Re: [gentoo-user] SQL Server Advice for Small Business
On Tue, July 30, 2013 23:34, Randy Westlund wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 07:52:11AM +0200, J. Roeleveld wrote: Will the server be internet-facing? I would make sure you have a firewall and only open the port needed for the front-end. Don't update the kernel too often, keep an eye out for security fixes and apply where necessary. Keep a seperate machine/VM where you build binary packages. This will significantly reduce the time needed to upgrade the software. No, it'll be LAN only. I'll filter out external connections. There's no wireless network and no adjacent businesses, so I'm not worrying too much about security. The only thing I'll need from the outside is SSH. In that case, make sure it runs stable and take time to test new versions. So your recommendation is to have a VM on the server with the same packages installed, compile things there, then move the binary package to the real server. I might set this up at some point, but I think I'll be okay with updating things in place, so long as I do it at night. I wouldn't put the VM on the server itself, but instead on your desktop/laptop. That way you also have a development environment where you can test new features and fix the inevitable bugs. The binary packages from there can then be moved to the server when you are ready to update. I always stop applications when I update them. To minimize downtime, I always ensure I have binary packages available. That depends on your budget and requirements. For databases, RAID-10 is generally considered the best performance. Also avoid filling the disks and try to use the first half of the disk, rather then the whole. (First half is faster then 2nd half) RAID-10 in software (eg. Linux Software Raid in the kernel) outperforms the cheaper RAID-cards easily. If you have the budget, you could invest in a dedicated hardware raid card (but make sure it is 100% hardware and doesn't use the CPU for the calculations) Okay, RAID-10 sounds good. Thanks for the tip about the first half of the drives. I got that from a book about Postgresql performance tuning :) The start is quite generic on how to test and optimize performance on hardware and OS level. Depends on how much you want in there. If just a simple share, then it will be simple. If you also want the MS Windows machines to authenticate against it, things get a little more complicated. Should just be a simple share, I don't think I'll need any authentication. I would still put in authentication. MS Windows can be set to save the password. That way, you can also set up personal homedirectories and enable tracing to see who does what. How mission-critical will this be? For my server (which has become quite critical over the years), I currently use a self-build server with good reliable components. TYAN-mainboard (with built-in iKVM), WD-RED drives, Areca hardware raid-card. When I started running my own server, it was on a cheap no-brand mainboard with simple desktop disks connected via IDE. (yes, ancient :) ) The server will be pretty important. If all goes according to plan, every employee that uses a computer (~15) will be interacting with it throughout the day. The goal is to replace paper records. Aside from the hard drives, are there any other components that are especially important for databases? Yes, memory. Databases are happy with lots and lots of memory for caching. Other then that, most components should work, but go for stability. Ignore boards that are designed for gaming/overclocking. Those are not generally designed for 24/7 usage over a period of several years. One of my mainboards is still 100% stable. Never had a crash. Only reason I stopped using it is because it only holds 4GB of memory. Tyan mainboards are, in my experience, rock-solid. Others on the list will probably have their own preferences as well. You can also go for a pre-build server from the likes of DELL, HP, Supermicro,... Those generally use good quality hardware as well. And they often come with (optional) onsite warranty. You want to try to keep the database design optimized for the usage pattern of the client-tools. Which usually means not too much normalization. That helps with reporting, not when you need to do mostly inserts. From what I've read so far, it sounded like everything should be normalized as much as possible even if there's a slight performance hit because it makes the system easier to modify and expand later. In my prototype, I have it divided into as many tables as possible, and each SELECT has mutiple joins. Is this a bad idea? JOINs are heavy for a database. Normalizing a database is nice, but I don't see that often on transactional systems. (Like what you are planning on making) Modifying tables don't take much either, simply do an ALTER TABLE to add/expand fields. (Do NOT reduce the size, or you will LOOSE data) and if necessary fill the fields for existing records
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 07/30/2013 05:40 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: There is going to be resistance. Two months ago there was a huge thread in gentoo-dev, because a package maintaner complained that his co-maintainer added a systemd unit to the package: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/85792 In the end, the maintainer rage-quit: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/2551 However, this is the extreme behaviour: most developers (and rational people) agree to adding systemd unit files to all packages, and we have much better coverage now that some months ago. If users cooperate opening bugs adding systemd unit files (after testing them in their machines), the coverage is going to grow even faster. Regards. On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 5:04 PM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:53 PM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 2:47 AM, Pavel Volkov negai...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Pavel Volkov negai...@gmail.com wrote: On Sunday 28 July 2013 03:22:02 Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: Therefore, as of today, anyone can have a Gentoo machine with only systemd, with no OpenRC installed. Really? Bug 373219 is still open. Sorry, I missed your explanation at the end about that one. Ok, thanks for what you've done :) Mmmh, and I missed this last reply of you. Anyway, dealing with /etc/init.d/functions.sh is basically trivial. But still, we have lots of packages with no systemd units -- shouldn't they all have a systemd use flag and units to go with it -- basically anything which has something in /etc/init.d . I was looking for a sendmail unit and could find nothing, for one example. Yeah, we are not even near 100% coverage. However, one of the many advantages of systemd is that a service unit from a distribution usually works as-is or with minimal changes in any other. For many basic unit files, you can go to https://github.com/vonSchlotzkow/systemd-gentoo-units It has a unit file for postfix, for example. If the one you are looking for is not there, you can search in other distributions. If you download the RPM from http://rpm.pbone.net/index.php3/stat/4/idpl/21317874/dir/fedora_19/com/sendmail-8.14.7-1.fc19.i686.rpm.html, and extract the files with rpm2tarbz2, then you can get the sendmail.service file. It will probably need some changes to work with Gentoo, but it should not be difficult. When is working, you can send your unit to the package maintainer in Gentoo, and at some point it could be included in the package (like the OpenRC init script). That's how we will get 100% coverage, eventually. OK, I will check those -- thanks. I hope package maintainers now start putting those service units in, now that systemd is required by gnome. -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici cov...@ccs.covici.com What's irrational about that guy's reasons for being against the systemd unit files? I remember that thread, and he made some decent technical points. Unfortunately, the council rejected a systemd USE flag, so the best route was shot in the head before it had a chance. Yet OpenRC needs a USE flag to enable it... rather fishy.
[gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo is so AWESOME
On 31/07/2013 07:32, Daniel Campbell wrote: I was interested in becoming a dev for a little while, but the testing and what looks to be prolonged process kinda put me off of the idea. It just seems like a lot of bureaucratic work. Perhaps my impression is wrong, though... You are right that the process is not necessarily ideal, but it all we currently have. Some improvements have been happening lately, though. For example, the new recruiting webapp can make handling the quizzes easier, and there have been efforts to increase the numbers of people who can do the final recruitment process. Which projects are most in need of developers or maintainers? I wouldn't mind learning a bit more about package maintenance, portage, and ebuilds... You might have better luck finding an area that interests you first, and going from there.
