Re: ia32 userland and XFS
On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 08:33:50PM +1100, An?bal Monsalve Salazar wrote: On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 07:37:16PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: According to this (seemingly 2+ year old) web page, the XFS file system chokes on the combination of 32 bit userland and 64 bit kernel. Is this still true, and why should a low-level driver hidden under a virtual fs care what user apps access it via the vfs? XFS as in the plain posix filesystem works perfectly fine with a 64 bit kernel and 32 bit userspace. But various advance capabilities or administration interfaces which are used by tools from xfsprogs are implemented as ioctls, and unfortunately most of them have been designed very badly and aren't wordsize clean. There have been handlers for a few of them for a while, but only as of today a full set of compat handlers has been commited. That code will be release with 2.6.29, but could also be backported. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
console-screen framebuffer
Hello, I installed usplash and grub2 on my lenny, and configured grub.cfg (added vga=0x318 : [EMAIL PROTECTED]). usplash works till, i suppose, console-screen.sh is launched : I suppose there must be a problem with framebuffer and console-screen setting fonts. I've added nvidiafb in /etc/initramfs-tools/modules, and then removed with no effect, which makes me think grub2 embeds its own framebuffer... Is there any patch or configuration setting I missed ? TIA, thomas
Re: console-screen framebuffer
On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 03:10:22PM +0100, thomas parquier wrote: I installed usplash and grub2 on my lenny, and configured grub.cfg (added vga=0x318 : [EMAIL PROTECTED]). usplash works till, i suppose, console-screen.sh is launched : I suppose there must be a problem with framebuffer and console-screen setting fonts. I've added nvidiafb in /etc/initramfs-tools/modules, and then removed with no effect, which makes me think grub2 embeds its own framebuffer... Is there any patch or configuration setting I missed ? grub uses vesa modes since there isn't anything else it could use that isn't video card specific. I wouldn't be surprised if the console fonts mess it up. Also combining vesa mode changes with native mode changes might not work correctly either. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: console-screen framebuffer
No problem with usplash removed... Oh, and the problem is the screen getting corrupted, completely unreadable : black background with some green blocks randomly positionned. 2008/12/2 thomas parquier [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello, I installed usplash and grub2 on my lenny, and configured grub.cfg (added vga=0x318 : [EMAIL PROTECTED]). usplash works till, i suppose, console-screen.sh is launched : I suppose there must be a problem with framebuffer and console-screen setting fonts. I've added nvidiafb in /etc/initramfs-tools/modules, and then removed with no effect, which makes me think grub2 embeds its own framebuffer... Is there any patch or configuration setting I missed ? TIA, thomas
Re: console-screen framebuffer
oops, this is occurs on my x86 lenny, and not yet on my x86_64 pc since I didn't reboot it yet... 2008/12/2 thomas parquier [EMAIL PROTECTED] No problem with usplash removed... Oh, and the problem is the screen getting corrupted, completely unreadable : black background with some green blocks randomly positionned. 2008/12/2 thomas parquier [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello, I installed usplash and grub2 on my lenny, and configured grub.cfg (added vga=0x318 : [EMAIL PROTECTED]). usplash works till, i suppose, console-screen.sh is launched : I suppose there must be a problem with framebuffer and console-screen setting fonts. I've added nvidiafb in /etc/initramfs-tools/modules, and then removed with no effect, which makes me think grub2 embeds its own framebuffer... Is there any patch or configuration setting I missed ? TIA, thomas
Re: usermin and webmin
Lennart Sorensen skrev: On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 12:15:10PM +0100, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote: a long time ago, there were the packages usermin and webmin in your repository. You took them away, as the code of these applications were very bad (spaghetti code) and so it ddid not fit the high qualtity Debian is standing for. Now are two years gone, and I have heard by lots of coders, that the code of those applications is significantly improved, the code shall now be very good, and the applications are both running very stable. It is not, it has hardly changed at all. The fundamentals are still a mess by its very design. As far as I know the webmin folks have been begging for feedback on this, but none has been given. As far as I can tell for all the packages I use, webmin does things correctly, the debian way. There are debian packages available. Anders -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ia32 userland and XFS
Adding [EMAIL PROTECTED] to the cc list so all the XFS folk see this. On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 07:37:16PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: https://alioth.debian.org/docman/view.php/30192/21/debian-amd64-howto.html#id292806 According to this (seemingly 2+ year old) web page, the XFS file system chokes on the combination of 32 bit userland and 64 bit kernel. Is this still true, and why should a low-level driver hidden under a virtual fs care what user apps access it via the vfs? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ia32 userland and XFS
On 12/02/08 03:52, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 08:33:50PM +1100, An?bal Monsalve Salazar wrote: On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 07:37:16PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: According to this (seemingly 2+ year old) web page, the XFS file system chokes on the combination of 32 bit userland and 64 bit kernel. Is this still true, and why should a low-level driver hidden under a virtual fs care what user apps access it via the vfs? XFS as in the plain posix filesystem works perfectly fine with a 64 bit kernel and 32 bit userspace. But various advance capabilities or administration interfaces which are used by tools from xfsprogs are implemented as ioctls, and unfortunately most of them have been designed very badly and aren't wordsize clean. Thanks, that's kinda what I figured. There have been handlers for a few of them for a while, but only as of today a full set of compat handlers has been commited. That code will be release with 2.6.29, but could also be backported. -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA How does being physically handicapped make me Differently-Abled? What different abilities do I have? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
sources.list: experimental
