Re: [e-users] Crash on e5
On 07/12/2013 22:16, Bertrand Jacquin wrote: On 2013-12-07 22:09, Guillaume Friloux wrote: On 07/12/2013 21:05, Bertrand Jacquin wrote: Moving to other FS is not an option. BTRFS that format is not yet completed/fully defined, has elementary fsck when not giving needed features. ZFS using FUSE is not going to happened on that critical host. Kernel was a 3.7 and have been updated to longterm-stable 3.10 kernel. There are been a lot of fixes on EXT and VFS between 3.7 and 3.10. We stick on longterm kernel on all hosts, that one was the last not using a longterm stable. Hello beber, just for information, you dont need FUSE anymore to use ZFS. zfsonlinux solves this. Thanks for the info, but why should we need this ? I see no valid reason. I dont say we need it. It was only for information. -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
Re: [e-users] Crash on e5
On Sunday 08 Dec 2013 01:48:18 Steven@e wrote: Hello beber, just for information, you dont need FUSE anymore to use ZFS. zfsonlinux solves this. Thanks for the info, but why should we need this ? I see no valid reason. There are out-of-tree Linux kernel modules care of ZFSOnLinux Project[1]. Therefore using ZFS-Fuse is not necessary (or recommended). At least one valid reason for using ZFS (there are many) is that it guards against fs corruption by using CRC checksums. I understand that both Oracle (RHL) Linux and SUSE consider BTRFS production ready and Oracle will be/are using this instead of ZFS. From my limited understanding BTRFS is being developed at speed and catching up with ZFS, but it does not have the amount of testing that ZFS had to date to vouch for its stability/maturity. At this stage in their development ZFS is superior to BTRFS in terms of functionality, although there is hope that BTRFS will develop at speed. [1] http://zfsonlinux.org/ -- Regards, Mick -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
Re: [e-users] Crash on e5
On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 10:25:04 + Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com said: On Sunday 08 Dec 2013 01:48:18 Steven@e wrote: Hello beber, just for information, you dont need FUSE anymore to use ZFS. zfsonlinux solves this. Thanks for the info, but why should we need this ? I see no valid reason. There are out-of-tree Linux kernel modules care of ZFSOnLinux Project[1]. Therefore using ZFS-Fuse is not necessary (or recommended). At least one valid reason for using ZFS (there are many) is that it guards against fs corruption by using CRC checksums. I understand that both Oracle (RHL) Linux and SUSE consider BTRFS production ready and Oracle will be/are using this instead of ZFS. From my limited understanding BTRFS is being developed at speed and catching up with ZFS, but it does not have the amount of testing that ZFS had to date to vouch for its stability/maturity. At this stage in their development ZFS is superior to BTRFS in terms of functionality, although there is hope that BTRFS will develop at speed. and why? ext4 HAS been production ready for YEARS... inf act not production ready... it has been *IN8 production for years... if there is a fs i would trust - it's ext4. not zfs and DEFINITELY not btrfs. ext4 (and 3 etc. before it) have many more miles of PRODUCTION behind them. what this probably was ... was an unstable bleeding-edge kernel since the servers are being run on gentoo and thus are not exactly being conservative. it was probably a newly introduced bug that hasn't been hammered out and other fs's used less will have such bugs many times MORE than ext4 will. -- - Codito, ergo sum - I code, therefore I am -- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler)ras...@rasterman.com -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
[e-users] Terminology 0.4.0 is out!
We are pleased to announce the release of Terminology 0.4 You can download the tarball either as [1]terminology-0.4.0.tar.gz or as [2]terminology-0.4.0.tar.bz2. This release features: * text reflow on resize, * full 256 colors support, * improved terminal compatibility, * improved selection handling, * backscroll compression to reduce memory usage, * many bug fixes, * and more! It is best run with the EFL 1.8 but also works with EFL 1.7. Happy compiling! 1. http://download.enlightenment.org/rel/apps/terminology/terminology-0.4.0.tar.gz 2. http://download.enlightenment.org/rel/apps/terminology/terminology-0.4.0.tar.bz2 -- Boris Faure for the Terminology team -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
Re: [e-users] [Enlightenment-release] Terminology 0.4.0 is out!