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 1:24 AM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: On 07/30/2013 05:40 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: There is going to be resistance. Two months ago there was a huge thread in gentoo-dev, because a package maintaner complained that his co-maintainer added a systemd unit to the package: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/85792 In the end, the maintainer rage-quit: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/2551 However, this is the extreme behaviour: most developers (and rational people) agree to adding systemd unit files to all packages, and we have much better coverage now that some months ago. If users cooperate opening bugs adding systemd unit files (after testing them in their machines), the coverage is going to grow even faster. Regards. On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 5:04 PM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:53 PM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 2:47 AM, Pavel Volkov negai...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Pavel Volkov negai...@gmail.com wrote: On Sunday 28 July 2013 03:22:02 Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: Therefore, as of today, anyone can have a Gentoo machine with only systemd, with no OpenRC installed. Really? Bug 373219 is still open. Sorry, I missed your explanation at the end about that one. Ok, thanks for what you've done :) Mmmh, and I missed this last reply of you. Anyway, dealing with /etc/init.d/functions.sh is basically trivial. But still, we have lots of packages with no systemd units -- shouldn't they all have a systemd use flag and units to go with it -- basically anything which has something in /etc/init.d . I was looking for a sendmail unit and could find nothing, for one example. Yeah, we are not even near 100% coverage. However, one of the many advantages of systemd is that a service unit from a distribution usually works as-is or with minimal changes in any other. For many basic unit files, you can go to https://github.com/vonSchlotzkow/systemd-gentoo-units It has a unit file for postfix, for example. If the one you are looking for is not there, you can search in other distributions. If you download the RPM from http://rpm.pbone.net/index.php3/stat/4/idpl/21317874/dir/fedora_19/com/sendmail-8.14.7-1.fc19.i686.rpm.html, and extract the files with rpm2tarbz2, then you can get the sendmail.service file. It will probably need some changes to work with Gentoo, but it should not be difficult. When is working, you can send your unit to the package maintainer in Gentoo, and at some point it could be included in the package (like the OpenRC init script). That's how we will get 100% coverage, eventually. OK, I will check those -- thanks. I hope package maintainers now start putting those service units in, now that systemd is required by gnome. -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici cov...@ccs.covici.com What's irrational about that guy's reasons for being against the systemd unit files? I remember that thread, and he made some decent technical points. Unfortunately, the council rejected a systemd USE flag, so the best route was shot in the head before it had a chance. Yet OpenRC needs a USE flag to enable it... rather fishy. You need an OpenRC use flag to install OpenRC init scripts? That's simply a lie. If you don't want OpenRC scripts in /etc/init.d, you need to set INSTALL_MASK accordingly. The same with systemd if you don't want unit files in /usr/lib/systemd/system. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo is so AWESOME
On 30 July 2013 23:32, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: I was interested in becoming a dev for a little while, but the testing and what looks to be prolonged process kinda put me off of the idea. It just seems like a lot of bureaucratic work. Perhaps my impression is wrong, though... As a tester - not AT at Gentoo - say that you are right. In the development job that activity is that which should/must be well documented or communicated to provide solid and trustworthy information. Nowadays, I experience that the line between developers and tester are getting thinner and thinner and there are development methods, such as DAD, which support this process. On the other hand, testing activity is the safety belt which keep the quality on a certain level which produces the tribute of the users which will be the fuel for the further job. -- -- Csanyi Andras (Sayusi Ando) -- http://sayusi.hu -- http://facebook.com/andras.csanyi -- Trust in God and keep your gunpowder dry! - Cromwell
[gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo is so AWESOME
On 31/07/2013 09:48, Michael Orlitzky wrote: I want to become a dev, what's my next step? There is none. Help out, and maybe someone will notice you? Ok, I'm on it. Been doing it for years, and I know several other people in the same situation. It doesn't work, and recruitment numbers are plummeting. There needs to be an explicit, documented process. I agree, it's not really concrete. Which projects/areas are you usually involved in?
Re: [gentoo-user] SQL Server Advice for Small Business
Am 30.07.2013 23:34, schrieb Randy Westlund: How often should a small database like this be backed up? Once a day? Twice a day? I'm thinking that I should backup to another machine on the network, then copy that to at least one off-side machine. Depends on your needs. Can you afford to lose one workday of data? If no, make backups more often. 15 people x 8 hours = 120 hours of work per day, that translates into money :-) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] [Preliminary report] Gnome-3.8 update works with openrc :)
On Tue, July 30, 2013 18:29, Michael Hampicke wrote: Am 30.07.2013 07:35, schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: ⢠Can you add a new wireless or wired networks with NetworkManager? Never tried NM or wifi on my workstation, but my guess would be that it will not work. I don't see why it wouldn't work. I use NM for wired/wifi/vpn on my netbook running KDE and OpenRC. -- Joost
Re: [gentoo-user] [~amd64] Some possibly (?) helpful hints re the big gnome-3.8 update
Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com writes: The wiki is wrong. The script /etc/init.d/udev is part of sys-fs/udev, which you need to uninstall before installing systemd. Perhaps it's CONFIG_PROTECT'd, but anyway sys-fs/udev and sys-apps/systemd install the udev binary in different directories, so the script is basically useless after the switch. It is pulled in by sys-fs/udev-init-scripts which is a dependency of systemd[openrc]. So the Wiki is correct.
[gentoo-user] Recommendation for CPU type in QEMU?
I'm looking at setting up 32-bit WINE to run a 32-bit Windows app. Since I'm on a pure 64-bit (no multi-lib) machine, that doesn't exactly work, which is why I'm looking at QEMU. I need to run WINE in 32 bit mode, on a 32-bit install in a VM. Is a 64-bit virtual cpu type recommended anyways? Are the qemu and kvm cpu types faster/slower? And what would they be listed as in the kernel .config? I'm not familiar with all the weird codenames for Intel's chips. What's the hierarchy between Nehalem/Westmere/SandyBridge/Haswell ? Here's the list of available types... [i660][waltdnes][~/qemu] sudo /usr/bin/qemu-kvm -cpu help x86 qemu64 QEMU Virtual CPU version 1.4.2 x86 phenom AMD Phenom(tm) 9550 Quad-Core Processor x86 core2duo Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T7700 @ 2.40GHz x86kvm64 Common KVM processor x86 qemu32 QEMU Virtual CPU version 1.4.2 x86kvm32 Common 32-bit KVM processor x86 coreduo Genuine Intel(R) CPU T2600 @ 2.16GHz x86 486 x86 pentium x86 pentium2 x86 pentium3 x86 athlon QEMU Virtual CPU version 1.4.2 x86 n270 Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU N270 @ 1.60GHz x86 Conroe Intel Celeron_4x0 (Conroe/Merom Class Core 2) x86 Penryn Intel Core 2 Duo P9xxx (Penryn Class Core 2) x86 Nehalem Intel Core i7 9xx (Nehalem Class Core i7) x86 Westmere Westmere E56xx/L56xx/X56xx (Nehalem-C) x86 SandyBridge Intel Xeon E312xx (Sandy Bridge) x86 Haswell Intel Core Processor (Haswell) x86 Opteron_G1 AMD Opteron 240 (Gen 1 Class Opteron) x86 Opteron_G2 AMD Opteron 22xx (Gen 2 Class Opteron) x86 Opteron_G3 AMD Opteron 23xx (Gen 3 Class Opteron) x86 Opteron_G4 AMD Opteron 62xx class CPU x86 Opteron_G5 AMD Opteron 63xx class CPU -- Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org I don't run desktop environments; I run useful applications
Re: [gentoo-user] fail: kde-base/kdelibs-4.10.5-r1
- Mail original - --[ 16%] Building CXX object kdeui/CMakeFiles/kdeui.dir/widgets/kmenubar.o Neil Bothwick OK. Here's the full output. It happens on a amd64 / 8 cores (AMD 8120) machine. Output is slightly different if I set MAKEOPTs to -j1 or -j8. Here's what I get with -j1: [ 16%] Building CXX object kdeui/CMakeFiles/kdeui.dir/widgets/kmenubar.o .. skipping the full gcc command line . ccache: FATAL: x_calloc: Could not allocate 40 bytes ^^ disable ccache, try again make[2]: *** [kdeui/CMakeFiles/kdeui.dir/widgets/kmenubar.o] Erreur 1 make[2] : on quitte le répertoire « /var/tmp/portage/kde-base/kdelibs-4.10.5-r1/work/kdelibs-4.10.5_build » make[1]: *** [kdeui/CMakeFiles/kdeui.dir/all] Erreur 2 make[1] : on quitte le répertoire « /var/tmp/portage/kde-base/kdelibs-4.10.5-r1/work/kdelibs-4.10.5_build » make: *** [all] Erreur 2 * ERROR: kde-base/kdelibs-4.10.5-r1 failed (compile phase): * emake failed 2 files joined: emergeinfo is the output of emerge --info '=kde-base/kdelibs-4.10.5-r1' and buildlog. Hope one can help. ccache disabled. kdelibs compiled all right. Thanks.