Hi all, just a question: adding an experimental source to the sources list (just to install a special application from this), will an aptitude upgrade or apt-get upgrade overwrite ALL installed packages ? Thanks for your help. Cheers Hans -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: sources.list: experimental
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 18:35, Hans-J. Ullrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: adding an experimental source to the sources list (just to install a special application from this), will an aptitude upgrade or apt-get upgrade overwrite ALL installed packages ? No, you need to explicitly request to install packages from experimental using -t experimental option. Regards, -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, Morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: sources.list: experimental
On 12/02/08 11:39, Sandro Tosi wrote: On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 18:35, Hans-J. Ullrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: adding an experimental source to the sources list (just to install a special application from this), will an aptitude upgrade or apt-get upgrade overwrite ALL installed packages ? No, you need to explicitly request to install packages from experimental using -t experimental option. To follow up on that, note how experimental is down at priority 1: $ apt-cache policy Package files: 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status release a=now 500 http://tovid.sourceforge.net unstable/contrib Packages origin tovid.sourceforge.net 1 http://ftp.debian.org ../project/experimental/non-free Packages release o=Debian,a=experimental,l=Debian,c=non-free origin ftp.debian.org 1 http://ftp.debian.org ../project/experimental/contrib Packages release o=Debian,a=experimental,l=Debian,c=contrib origin ftp.debian.org 1 http://ftp.debian.org ../project/experimental/main Packages release o=Debian,a=experimental,l=Debian,c=main origin ftp.debian.org 500 http://www.debian-multimedia.org unstable/main Packages release v=None,o=Unofficial Multimedia Packages,a=unstable,l=Unofficial Multimedia Packages,c=main origin www.debian-multimedia.org 500 ftp://mirrors.kernel.org unstable/non-free Packages release o=Debian,a=unstable,l=Debian,c=non-free origin mirrors.kernel.org 500 ftp://mirrors.kernel.org unstable/contrib Packages release o=Debian,a=unstable,l=Debian,c=contrib origin mirrors.kernel.org 500 ftp://mirrors.kernel.org unstable/main Packages release o=Debian,a=unstable,l=Debian,c=main origin mirrors.kernel.org Pinned packages: -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA How does being physically handicapped make me Differently-Abled? What different abilities do I have? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: sources.list: experimental
On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 06:35:59PM +0100, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote: just a question: adding an experimental source to the sources list (just to install a special application from this), will an aptitude upgrade or apt-get upgrade overwrite ALL installed packages ? upgrade doesn't do anything involving adding or removing packages. dist-upgrade does, so really using anything other than dist-upgrade ever is just a mistake. upgrade really shouldn't even be an option. At least for apt-get. Perhaps aptitude behaves differently. Other than that, as already mentioned you would have to specifically specify experimental for a package to install that. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: sources.list: experimental
Lennart Sorensen: On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 06:35:59PM +0100, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote: just a question: adding an experimental source to the sources list (just to install a special application from this), will an aptitude upgrade or apt-get upgrade overwrite ALL installed packages ? upgrade doesn't do anything involving adding or removing packages. Well, but it upgrades packages. In other words: it overwrites existing packages. That's what Hans asked. dist-upgrade does, so really using anything other than dist-upgrade ever is just a mistake. No, it is not. Using 'upgrade' (or 'safe-upgrade' when using aptitude) is the safe way to update your system without changing the set of installed packages. In the past, this list received many mails from people asking for help after apt(itude) removed some important package from their system. If all these people had made a habit of using dist-upgrade only when they know they really need it, they would have saved themselves a lot trouble. Of course, if you always check apt(itude)'s output before confirming its actions, you don't break your system either. But it is never a mistake to try the safe alternative first. J. -- I often blame my shortcomings on my upbringing. [Agree] [Disagree] http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: sources.list: experimental
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lennart Sorensen) writes: On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 06:35:59PM +0100, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote: just a question: adding an experimental source to the sources list (just to install a special application from this), will an aptitude upgrade or apt-get upgrade overwrite ALL installed packages ? upgrade doesn't do anything involving adding or removing packages. dist-upgrade does, so really using anything other than dist-upgrade ever is just a mistake. upgrade really shouldn't even be an option. At least for apt-get. Perhaps aptitude behaves differently. Actualy you are verry wrong there. Not in what it is supposed to do but in what actually happens and why update is a good idea. As you say will do things involving adding or removing packages. Unfortunately it is not always too smart about that and result depend on the order of updates. For example: Package: foo Version: 1.2-3 Depends: foo-simple (= 1.2-3) | foo-heavy (= 1.2-3) Now imagine you have foo 1.2-1 and foo-heavy 1.2-1 installed then dist-upgrade will want to update foo 1.2-3. That will have broken dependencies (foo-heavy 1.2-3 is not installed yet) so to fullfill them it will add foo-simple 1.2-3. Only later it hits foo-heavy 1.2-1 and will also update that to 1.2-3. By first doing an upgrade you have 2 effects: 1) many examples like above do get solved by upgrade 2) the number of packages for dist-upgrade is greatly reduced often resulting in a better solution, at least from my experience MfG Goswin PS: aptitude can be even more spectacular wrong if the dependencies are currently broken like often in sid. The non-GUI mode I find mostly unbearable. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: sources.list: experimental
Jochen Schulz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Of course, if you always check apt(itude)'s output before confirming its actions, you don't break your system either. But it is never a mistake to try the safe alternative first. Which is a lot shorter and easier to read once the safe-upgrade packages are out of the way. :) MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