Great! Awesome job. Awesome. Daniel Juyung Seo (SeoZ) On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 12:39 AM, Boris Faure bo...@fau.re wrote: We are pleased to announce the release of Terminology 0.4 You can download the tarball either as [1]terminology-0.4.0.tar.gz or as [2]terminology-0.4.0.tar.bz2. This release features: * text reflow on resize, * full 256 colors support, * improved terminal compatibility, * improved selection handling, * backscroll compression to reduce memory usage, * many bug fixes, * and more! It is best run with the EFL 1.8 but also works with EFL 1.7. Happy compiling! 1. http://download.enlightenment.org/rel/apps/terminology/terminology-0.4.0.tar.gz 2. http://download.enlightenment.org/rel/apps/terminology/terminology-0.4.0.tar.bz2 -- Boris Faure for the Terminology team -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Enlightenment-release mailing list enlightenment-rele...@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-release -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
Re: [e-users] [Enlightenment-release] Terminology 0.4.0 is out!
I just announced it on Facebook Enlightenment Page, Facebook Enlightenment Korea Page, and Twitter Enlightenment Korea. And my personal facebook, twitter, and google plus. Btw, who manages Google Plus Enlightenment account? Daniel Juyung Seo (SeoZ) On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 12:47 AM, Daniel Juyung Seo seojuyu...@gmail.comwrote: Great! Awesome job. Awesome. Daniel Juyung Seo (SeoZ) On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 12:39 AM, Boris Faure bo...@fau.re wrote: We are pleased to announce the release of Terminology 0.4 You can download the tarball either as [1]terminology-0.4.0.tar.gz or as [2]terminology-0.4.0.tar.bz2. This release features: * text reflow on resize, * full 256 colors support, * improved terminal compatibility, * improved selection handling, * backscroll compression to reduce memory usage, * many bug fixes, * and more! It is best run with the EFL 1.8 but also works with EFL 1.7. Happy compiling! 1. http://download.enlightenment.org/rel/apps/terminology/terminology-0.4.0.tar.gz 2. http://download.enlightenment.org/rel/apps/terminology/terminology-0.4.0.tar.bz2 -- Boris Faure for the Terminology team -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Enlightenment-release mailing list enlightenment-rele...@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-release -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
Re: [e-users] [Enlightenment-release] Terminology 0.4.0 is out!
Myself and Raster have post access to the E G+ page. I've shared the release announcement there. On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Daniel Juyung Seo seojuyu...@gmail.comwrote: I just announced it on Facebook Enlightenment Page, Facebook Enlightenment Korea Page, and Twitter Enlightenment Korea. And my personal facebook, twitter, and google plus. Btw, who manages Google Plus Enlightenment account? Daniel Juyung Seo (SeoZ) On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 12:47 AM, Daniel Juyung Seo seojuyu...@gmail.com wrote: Great! Awesome job. Awesome. Daniel Juyung Seo (SeoZ) On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 12:39 AM, Boris Faure bo...@fau.re wrote: We are pleased to announce the release of Terminology 0.4 You can download the tarball either as [1]terminology-0.4.0.tar.gz or as [2]terminology-0.4.0.tar.bz2. This release features: * text reflow on resize, * full 256 colors support, * improved terminal compatibility, * improved selection handling, * backscroll compression to reduce memory usage, * many bug fixes, * and more! It is best run with the EFL 1.8 but also works with EFL 1.7. Happy compiling! 1. http://download.enlightenment.org/rel/apps/terminology/terminology-0.4.0.tar.gz 2. http://download.enlightenment.org/rel/apps/terminology/terminology-0.4.0.tar.bz2 -- Boris Faure for the Terminology team -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Enlightenment-release mailing list enlightenment-rele...@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-release -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users -- ~Jeff Hoogland http://jeffhoogland.com/ Thoughts on Technology http://jeffhoogland.blogspot.com/, Tech Blog Bodhi Linux http://bodhilinux.com/, Enlightenment for your Desktop -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
Re: [e-users] Crash on e5