Re: [gentoo-user] Recommendation for CPU type in QEMU?
On 31/07/2013 11:11, Walter Dnes wrote: I'm looking at setting up 32-bit WINE to run a 32-bit Windows app. Since I'm on a pure 64-bit (no multi-lib) machine, that doesn't exactly work, which is why I'm looking at QEMU. I need to run WINE in 32 bit mode, on a 32-bit install in a VM. Is a 64-bit virtual cpu type recommended anyways? Are the qemu and kvm cpu types faster/slower? And what would they be listed as in the kernel .config? I'm not familiar with all the weird codenames for Intel's chips. What's the hierarchy between Nehalem/Westmere/SandyBridge/Haswell ? Here's the list of available types... [i660][waltdnes][~/qemu] sudo /usr/bin/qemu-kvm -cpu help Please provide the content of /proc/cpuinfo on the host. --Kerin
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo is so AWESOME
On 2013-07-30 5:32 PM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: Which projects are most in need of developers or maintainers? I wouldn't mind learning a bit more about package maintenance, portage, and ebuilds... One that I would *love* to see updated is sogo, which is in the gnustep overlay http://www.sogo.nu Very fast/lightweight (one server can handle thousands of users) fullblown Exchange Server replacement that fully supports Thunderbird+Lightning, as well as Outlook (NATIVE support, no MAPI plugin required, it actually thinks it is talking to an Exchange Server), and pretty much every mobile client out there, including Apple iCal/iPhone, Blackberry Windows Mobile (requires the Funambol SOGo Connector), and Android... The latest ebuild available is 1.2.1 which is really old - the current version of SOGo is 2.0.7, and has *massive* improvements over the 1.x series... Also - it is also - or will be, I don't see anything on the current website yet - capable of acting as a full blown Active Directory Server with integration of Samba4 and Openchange, so, hopefully in the foreseeable future, SOGo will be able to fully replace an AD Domain *and* Exchange Server... My plan is to get this installed in the next few weeks (I have paid support from Inverse for this), and if/when the time comes to upgrade my 2008R2 domain controllers, I'll be migrating to SOGo AD Domain controllers instead. I figure by that time (a few years or so), SOGo will be well ready for prime time.
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo is so AWESOME
On 07/30/2013 11:32 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote: On 07/30/2013 01:16 PM, hasufell wrote: And we need MOAR devs http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=1chap=2 https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Gentoo/Staffing_Needs so awesome! srsly! What many people don't seem to get is: you don't need to be a commit monkey doing your 100+ commits per week. Our minimum rate of commits is pretty low before you actually are forced to retire. Better have a lot of devs each one focussing on a few packages than having few devs working on the entire tree and messing up things randomly. It's not that much work, just some regular attention. You want to join! I was interested in becoming a dev for a little while, but the testing and what looks to be prolonged process kinda put me off of the idea. It just seems like a lot of bureaucratic work. Perhaps my impression is wrong, though... Yes, your impression is wrong. You can: a) file bugs b) attach your ebuilds to bug reports (either demanding inclusion or fixing a bug, etc...) c) proxy-maintain a package (say in the bug report that you are willing to do that) d) start contributing to sunrise (join #gentoo-sunrise) and get noticed or participate in #gentoo-dev-help e) just be bold and tell us we need you; it's good if you already have an overlay and some experience or worked on bugzilla ebuilds a lot Which projects are most in need of developers or maintainers? I wouldn't mind learning a bit more about package maintenance, portage, and ebuilds... an incomplete list of herds needing help from my own perspective: - perl herd is officially asking for help - lang-misc consists of _one_ dev (we can also need help with packages like dev-lang/elixir, dev-lang/fpc and dev-lang/dmd, dmd not being in the tree yet for that very reason) - science herd is unable to import most of their ebuilds into the tree, so they stay in the science overlay. That sucks. More people. - gnome is really underpowered, hence the trouble with gnome3 if it's about projects, then well... maybe gentoo alt (bsd and prefix), arch testers or even kernel (kernel package maintainers don't have the resources anymore to stabilize vanilla-sources). Also: if you are good with python, you want to contribute to portage... very few people work on that and it's not getting less work. Our security system lacks some responsiveness imo due to being underpowered, we can improve that. GENTOO IS AWESOME!
Re: [gentoo-user] Recommendation for CPU type in QEMU?
Am Wed, 31 Jul 2013 06:11:24 -0400 schrieb Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org: I'm looking at setting up 32-bit WINE to run a 32-bit Windows app. Since I'm on a pure 64-bit (no multi-lib) machine, that doesn't exactly work, which is why I'm looking at QEMU. I need to run WINE in 32 bit mode, on a 32-bit install in a VM. Is a 64-bit virtual cpu type recommended anyways? Are the qemu and kvm cpu types faster/slower? And what would they be listed as in the kernel .config? I'm not familiar with all the weird codenames for Intel's chips. What's the hierarchy between Nehalem/Westmere/SandyBridge/Haswell ? Here's the list of available types... [i660][waltdnes][~/qemu] sudo /usr/bin/qemu-kvm -cpu help x86 qemu64 QEMU Virtual CPU version 1.4.2 x86 phenom AMD Phenom(tm) 9550 Quad-Core Processor x86 core2duo Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T7700 @ 2.40GHz x86kvm64 Common KVM processor x86 qemu32 QEMU Virtual CPU version 1.4.2 x86kvm32 Common 32-bit KVM processor x86 coreduo Genuine Intel(R) CPU T2600 @ 2.16GHz x86 486 x86 pentium x86 pentium2 x86 pentium3 x86 athlon QEMU Virtual CPU version 1.4.2 x86 n270 Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU N270 @ 1.60GHz x86 Conroe Intel Celeron_4x0 (Conroe/Merom Class Core 2) x86 Penryn Intel Core 2 Duo P9xxx (Penryn Class Core 2) x86 Nehalem Intel Core i7 9xx (Nehalem Class Core i7) x86 Westmere Westmere E56xx/L56xx/X56xx (Nehalem-C) x86 SandyBridge Intel Xeon E312xx (Sandy Bridge) x86 Haswell Intel Core Processor (Haswell) x86 Opteron_G1 AMD Opteron 240 (Gen 1 Class Opteron) x86 Opteron_G2 AMD Opteron 22xx (Gen 2 Class Opteron) x86 Opteron_G3 AMD Opteron 23xx (Gen 3 Class Opteron) x86 Opteron_G4 AMD Opteron 62xx class CPU x86 Opteron_G5 AMD Opteron 63xx class CPU There's also -cpu host, which simply passes your CPU through to the guest. That's what I use for my 32 bit WinXP VM. You can use it if you don't mind not being able to migrate your guest, but it sounds to me like you're doing this on a desktop machine, so I suspect guest migration doesn't matter to you. -- Marc Joliet -- People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don't - Bjarne Stroustrup signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
Top-posting because my question is about something in the linked threads... In one comment was said the following: Can I ask the systemd people to design a working solution for opting out? I can't support this initiative without such a solution and I would be happy to work with the systemd people to reach it, ie I'll test. This already went before the Council, and the decision was that INSTALL_MASK IS the working solution for opting out. If somebody wants to come up with a better one and propose it they're of course welcome to, but in the meantime, INSTALL_MASK is the official solution. Where is this 'INSTALL_MASK' option for opting out of systemd completely documented? Googling only finds references to this discussion? Thanks, Charles On 2013-07-30 6:40 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: There is going to be resistance. Two months ago there was a huge thread in gentoo-dev, because a package maintaner complained that his co-maintainer added a systemd unit to the package: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/85792 In the end, the maintainer rage-quit: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/2551 However, this is the extreme behaviour: most developers (and rational people) agree to adding systemd unit files to all packages, and we have much better coverage now that some months ago. If users cooperate opening bugs adding systemd unit files (after testing them in their machines), the coverage is going to grow even faster.
