP LPr hosts connected to a AL-FC RAID system (probably HP). We would
| want to pick either HPUX, linux, NT or Solaris x86. Any experience
| that could be passed would be great.
I would avoid using AIX (I know you didn't mention it) for any
application which has a large number of files in a single directory. I
know Linux will handle this, but I have no idea how well.
Having used EMC2 and Hitachi RAID boxes I would favor Hitachi by a bit,
although either can and will fail if you use it long enough.
Final thought, backup. RAID isn't perfect, and even the best servers can
fail in a way which corrupts data.
--
bill davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
The Internet is not the fountain of youth, but some days it feels like
the fountain of immaturity.
------------------------------
From: Oliver Hach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ali chipset
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 00:32:06 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thomas Mikkelsen wrote:
> Is there a driver for the ali m1542 chipset
>
> Its comes with the ASUS P5A-B motherboard
The m1542 is supported by Kernel 2.3.x.....
There is another way: 2_2_9_uniform-ide-6_19_hotel_patch
might work....
olli
------------------------------
From: "Stefan Monnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.admin.misc,comp.sys.sun.admin,comp.sys.hp.misc
Subject: Re: Terabite Plus Filesystems
Date: 03 Jun 1999 02:11:33 -0400
>>>>> "Al" == Al in Seattle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sent this flame-bait:
> Well after all the sh** that I have taken because I dared to stand up and
> just *question* using NT versus Unix on this thread, I open up June 1999
> WinNT mag and on page 78, is a story about NCSA using a 192 processor
> cluster of off the shelf NT dual processor boxes, using off the shelf NT
> SP3.
> While I understand that this is not a terabite file system being used in it,
> you Unix Bigots that have said that NT doesn't scale ought to at least read
> the article. The person managing the system apparently has been very happy
> with it. Considers it an unqualified success.
WinNT mag is at least as biased towards NT as comp.os.linux.* is towards Linux.
Being mostly financed by Microsoft, they are unlikely to feature an article
about how NT is unusable.
Now, for the actual content, you'll note that indeed, a cluster of 96
bi-processors has very little to do with what was being discussed.
You don't mention what the cluster was used for, but you'll note that
I expect most OS designers to look at such clusters as the evidence that
the OS itself doesn't scale (the 192 processors were not a single-system
image). NT machines are also very often clustered for reliability reasons
(failover and friends) which is sometimes considered a tribute to NT's
instability, I don't know if that was the case for that NCSA example.
All unix vendors like Sun, HP, ... sell machines with terabyte filesystems
on a regular basis, which is something that cannot be said of NT (or Linux for
that matter).
So, yes, maybe NT can deal with such amounts of disk, maybe Linux can deal
with it also, but I haven't seen any evidence for such competence, whereas
there is ample evidence for the other Unix guys, hence the recommendation to go
with such a machine.
Stefan
------------------------------
From: Michael Gibson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Weird Pentium III issue...
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 23:41:31 +0000
On Mon, 31 May 1999, Eric Ladner wrote:
>Howdy,
>
>I recently swapped out a motherboard and CPU under a Red Hat
>5.2 (using 2.2.9) system and have noticed a couple of weird
>things since.
>
>No matter what, the average load is alwasy 1.0 (+- 0.1). If
>I'm in X, it says that the X server is taking up 80-90% of the
>CPU. If I'm not in X, small processes like kswapd and mysqld
>seem to be competing for the CPU and take up 80-90% of the time.
What software are you using that gives you these figures? I have a PIII 500
and haven't encountered any problems. Saying that I am running a fresh install
of slackware 4 :-)
Michael
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.hardware) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Hardware Digest
******************************