On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 21:42:25 +0900 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) ras...@rasterman.com wrote: On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 10:25:04 + Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com said: On Sunday 08 Dec 2013 01:48:18 Steven@e wrote: Hello beber, just for information, you dont need FUSE anymore to use ZFS. zfsonlinux solves this. Thanks for the info, but why should we need this ? I see no valid reason. There are out-of-tree Linux kernel modules care of ZFSOnLinux Project[1]. Therefore using ZFS-Fuse is not necessary (or recommended). At least one valid reason for using ZFS (there are many) is that it guards against fs corruption by using CRC checksums. I understand that both Oracle (RHL) Linux and SUSE consider BTRFS production ready and Oracle will be/are using this instead of ZFS. From my limited understanding BTRFS is being developed at speed and catching up with ZFS, but it does not have the amount of testing that ZFS had to date to vouch for its stability/maturity. At this stage in their development ZFS is superior to BTRFS in terms of functionality, although there is hope that BTRFS will develop at speed. and why? ext4 HAS been production ready for YEARS... inf act not production ready... it has been *IN8 production for years... if there is a fs i would trust - it's ext4. not zfs and DEFINITELY not btrfs. ext4 (and 3 etc. before it) have many more miles of PRODUCTION behind them. Absolutely. The other filesystems are amazing in their feature sets, but are not viable production filesystems quite yet in my opinion. what this probably was ... was an unstable bleeding-edge kernel since the servers are being run on gentoo and thus are not exactly being conservative. it was probably a newly introduced bug that hasn't been hammered out and other fs's used less will have such bugs many times MORE than ext4 will. Gentoo is a great desktop distro, but definitely not a server OS (may cause a flame war here, but sorry...). For me, and I've been a sysadmin since Debian first came out (yes, that long), and I've used literally all distros at one time or another. Debian stable (or even testing) is an ideal server OS you can absolutely rely on. I would not use anything else. If you absolutely must use gentoo for some feature only it provides, then only use it in the VM - definitely NOT on the host. The host must be rock solid. But, if rebuilding the setup is on the radar in light of this wake up call, the filesystem argument is totally moot - just use LVM for the images. It's the correct thing to do for a production VM host. -- Regards, Christopher Barry Random geeky fortune: One does not thank logic. -- Sarek, Journey to Babel, stardate 3842.4 -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
[e-users] Python-EFL 1.8.0 released
= Python-EFL 1.8.0 release = We are pleased to announce that **Python-EFL** 1.8.0 is now released and available for download. == Download == http://download.enlightenment.org/rel/bindings/python/python-efl-1.8.0.tar.gz For convenience the tarball only contains intermediary C source generated from our Cython source, which is publicly accessible in our git repository at: https://git.enlightenment.org/bindings/python/python-efl.git/ = What's New = Major changes have been made to Python-EFL in the past year since 1.7 release first came out. The usual has been done in fixing bugs, optimizing speed and much more. (See **changes.html** in the tarball for full list of changes.) == Merged EFL tree == We have merged **evas **, **ecore**, **edje**, **emotion**, **dbus_mainloop** and **elementary** inside a single **efl** top-level package (as you can see now there are no more separate packages to download, only python-efl). == Python 3 support == This new release is (finally) fully compatible with both Python 2 and Python 3. If you need to install for several versions just use the version specific Python binary while installing, for example: python3.3 setup.py install will install the bindings for use with Python 3.3. == Improved documentation == **Python-EFL** now has fairly complete documentation built using Sphinx. The docs can be generated by the user for local reading (see below), or browsed online at: http://docs.enlightenment.org = Building and Dependencies = If you have existing Python-EFL or the old split 1.7 release bindings installed, you may wish to uninstall them before compiling and installing to avoid possible conflicts during install and/or runtime. The bindings are compiled against the following libraries: * python (Python 2.6+/3.0+, or PyPy (not tested)) * efl (1.8) * elementary (1.8, optional) * python-dbus (0.83+, optional) The setup script detects your installed libraries and builds bindings according to those found. To install the bindings run: (sudo) python setup.py install To generate the documentation locally you need: * sphinx (1.0+) * graphviz (optional) To build the documentation: python setup.py build_doc For more information on available build options see: python setup.py --help -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