Re: [gentoo-user] which VM do you recommend?
On 2013-07-30 8:30 PM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 06:36:57AM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote Side question... I want to run the vmware tools on my gentoo VM (so the host can safely power it down), but it also requires modules. Why do you need vmware tools? From the host, execute... ssh root@guest /sbin/poweroff Two reasons this isn't sufficient... 1. Extended power outage If my UPS sends a shutdown command to the host, I (obviously) want it to safely shutdown ALL running VMs. 2. Manual host shutdown I have my hosts configured so that if I press/release the power button, the host goes through a full power down process. I (obviously) want this process to also initiate safe shutdowns on all running VM's. I do not want to have to SSH in and manually run a command to uncooperative VM's first, I want to just be able to press/release the power button, and have the host safely shut down all running VMs, then itself. ...or, if you have sys-power/hibernate-script installed, and want to hibernate... This is a server. I always completely disable hibernation on servers (doesn't everyone?)...
Re: [gentoo-user] Recommendation for CPU type in QEMU?
On 31/07/2013 12:31, Marc Joliet wrote: [snip] There's also -cpu host, which simply passes your CPU through to the guest. That's what I use for my 32 bit WinXP VM. You can use it if you don't mind not being able to migrate your guest, but it sounds to me like you're doing this on a desktop machine, so I suspect guest migration doesn't matter to you. I thought the same until very recently but it's not the case. The -cpu host feature exposes all feature bits supported by qemu. Those may include features that aren't supported in hardware by the host CPU, in which case qemu has to resort to (slow) emulation if they are used. --Kerin
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On Wed, 31 Jul 2013 07:34:22 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: Where is this 'INSTALL_MASK' option for opting out of systemd completely documented? man make.conf -- Neil Bothwick If at first you don't succeed, redefine success. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 2013-07-31 8:22 AM, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Wed, 31 Jul 2013 07:34:22 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: Where is this 'INSTALL_MASK' option for opting out of systemd completely documented? man make.conf Thanks but... I didn't see one word mention of systemd. So, how should this be used to 'opt out of systemd completely'?
Re: [gentoo-user] which VM do you recommend?
On 31/07/13 19:40, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2013-07-30 8:30 PM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 06:36:57AM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote Side question... I want to run the vmware tools on my gentoo VM (so the host can safely power it down), but it also requires modules. Why do you need vmware tools? From the host, execute... ssh root@guest /sbin/poweroff Two reasons this isn't sufficient... 1. Extended power outage If my UPS sends a shutdown command to the host, I (obviously) want it to safely shutdown ALL running VMs. 2. Manual host shutdown I have my hosts configured so that if I press/release the power button, the host goes through a full power down process. I (obviously) want this process to also initiate safe shutdowns on all running VM's. I do not want to have to SSH in and manually run a command to uncooperative VM's first, I want to just be able to press/release the power button, and have the host safely shut down all running VMs, then itself. ...or, if you have sys-power/hibernate-script installed, and want to hibernate... This is a server. I always completely disable hibernation on servers (doesn't everyone?)... Actually there are some good reasons to do it in certain cases, especially on servers not up 24/7 (backup systems/cool standbys, fast shutdown required, ...). You can bring systems down or online a lot faster. Not everyone has/needs 24/7, or wants to pay the power bills for running a machine that may have no users/work for over a weekend or longer, but wants it up and running on demand. BillK
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31/07/13 at 08:30am, Tanstaafl wrote: So, how should this be used to 'opt out of systemd completely'? from main make.conf Use this variable if you want to selectively prevent certain files from being copied into your file system tree. .. You can use it to prevent ebuilds from installing unit files or open-rc scripts from doing so (based on what you want to opt-out of). -- - Yohan Pereira The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and a seal. -- Mark Twain
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo is so AWESOME
On 07/31/2013 03:25 AM, Michael Palimaka wrote: On 31/07/2013 09:48, Michael Orlitzky wrote: I want to become a dev, what's my next step? There is none. Help out, and maybe someone will notice you? Ok, I'm on it. Been doing it for years, and I know several other people in the same situation. It doesn't work, and recruitment numbers are plummeting. There needs to be an explicit, documented process. I agree, it's not really concrete. Which projects/areas are you usually involved in? I'm not heavily involved in any one project. I proxy maintain, * net-dns/djbdns * net-dns/rbldnsd I wrote at least three programs that are in the tree whose maintenance I would be happy to take over: * xfce-extra/xfce4-hdaps * sys-apps/apply-default-acl * app-emacs/nagios-mode In sunrise, I have, * app-antivirus/clamav-unofficial-sigs * net-mail/amavis-logwatch * net-mail/postfix-logwatch Lately I've been submitting things to the gentoo-haskell overlay. Most haskell ebuilds can be generated automatically, so this is simply a matter of running hackport merge program, and sending a pull request. Another program I wrote lives in the overlay: * net-misc/hath And I would be happy to maintain a number of Haskell libraries that I use in my day-to-day-development (mostly numerical stuff and deps of my programs). In my personal overlay, there are a few more packages: * app-emacs/vbnet-mode * app-emacs/visual-basic-mode (bug #445370) There are a few minor bugs in my bugzilla list that I could easily take care of. Long-term, I have a professional interest in fixing mpm-itk in apache-2.4.x.
Re: [gentoo-user] [~amd64] Some possibly (?) helpful hints re the big gnome-3.8 update
On Wed, Jul 31 2013, Graham Murray wrote: Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com writes: The wiki is wrong. The script /etc/init.d/udev is part of sys-fs/udev, which you need to uninstall before installing systemd. Perhaps it's CONFIG_PROTECT'd, but anyway sys-fs/udev and sys-apps/systemd install the udev binary in different directories, so the script is basically useless after the switch. It is pulled in by sys-fs/udev-init-scripts which is a dependency of systemd[openrc]. So the Wiki is correct. But the wiki doesn't specify emerging system with the openrc flag. Should I suggest that the wiki be modified. To be sure I understand. At this point I would have already 1. merged systemd (perhaps with USE=openrc ... 2. set USE=systemd ... 3. updated with emerge --newuse --deep --verbose--ask @world * The wiki doesn't say --update; is that correct? I would *not* have 1. added init=/usr/lib/systemd/systemd to the kernel line in grub 2. rebooted. A related question. Am I correct in believing that once I do the emerge ... @world above I can *not* reboot until I have added the init=... phrase to the kernel line in grub (and thus committed to systemd not OpenRC) Thanks to all allan
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 7:30 AM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 2013-07-31 8:22 AM, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Wed, 31 Jul 2013 07:34:22 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: Where is this 'INSTALL_MASK' option for opting out of systemd completely documented? man make.conf Thanks but... I didn't see one word mention of systemd. So, how should this be used to 'opt out of systemd completely'? If you don't use the systemd USE flag (and never install anything that depends on systemd), you will not get systemd installed, but many packages will install systemd unit files in /urs/lib/systemd/system. This unit files are little non-executable files which do nothing in your system, but some people feel really strongly about having anything in their machines with *systemd* in its path. If you want to exorcise those unit files, add /usr/lib/systemd/system to INSTALL_MASK. It's the exact same situation with OpenRC: those of us who install systemd don't want nor need the files in /etc/init.d, but they get installed anyway. If we want to exorcise OpenRC init scripts from our systems, we need to add /etc/init.d to INSTALL_MASK. For the record, I now think it's a waste of time trying to stop the installation of tiny files that basically do nothing, either in /usr/lib/systemd/system or in /etc/init.d, but you have the option if you so desire. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] [~amd64] Some possibly (?) helpful hints re the big gnome-3.8 update
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Graham Murray gra...@gmurray.org.uk wrote: Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com writes: The wiki is wrong. The script /etc/init.d/udev is part of sys-fs/udev, which you need to uninstall before installing systemd. Perhaps it's CONFIG_PROTECT'd, but anyway sys-fs/udev and sys-apps/systemd install the udev binary in different directories, so the script is basically useless after the switch. It is pulled in by sys-fs/udev-init-scripts which is a dependency of systemd[openrc]. So the Wiki is correct. Yeah, sorry: my bad. I completely forgot about the openrc USE flag. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 2013-07-31 8:41 AM, Yohan Pereira yohan.pere...@gmail.com wrote: On 31/07/13 at 08:30am, Tanstaafl wrote: So, how should this be used to 'opt out of systemd completely'? from main make.conf Use this variable if you want to selectively prevent certain files from being copied into your file system tree. .. You can use it to prevent ebuilds from installing unit files or open-rc scripts from doing so (based on what you want to opt-out of). Well, no offense, but that is gobbledy-greek to non programmers. I would have no idea *how* to 'prevent ebuilds from installing unit files...'. If this really is 'the one true way' to 'totally opt out of systemd', then in my opinion there should be a very thorough example of *how* to 'opt out of systemd' included in the man page. Side-question... I'm wondering if one of the reasons that the dev who was making such a big deal of this was mainly concerned about the 'slipper slope' factor, and saw some writing on the wall that the systemd devs were just playing nice just to get their foot in the door, then were going to pull some tricks to force changes that would eventually result in *everyone* (even those using eudev) to *have* to switch to systemd some time in the future? Not saying this is how it is, but I'm more than a bit concerned about this.
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 2013-07-31 11:20 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: If you don't use the systemd USE flag (and never install anything that depends on systemd), you will not get systemd installed, but many packages will install systemd unit files in /urs/lib/systemd/system. This unit files are little non-executable files which do nothing in your system, but some people feel really strongly about having anything in their machines with *systemd* in its path. If you want to exorcise those unit files, add /usr/lib/systemd/system to INSTALL_MASK. Ok, thanks Canek... but my last question remains... if this really is going to be the only and one true way to opt out of systemd, shouldn't this be well documented in the man page, as opposed to just generic references to masking 'files'...? It's the exact same situation with OpenRC: those of us who install systemd don't want nor need the files in /etc/init.d, but they get installed anyway. If we want to exorcise OpenRC init scripts from our systems, we need to add /etc/init.d to INSTALL_MASK. And so *both* should be fully documented in the man page... For the record, I now think it's a waste of time trying to stop the installation of tiny files that basically do nothing, either in /usr/lib/systemd/system or in /etc/init.d, but you have the option if you so desire. Ok, and thanks again...
Re: [gentoo-user] [~amd64] Some possibly (?) helpful hints re the big gnome-3.8 update
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 9:28 AM, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: On Wed, Jul 31 2013, Graham Murray wrote: Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com writes: The wiki is wrong. The script /etc/init.d/udev is part of sys-fs/udev, which you need to uninstall before installing systemd. Perhaps it's CONFIG_PROTECT'd, but anyway sys-fs/udev and sys-apps/systemd install the udev binary in different directories, so the script is basically useless after the switch. It is pulled in by sys-fs/udev-init-scripts which is a dependency of systemd[openrc]. So the Wiki is correct. But the wiki doesn't specify emerging system with the openrc flag. Should I suggest that the wiki be modified. To be sure I understand. At this point I would have already 1. merged systemd (perhaps with USE=openrc ... 2. set USE=systemd ... 3. updated with emerge --newuse --deep --verbose--ask @world * The wiki doesn't say --update; is that correct? I would *not* have 1. added init=/usr/lib/systemd/systemd to the kernel line in grub 2. rebooted. I think (now that Graham correctly pointed that you can preserve /etc/init.d/udev with the openrc USE flag), that then you should restart udev. A related question. Am I correct in believing that once I do the emerge ... @world above I can *not* reboot until I have added the init=... phrase to the kernel line in grub (and thus committed to systemd not OpenRC) That, I believe, is correct. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 2013-07-31 11:20 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: If you don't use the systemd USE flag (and never install anything that depends on systemd), you will not get systemd installed, but many packages will install systemd unit files in /urs/lib/systemd/system. This unit files are little non-executable files which do nothing in your system, but some people feel really strongly about having anything in their machines with *systemd* in its path. If you want to exorcise those unit files, add /usr/lib/systemd/system to INSTALL_MASK. Ok, thanks Canek... but my last question remains... if this really is going to be the only and one true way to opt out of systemd, shouldn't this be well documented in the man page, as opposed to just generic references to masking 'files'...? No, because the *exact same* situation occurs for Bash completion scripts... and logrotate scripts... and cron jobs... and... The devs decided (and I agree with them) that the important thing is to cover the necessities of the majority of users and to have reasonable default settings. Therefore, having USE flags for bash_complete, and logrotate, and crond, and systemd, and OpenRC, and whatever else you want to throw in the mix is overkill and a maintenance nightmare. Not to mention that they will require a full rebuild every time you changed one of those flags. And the packages (in general) will not care about those tiny files; they will work fine with all of them installed, no matter if you don't use Bash completion, nor logrotate, nor crond, nor systemd nor OpenRC. So, those files are installed unconditionally. And that's the smart thing to do, since most users will not even care about any of them. There is no need to document nothing special about any of them (bash_complete, logrotate, crond, systemd, OpenRC, etc.), since that option is for really special cases (think embedded devices with really small disk space), or for really picky users (like myself some weeks ago, before I reached the conclusion that masking files in /etc/init.d is not worth it). It's the exact same situation with OpenRC: those of us who install systemd don't want nor need the files in /etc/init.d, but they get installed anyway. If we want to exorcise OpenRC init scripts from our systems, we need to add /etc/init.d to INSTALL_MASK. And so *both* should be fully documented in the man page... No, see above. For the record, I now think it's a waste of time trying to stop the installation of tiny files that basically do nothing, either in /usr/lib/systemd/system or in /etc/init.d, but you have the option if you so desire. Ok, and thanks again... Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
[gentoo-user] Re: gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31/07/13 18:26, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2013-07-31 11:20 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: If you don't use the systemd USE flag (and never install anything that depends on systemd), you will not get systemd installed, but many packages will install systemd unit files in /urs/lib/systemd/system. This unit files are little non-executable files which do nothing in your system, but some people feel really strongly about having anything in their machines with *systemd* in its path. If you want to exorcise those unit files, add /usr/lib/systemd/system to INSTALL_MASK. Ok, thanks Canek... but my last question remains... if this really is going to be the only and one true way to opt out of systemd, shouldn't this be well documented in the man page, as opposed to just generic references to masking 'files'...? Actually, this isn't how you opt out of systemd. You do that by having -systemd in your USE flags. Just because the unit files are present doesn't mean you're now using systemd.