Re: [e-users] [E-devel] Python-EFL 1.8.0 released
2013/12/8 Kai Huuhko kai.huu...@gmail.com = Python-EFL 1.8.0 release = We are pleased to announce that **Python-EFL** 1.8.0 is now released and available for download. \o/ == Download == http://download.enlightenment.org/rel/bindings/python/python-efl-1.8.0.tar.gz For convenience the tarball only contains intermediary C source generated from our Cython source, which is publicly accessible in our git repository at: https://git.enlightenment.org/bindings/python/python-efl.git/ = What's New = Major changes have been made to Python-EFL in the past year since 1.7 release first came out. The usual has been done in fixing bugs, optimizing speed and much more. (See **changes.html** in the tarball for full list of changes.) == Merged EFL tree == We have merged **evas **, **ecore**, **edje**, **emotion**, **dbus_mainloop** and **elementary** inside a single **efl** top-level package (as you can see now there are no more separate packages to download, only python-efl). == Python 3 support == This new release is (finally) fully compatible with both Python 2 and Python 3. If you need to install for several versions just use the version specific Python binary while installing, for example: python3.3 setup.py install will install the bindings for use with Python 3.3. == Improved documentation == **Python-EFL** now has fairly complete documentation built using Sphinx. The docs can be generated by the user for local reading (see below), or browsed online at: http://docs.enlightenment.org = Building and Dependencies = If you have existing Python-EFL or the old split 1.7 release bindings installed, you may wish to uninstall them before compiling and installing to avoid possible conflicts during install and/or runtime. The bindings are compiled against the following libraries: * python (Python 2.6+/3.0+, or PyPy (not tested)) * efl (1.8) * elementary (1.8, optional) * python-dbus (0.83+, optional) The setup script detects your installed libraries and builds bindings according to those found. To install the bindings run: (sudo) python setup.py install To generate the documentation locally you need: * sphinx (1.0+) * graphviz (optional) To build the documentation: python setup.py build_doc For more information on available build options see: python setup.py --help -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-de...@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
Re: [e-users] Terminology 0.4.0 is out!
On 12/08/2013 10:39 AM, Boris Faure wrote: We are pleased to announce the release of Terminology 0.4 You can download the tarball either as [1]terminology-0.4.0.tar.gz or as [2]terminology-0.4.0.tar.bz2. This release features: * text reflow on resize, * full 256 colors support, * improved terminal compatibility, * improved selection handling, * backscroll compression to reduce memory usage, * many bug fixes, * and more! It is best run with the EFL 1.8 but also works with EFL 1.7. Happy compiling! 1. http://download.enlightenment.org/rel/apps/terminology/terminology-0.4.0.tar.gz 2. http://download.enlightenment.org/rel/apps/terminology/terminology-0.4.0.tar.bz2 Congrats and thanks on the release! Working fine here. little-tommy -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
Re: [e-users] [Enlightenment-release] Python-EFL 1.8.0 released
Thanks for the effort! I updated the news on FB Enlightenment, FB Enlightenment Korea, Twitter Enlightenment Korea. Thanks. Daniel Juyung Seo (SeoZ) On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Kai Huuhko kai.huu...@gmail.com wrote: = Python-EFL 1.8.0 release = We are pleased to announce that **Python-EFL** 1.8.0 is now released and available for download. == Download == http://download.enlightenment.org/rel/bindings/python/python-efl-1.8.0.tar.gz For convenience the tarball only contains intermediary C source generated from our Cython source, which is publicly accessible in our git repository at: https://git.enlightenment.org/bindings/python/python-efl.git/ = What's New = Major changes have been made to Python-EFL in the past year since 1.7 release first came out. The usual has been done in fixing bugs, optimizing speed and much more. (See **changes.html** in the tarball for full list of changes.) == Merged EFL tree == We have merged **evas **, **ecore**, **edje**, **emotion**, **dbus_mainloop** and **elementary** inside a