[gentoo-user] Re: gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On Wed, 31 Jul 2013 11:24:09 -0400 Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 2013-07-31 8:41 AM, Yohan Pereira yohan.pere...@gmail.com wrote: On 31/07/13 at 08:30am, Tanstaafl wrote: So, how should this be used to 'opt out of systemd completely'? from main make.conf Use this variable if you want to selectively prevent certain files from being copied into your file system tree. .. You can use it to prevent ebuilds from installing unit files or open-rc scripts from doing so (based on what you want to opt-out of). Well, no offense, but that is gobbledy-greek to non programmers. I would have no idea *how* to 'prevent ebuilds from installing unit files...'. If this really is 'the one true way' to 'totally opt out of systemd', then in my opinion there should be a very thorough example of *how* to 'opt out of systemd' included in the man page. I'd rather not see man make.conf cluttered with trivia, but maybe it would be nice if there were a unified choosing a system manager document which had recipes for avoiding the little files from other systems.
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31/07/13 at 11:26am, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2013-07-31 11:20 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: If you don't use the systemd USE flag (and never install anything that depends on systemd), you will not get systemd installed, but many packages will install systemd unit files in /urs/lib/systemd/system. This unit files are little non-executable files which do nothing in your system, but some people feel really strongly about having anything in their machines with *systemd* in its path. If you want to exorcise those unit files, add /usr/lib/systemd/system to INSTALL_MASK. Ok, thanks Canek... but my last question remains... if this really is going to be the only and one true way to opt out of systemd, shouldn't this be well documented in the man page, as opposed to just generic references to masking 'files'...? The one true way is to set -systemd in your useflags. However anything that hard depends on systemd will pull it in like AFAIR gnome. Trying to opt-out of systemd in these cases is not supported and probably not trivial. The install_mask is just for preventing certain tiny files that certain packages install that let them be used by a init sytstem like the scripts in init.d in the case of openrc and unit files in the case of systemd. ALl this will do is help you save few kbs of disk space. It wont help you get rid of systemd in cases where its required like in the case of gnome. -- - Yohan Pereira The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and a seal. -- Mark Twain
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 07/31/2013 11:20 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: For the record, I now think it's a waste of time trying to stop the installation of tiny files that basically do nothing, either in /usr/lib/systemd/system or in /etc/init.d, but you have the option if you so desire. The nice thing about the systemd service files is that they're distribution independent. That means the service file can go upstream, and the daemon's authors can make sure that it's correct. No more duplication of effort for each distro maintainer. Of course, you don't get that benefit unless you use systemd. But it's tempting, right? So there's been some talk about getting openrc, upstart, etc. to parse the systemd service files. That way, we'd get the benefit without having to run systemd. Should that dream ever become reality, you may one day get an unexpected surprise if you INSTALL_MASK the service files. In any case, masking them would be just one more make.conf setting you have to worry about. If it makes the situation more palatable, note that the service files come from the package authors, and not from the systemd people.
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 2013-07-31 11:45 AM, Yohan Pereira yohan.pere...@gmail.com wrote: The one true way is to set -systemd in your useflags. However anything that hard depends on systemd will pull it in like AFAIR gnome. Trying to opt-out of systemd in these cases is not supported and probably not trivial. Ok, I misread some things in those discussions (was reading quickly)... I could have sworn I saw mention a -systemd USE flag was explicitly rejected by the devs... now I see it was only a USE flag for the inclusion of the unit files. Sorry for the noise...
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31/07/2013 17:36, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: No, because the *exact same* situation occurs for Bash completion scripts... and logrotate scripts... and cron jobs... and... The devs decided (and I agree with them) that the important thing is to cover the necessities of the majority of users and to have reasonable default settings. Therefore, having USE flags for bash_complete, and logrotate, and crond, and systemd, and OpenRC, and whatever else you want to throw in the mix is overkill and a maintenance nightmare. Not to mention that they will require a full rebuild every time you changed one of those flags. And the packages (in general) will not care about those tiny files; they will work fine with all of them installed, no matter if you don't use Bash completion, nor logrotate, nor crond, nor systemd nor OpenRC. So, those files are installed unconditionally. And that's the smart thing to do, since most users will not even care about any of them. Folk will get MUCH larger savings if they mask html help/doc files from being installed. Those things get to be huge. Whinging about systemd binaries being installed is valid, but whinging about some data files is not. Anyone who does is letting their OCD show in ways they really should be keeping private. Unless the system is embedded in which case a lot more than units are going to be masked out -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] SQL Server Advice for Small Business
On Mon, July 29, 2013 22:22, Randy Westlund wrote: Hey guys, I'm planning to set up an SQL server for my dad's small canvas awning business, and I've never done this before. Most of my sysadmin-type skills are self-taught. I could use some advice. [snip] Randy, I've read your original post and subsequently the answers. One question that nobody raised about your original post was why are you writing something for your fathers company in the first place? Why aren't you looking at ERP packages such as Compiere, Adempiere, Tryton, OpenERP etc etc? In other words, why are you reinventing the wheel? With these systems, you will get all of the data entry stuff already set up and you can then do your data analysis stuff, although these systems also do heaps of this stuff already. You don't mention what you do for a crust, but if you do a good implementation of one at your Dad's place, you could sell your services to other companies. Someone mentioned PostGIS - forget it. You want to generate heat maps based upon where business is going. This does not need a GIS. If you are generating real, accurate maps, then a GIS would be what you want, but in this case, you just need a rough mudmap of the areas in question. This would just show that City A is north west, ie the top left side of the page, from you, which is in the centre, company B is east, the right hand side of the page etc and based upon this, generate your heat map. Scale, true orientation and position are not important. Even just grab a Google Earth screen grab of your area and then write something what will add heat, colours, to it in the appropriate places. You mentioned a small database. Don't underestimate how big things can get quickly. If, at the moment when someone is spec'ing a job, and they take photo's, but subsequently those photo's are hard to access, they won't take the photo's in the first place. If you set up an easy to access repository for the photo's, people will start taking more photo's. If there are CAD drawings, what are they? 2D/3D, AutoCAD/MicroStation or full on Solidworks solid models? These get big very quickly. Scanned notes etc just add more and more. I have a feeling that your small db could get big quickly. Just plan for that. In closing, these are just my five cents worth, we no longer have two cent pieces in Australia, regarding the software. I have no idea on the hardware except as someone mentioned back up, back up and back up. Oh, also, the more RAM the merrier. Good luck, Andrew
Re: [gentoo-user] [~amd64] Some possibly (?) helpful hints re the big gnome-3.8 update
Thank you Canek and Graham. I apologize for all the questions, but one still remains. The wiki says to emerge --ask --changed-use --deep @world One could make small additions/changes, but there is a large one that is not clear. Should you have --update ? allan
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On Wed, 31 Jul 2013 10:36:31 -0500, »Q« wrote: If this really is 'the one true way' to 'totally opt out of systemd', then in my opinion there should be a very thorough example of *how* to 'opt out of systemd' included in the man page. I'd rather not see man make.conf cluttered with trivia, but maybe it would be nice if there were a unified choosing a system manager document which had recipes for avoiding the little files from other systems. I couldn't agree more. The make.conf man page should, and does, define how a setting works. how it is used for specific packages should be described in the documentation for those packages, or on the wiki. -- Neil Bothwick Eat shit - 50 million flies can't be wrong Use Microsoft . . . . . signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] [~amd64] Some possibly (?) helpful hints re the big gnome-3.8 update
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 12:43 PM, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: Thank you Canek and Graham. I apologize for all the questions, but one still remains. The wiki says to emerge --ask --changed-use --deep @world One could make small additions/changes, but there is a large one that is not clear. Should you have --update ? I would do it, just in case. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31 July 2013, at 18:23, Alan McKinnon wrote: ... Whinging about systemd binaries being installed is valid, but whinging about some data files is not. Anyone who does is letting their OCD show in ways they really should be keeping private. Hmmmn, it's a bit freaking weird - if I'm understanding correctly some of the statements made here about systemd - that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything. Stroller.
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 12:56 PM, Stroller strol...@stellar.eclipse.co.uk wrote: On 31 July 2013, at 18:23, Alan McKinnon wrote: ... Whinging about systemd binaries being installed is valid, but whinging about some data files is not. Anyone who does is letting their OCD show in ways they really should be keeping private. Hmmmn, it's a bit freaking weird - if I'm understanding correctly some of the statements made here about systemd - that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything. If you use systemd, all the files installed in /etc/init.d (except functions.sh) don't actually do nothing. If you use OpenRC, all the files installed in /urs/lib/systemd/system don't actually do nothing. Whichever you use (OpenRC or systemd), you will have files in both locations (actually, a bunch of them), and therefore one of those locations will have files that don't actually do nothing. Unless you use INSTALL_MASK, which is of course what this is all about. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
[gentoo-user] ata6: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x4000000 action 0xe frozen
Early during booting phase, dmesg shows:
[0.515651] ata6: SATA max UDMA/133 abar m8192@0xfdefe000 port
0xfdefe180 irq 17
[0.833387] ata6: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 300)
But later, it reports lots like the following stanza:
[164362.715469] ata6: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x400
action 0xe frozen
[164362.715474] ata6: irq_stat 0x0040, connection status changed
[164362.715479] ata6: SError: { DevExch }
[164362.715490] ata6: hard resetting link
[164363.433615] ata6: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 300)
[164363.446934] ata6: EH complete
Is it related to a disk drive, and if so, is there a way to know which
drive is on ata6?
PS: There are two drives attached to the system, reported by dmesg like so:
[0.872490] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 156301488 512-byte logical blocks:
(80.0 GB/74.5 GiB)
[0.874828] sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] 488397168 512-byte logical blocks: (250
GB/232 GiB)
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31/07/2013 19:56, Stroller wrote: On 31 July 2013, at 18:23, Alan McKinnon wrote: ... Whinging about systemd binaries being installed is valid, but whinging about some data files is not. Anyone who does is letting their OCD show in ways they really should be keeping private. Hmmmn, it's a bit freaking weird - if I'm understanding correctly some of the statements made here about systemd - that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything. Stroller. You are understanding it wrong. The scene being worked towards is: ebuilds for services will install openrc scripts in /etc/init.d ebuilds for services will install unit files somewhere else. Only one of those sets of teeny weeny files can be used at a time, the set in user depends on the service manager. There's an idea floating around that openrc could use systemd unit files but it's still just an idea. If it becomes more than an idea, the files in /etc/init.d may or may not be dispensed with. Either way it doesn't matter. Unit files are unlikely to number more than 100 total, and are likely to be smaller than 1 fs allocation unit in size. bash's man page is considerably larger than all that all by itself. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31/07/13 at 06:56pm, Stroller wrote: Hmmmn, it's a bit freaking weird - if I'm understanding correctly some of the statements made here about systemd - that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything. If your refering to what I think your refering to then I think Canek was talking about packages installing systemd unit files as well ask openrc init scripts regardless of the init system in use. There fore systemd users will have scripts in init.d which they do not use and vice versa. -- - Yohan Pereira The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and a seal. -- Mark Twain
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 01:09:03PM -0500, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: Hmmmn, it's a bit freaking weird - if I'm understanding correctly some of the statements made here about systemd - that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything. If you use systemd, all the files installed in /etc/init.d (except functions.sh) don't actually do nothing. If you use OpenRC, all the files installed in /urs/lib/systemd/system don't actually do nothing. Whichever you use (OpenRC or systemd), you will have files in both locations (actually, a bunch of them), and therefore one of those locations will have files that don't actually do nothing. Unless you use INSTALL_MASK, which is of course what this is all about. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México In English don't actually do nothing means do something; i.e. don't actually do anything != don't actually do nothing. -- Happy Penguin Computers ') 126 Fenco Drive ( \ Tupelo, MS 38801 ^^ supp...@happypenguincomputers.com 662-269-2706 662-205-6424 http://happypenguincomputers.com/ A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On 31/07/2013 19:56, Stroller wrote: On 31 July 2013, at 18:23, Alan McKinnon wrote: ... Whinging about systemd binaries being installed is valid, but whinging about some data files is not. Anyone who does is letting their OCD show in ways they really should be keeping private. Hmmmn, it's a bit freaking weird - if I'm understanding correctly some of the statements made here about systemd - that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything. Stroller. You are understanding it wrong. The scene being worked towards is: ebuilds for services will install openrc scripts in /etc/init.d ebuilds for services will install unit files somewhere else. Only one of those sets of teeny weeny files can be used at a time, the set in user depends on the service manager. There's an idea floating around that openrc could use systemd unit files but it's still just an idea. If it becomes more than an idea, the files in /etc/init.d may or may not be dispensed with. Either way it doesn't matter. Unit files are unlikely to number more than 100 total, and are likely to be smaller than 1 fs allocation unit in size. 160 files in my laptop, using 652K, 122 files in a LAMP server, using 492K. bash's man page is considerably larger than all that all by itself. bash's man page is 62K in my laptop (compressed with bzip2), 277K uncompressed. So, not quite exactly like you say, but the point remains true. The man pages in my laptop use more than 20 times the space used in /usr/lib/systemd (and that includes binaries like systemd itself and systemd-udev). acero ~ # du -sh /usr/share/man 82M /usr/share/man acero ~ # du -sh /usr/lib/systemd/ 3.6M /usr/lib/systemd/ And /usr/share/doc is 2.5G in my laptop. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Bruce Hill da...@happypenguincomputers.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 01:09:03PM -0500, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: Hmmmn, it's a bit freaking weird - if I'm understanding correctly some of the statements made here about systemd - that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything. If you use systemd, all the files installed in /etc/init.d (except functions.sh) don't actually do nothing. If you use OpenRC, all the files installed in /urs/lib/systemd/system don't actually do nothing. Whichever you use (OpenRC or systemd), you will have files in both locations (actually, a bunch of them), and therefore one of those locations will have files that don't actually do nothing. Unless you use INSTALL_MASK, which is of course what this is all about. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México In English don't actually do nothing means do something; i.e. don't actually do anything != don't actually do nothing. I was using (on purpose) the exact same sentence that Stroller used. I believe he's German; I'm Mexican. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
[gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo is so AWESOME
On 31/07/2013 22:56, Michael Orlitzky wrote: Lately I've been submitting things to the gentoo-haskell overlay. Have you asked any members of that project if they would be interested in being your mentor? Even if they can't, they might know someone who can.