single **efl** top-level package (as you can see now there are no more separate packages to download, only python-efl). == Python 3 support == This new release is (finally) fully compatible with both Python 2 and Python 3. If you need to install for several versions just use the version specific Python binary while installing, for example: python3.3 setup.py install will install the bindings for use with Python 3.3. == Improved documentation == **Python-EFL** now has fairly complete documentation built using Sphinx. The docs can be generated by the user for local reading (see below), or browsed online at: http://docs.enlightenment.org = Building and Dependencies = If you have existing Python-EFL or the old split 1.7 release bindings installed, you may wish to uninstall them before compiling and installing to avoid possible conflicts during install and/or runtime. The bindings are compiled against the following libraries: * python (Python 2.6+/3.0+, or PyPy (not tested)) * efl (1.8) * elementary (1.8, optional) * python-dbus (0.83+, optional) The setup script detects your installed libraries and builds bindings according to those found. To install the bindings run: (sudo) python setup.py install To generate the documentation locally you need: * sphinx (1.0+) * graphviz (optional) To build the documentation: python setup.py build_doc For more information on available build options see: python setup.py --help -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Enlightenment-release mailing list enlightenment-rele...@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-release -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
Re: [e-users] Crash on e5
On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 12:17:53 -0500 Christopher Barry christopher.r.ba...@gmail.com said: On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 21:42:25 +0900 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) ras...@rasterman.com wrote: On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 10:25:04 + Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com said: On Sunday 08 Dec 2013 01:48:18 Steven@e wrote: Hello beber, just for information, you dont need FUSE anymore to use ZFS. zfsonlinux solves this. Thanks for the info, but why should we need this ? I see no valid reason. There are out-of-tree Linux kernel modules care of ZFSOnLinux Project[1]. Therefore using ZFS-Fuse is not necessary (or recommended). At least one valid reason for using ZFS (there are many) is that it guards against fs corruption by using CRC checksums. I understand that both Oracle (RHL) Linux and SUSE consider BTRFS production ready and Oracle will be/are using this instead of ZFS. From my limited understanding BTRFS is being developed at speed and catching up with ZFS, but it does not have the amount of testing that ZFS had to date to vouch for its stability/maturity. At this stage in their development ZFS is superior to BTRFS in terms of functionality, although there is hope that BTRFS will develop at speed. and why? ext4 HAS been production ready for YEARS... inf act not production ready... it has been *IN8 production for years... if there is a fs i would trust - it's ext4. not zfs and DEFINITELY not btrfs. ext4 (and 3 etc. before it) have many more miles of PRODUCTION behind them. Absolutely. The other filesystems are amazing in their feature sets, but are not viable production filesystems quite yet in my opinion. what this probably was ... was an unstable bleeding-edge kernel since the servers are being run on gentoo and thus are not exactly being conservative. it was probably a newly introduced bug that hasn't been hammered out and other fs's used less will have such bugs many times MORE than ext4 will. Gentoo is a great desktop distro, but definitely not a server OS (may cause a flame war here, but sorry...). For me, and I've been a sysadmin since Debian first came out (yes, that long), and I've used literally all distros at one time or another. Debian stable (or even testing) is an ideal server OS you can absolutely rely on. I would not use anything else. If you absolutely must use gentoo for some feature only it provides, then only use it in the VM - definitely NOT on the host. The host must be rock solid. But, if rebuilding the setup is on the radar in light of this wake up call, the filesystem argument is totally moot - just use LVM for the images. It's the correct thing to do for a production VM host. well beber (our admin who volunteers his time to the server and its vms) wants gentoo. -- - Codito, ergo sum - I code, therefore I am -- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler)ras...@rasterman.com -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
Re: [e-users] Crash on e5
On 2013-12-09 01:52, Carsten Haitzler wrote: On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 12:17:53 -0500 Christopher Barry christopher.r.ba...@gmail.com said: On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 21:42:25 +0900 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) ras...@rasterman.com wrote: On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 10:25:04 + Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com said: On Sunday 08 Dec 2013 01:48:18 Steven@e wrote: Hello beber, just for information, you dont need FUSE anymore to use ZFS. zfsonlinux solves this. Thanks for the info, but why should we need this ? I see no valid reason. There are out-of-tree Linux kernel modules care of ZFSOnLinux Project[1]. Therefore using ZFS-Fuse is not necessary (or recommended). At least one valid reason for using ZFS (there are many) is that it guards against fs corruption by using CRC checksums. I understand that both Oracle (RHL) Linux and SUSE consider BTRFS production ready and Oracle will be/are using this instead of ZFS. From my limited understanding BTRFS is being developed at speed and catching up with ZFS, but it does not have the amount of testing that ZFS had to date to vouch for its stability/maturity. At this stage in their development ZFS is superior to BTRFS in terms of functionality, although there is hope that BTRFS will develop at speed. and why? ext4 HAS been production ready for YEARS... inf act not production ready... it has been *IN8 production for years... if there is a fs i would trust - it's ext4. not zfs and DEFINITELY not btrfs. ext4 (and 3 etc. before it) have many more miles of PRODUCTION behind them. Absolutely. The other filesystems are amazing in their feature sets, but are not viable production filesystems quite yet in my opinion. what this probably was ... was an unstable bleeding-edge kernel since the servers are being run on gentoo and thus are not exactly being conservative. it was probably a newly introduced bug that hasn't been hammered out and other fs's used less will have such bugs many times MORE than ext4 will. Gentoo is a great desktop distro, but definitely not a server OS (may cause a flame war here, but sorry...). For me, and I've been a sysadmin since Debian first came out (yes, that long), and I've used literally all distros at one time or another. Debian stable (or even testing) is an ideal server OS you can absolutely rely on. I would not use anything else. If you absolutely must use gentoo for some feature only it provides, then only use it in the VM - definitely NOT on the host. The host must be rock solid. But, if rebuilding the setup is on the radar in light of this wake up call, the filesystem argument is totally moot - just use LVM for the images. It's the correct thing to do for a production VM host. well beber (our admin who volunteers his time to the server and its vms) wants gentoo. Yep :) And opposed to Christopher, I don't find gentoo is great for a desktop but for servers. The main reason is flexibility and that it's easier to manage, but as Chris said, this is flamewar topic, I could write a book on why people should not use Debian on servers. We have a builder host, so configuration, packages etc are shared across all servers and no compilation is done on production hosts (without that, I have to say that it's a real pain in ass to maintain, but not the case) About FS, raster speech agreed . -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
Re: [e-users] Crash on e5
* Carsten Haitzler ras...@rasterman.com [2013-12-08 21:42:25 +0900]: On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 10:25:04 + Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com said: On Sunday 08 Dec 2013 01:48:18 Steven@e wrote: Hello beber, just for information, you dont need FUSE anymore to use ZFS. zfsonlinux solves this. Thanks for the info, but why should we need this ? I see no valid reason. There are out-of-tree Linux kernel modules care of ZFSOnLinux Project[1]. Therefore using ZFS-Fuse is not necessary (or recommended). At least one valid reason for using ZFS (there are many) is that it guards against fs corruption by using CRC checksums. I understand that both Oracle (RHL) Linux and SUSE consider BTRFS production ready and Oracle will be/are using this instead of ZFS. From my limited understanding BTRFS is being developed at speed and catching up with ZFS, but it does not have the amount of testing that ZFS had to date to vouch for its stability/maturity. At this stage in their development ZFS is superior to BTRFS in terms of functionality, although there is hope that BTRFS will develop at speed. and why? ext4 HAS been production ready for YEARS... inf act not production ready... it has been *IN8 production for years... if there is a fs i would trust - it's ext4. not zfs and DEFINITELY not btrfs. ext4 (and 3 etc. before it) have many more miles of PRODUCTION behind them. what this probably was ... was an unstable bleeding-edge kernel since the servers are being run on gentoo and thus are not exactly being conservative. it was probably a newly introduced bug that hasn't been hammered out and other fs's used less will have such bugs many times MORE than ext4 will. I am going to chime in and give my 2 cents. for filesystems, on production servers I tell our ops guys only use ext4 or xfs thats it. Nex6 -- - Codito, ergo sum - I code, therefore I am -- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler)ras...@rasterman.com -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
Re: [e-users] Crash on e5
* Bertrand Jacquin be...@meleeweb.net [2013-12-09 02:41:18 +0100]: On 2013-12-09 01:52, Carsten Haitzler wrote: On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 12:17:53 -0500 Christopher Barry christopher.r.ba...@gmail.com said: On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 21:42:25 +0900 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) ras...@rasterman.com wrote: On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 10:25:04 + Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com said: On Sunday 08 Dec 2013 01:48:18 Steven@e wrote: Hello beber, just for information, you dont need FUSE anymore to use ZFS. zfsonlinux solves this. Thanks for the info, but why should we need this ? I see no valid reason. There are out-of-tree Linux kernel modules care of ZFSOnLinux Project[1]. Therefore using ZFS-Fuse is not necessary (or recommended). At least one valid reason for using ZFS (there are many) is that it guards against fs corruption by using CRC checksums. I understand that both Oracle (RHL) Linux and SUSE consider BTRFS production ready and Oracle will be/are using this instead of ZFS. From my limited understanding BTRFS is being developed at speed and catching up with ZFS, but it does not have the amount of testing that ZFS had to date to vouch for its stability/maturity. At this stage in their development ZFS is superior to BTRFS in terms of functionality, although there is hope that BTRFS will develop at speed. and why? ext4 HAS been production ready for YEARS... inf act not production ready... it has been *IN8 production for years... if there is a fs i would trust - it's ext4. not zfs and DEFINITELY not btrfs. ext4 (and 3 etc. before it) have many more miles of PRODUCTION behind them. Absolutely. The other filesystems are amazing in their feature sets, but are not viable production filesystems quite yet in my opinion. what this probably was ... was an unstable bleeding-edge kernel since the servers are being run on gentoo and thus are not exactly being conservative. it was probably a newly introduced bug that hasn't been hammered out and other fs's used less will have such bugs many times MORE than ext4 will. Gentoo is a great desktop distro, but definitely not a server OS (may cause a flame war here, but sorry...). For me, and I've been a sysadmin since Debian first came out (yes, that long), and I've used literally all distros at one time or another. Debian stable (or even testing) is an ideal server OS you can absolutely rely on. I would not use anything else. If you absolutely must use gentoo for some feature only it provides, then only use it in the VM - definitely NOT on the host. The host must be rock solid. But, if rebuilding the setup is on the radar in light of this wake up call, the filesystem argument is totally moot - just use LVM for the images. It's the correct thing to do for a production VM host. well beber (our admin who volunteers his time to the server and its vms) wants gentoo. Yep :) And opposed to Christopher, I don't find gentoo is great for a desktop but for servers. The main reason is flexibility and that it's easier to manage, but as Chris said, this is flamewar topic, I could write a book on why people should not use Debian on servers. We have a builder host, so configuration, packages etc are shared across all servers and no compilation is done on production hosts (without that, I have to say that it's a real pain in ass to maintain, but not the case) About FS, raster speech agreed . while I love using debian for servers or desktops i think using the distro your most familer with is best. -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