[gentoo-user] Re: gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 30/07/2013 17:04, Pavel Volkov wrote: It is reliable, but for now I'll suggest adding -consolekit line into /etc/portage/profile/use.force (at least if you use default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/kde profile like me) Good news, we will be making changes with KDE 4.11 so that we no longer force the USE flag in the profile.
[gentoo-user] Re: gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 2013-07-31, Bruce Hill da...@happypenguincomputers.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 01:09:03PM -0500, Canek Pel?ez Vald?s wrote: Hmmmn, it's a bit freaking weird - if I'm understanding correctly some of the statements made here about systemd - that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything. If you use systemd, all the files installed in /etc/init.d (except functions.sh) don't actually do nothing. If you use OpenRC, all the files installed in /urs/lib/systemd/system don't actually do nothing. Whichever you use (OpenRC or systemd), you will have files in both locations (actually, a bunch of them), and therefore one of those locations will have files that don't actually do nothing. Unless you use INSTALL_MASK, which is of course what this is all about. In English don't actually do nothing means do something; i.e. don't actually do anything != don't actually do nothing. In standard, formal English, that's correct. However, in some English dialects, a double-negatve does not equate to a positive. A double negative is simply a stronger negative. For example, don't do nothing is a stronger, more emphatic version of don't do anything. Languages like that have negative concord. Old and Middle English were that way, and some modern dialects of English are that way. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! Either CONFESS now or at we go to PEOPLE'S COURT!! gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo is so AWESOME
On 07/31/2013 02:25 PM, Michael Palimaka wrote: On 31/07/2013 22:56, Michael Orlitzky wrote: Lately I've been submitting things to the gentoo-haskell overlay. Have you asked any members of that project if they would be interested in being your mentor? Even if they can't, they might know someone who can. I haven't, and I'll accept some of the blame for that, but there are only three team members: gienah, qnikst, and slyfox. All of them are certainly overworked, and the most communication I've had with any of them is a question on IRC or a thanks/thanks exchange on a pull request. It seems a little rude to pop in, address them personally, and ask them each if they'd devote months of their time towards mentoring me. (Doing so can pressure someone into agreeing to something he doesn't want to do, or makes him reject you personally which many people find awkward.)
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On 31/07/2013 19:56, Stroller wrote: On 31 July 2013, at 18:23, Alan McKinnon wrote: ... Whinging about systemd binaries being installed is valid, but whinging about some data files is not. Anyone who does is letting their OCD show in ways they really should be keeping private. Hmmmn, it's a bit freaking weird - if I'm understanding correctly some of the statements made here about systemd - that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything. Stroller. You are understanding it wrong. The scene being worked towards is: ebuilds for services will install openrc scripts in /etc/init.d ebuilds for services will install unit files somewhere else. Only one of those sets of teeny weeny files can be used at a time, the set in user depends on the service manager. There's an idea floating around that openrc could use systemd unit files but it's still just an idea. If it becomes more than an idea, the files in /etc/init.d may or may not be dispensed with. Either way it doesn't matter. Unit files are unlikely to number more than 100 total, and are likely to be smaller than 1 fs allocation unit in size. 160 files in my laptop, using 652K, 122 files in a LAMP server, using 492K. bash's man page is considerably larger than all that all by itself. bash's man page is 62K in my laptop (compressed with bzip2), 277K uncompressed. So, not quite exactly like you say, but the point remains true. The man pages in my laptop use more than 20 times the space used in /usr/lib/systemd (and that includes binaries like systemd itself and systemd-udev). Oh, I just noticed that systemd-udev is a link to /sbin/udev. So add 205K more for it. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31 July 2013, at 19:09, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 12:56 PM, Stroller strol...@stellar.eclipse.co.uk wrote: On 31 July 2013, at 18:23, Alan McKinnon wrote: ... Whinging about systemd binaries being installed is valid, but whinging about some data files is not. Anyone who does is letting their OCD show in ways they really should be keeping private. Hmmmn, it's a bit freaking weird - if I'm understanding correctly some of the statements made here about systemd - that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything. If you use systemd, all the files installed in /etc/init.d (except functions.sh) don't actually do nothing. Right, which is a bit freakin' odd, because on most every previous distro and other *nix system, that's where the system administrator goes to start and stop services. If they're not used, in this case, I don't think they should be installed. /etc/init.d is wholly different from /usr/share/package-name/examples There are many other directories on the system where it's no problem to have some idle, unused, wasted files, but /etc/init.d has long been an important directory. Stroller.
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31 July 2013, at 19:09, Alan McKinnon wrote: On 31/07/2013 19:56, Stroller wrote: On 31 July 2013, at 18:23, Alan McKinnon wrote: ... Whinging about systemd binaries being installed is valid, but whinging about some data files is not. Anyone who does is letting their OCD show in ways they really should be keeping private. Hmmmn, it's a bit freaking weird - if I'm understanding correctly some of the statements made here about systemd - that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything. You are understanding it wrong. No. According to Canek, I'm not. Only one of those sets of teeny weeny files can be used at a time, Heck! Even according to yourself, in the same email, I'm not understanding it wrong! I've asked you this before - would you stop wrongly telling people they're wrong, please? Would you please just stop and think could it be me who is misunderstanding this? Could you please just rephrase yourself I think you may be mistaken. Whenever it is *you* who is mistaken, you are always assertively and authoritatively so. This makes it harder for people to question or challenge you, and it ensures those you misadvise will waste their time with greater determination. Well, Alan knows what he's on about, and he said this definitely - there was no doubt in his statement. Not only that, it's just plain annoying to be told one is wrong when one is not. Stroller.
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31 July 2013, at 19:24, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: ... If you use systemd, all the files installed in /etc/init.d (except functions.sh) don't actually do nothing. In English don't actually do nothing means do something; i.e. don't actually do anything != don't actually do nothing. I was using (on purpose) the exact same sentence that Stroller used. I believe he's German; I'm Mexican. I'm English. Stroller.
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Stroller strol...@stellar.eclipse.co.uk wrote: On 31 July 2013, at 19:24, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: ... If you use systemd, all the files installed in /etc/init.d (except functions.sh) don't actually do nothing. In English don't actually do nothing means do something; i.e. don't actually do anything != don't actually do nothing. I was using (on purpose) the exact same sentence that Stroller used. I believe he's German; I'm Mexican. I'm English. Oh, sorry; I thought I saw your email host ending with .de. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] ata6: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x4000000 action 0xe frozen
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Thanasis thana...@asyr.hopto.org wrote:
Early during booting phase, dmesg shows:
[0.515651] ata6: SATA max UDMA/133 abar m8192@0xfdefe000 port
0xfdefe180 irq 17
[0.833387] ata6: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 300)
But later, it reports lots like the following stanza:
[164362.715469] ata6: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x400
action 0xe frozen
[164362.715474] ata6: irq_stat 0x0040, connection status changed
[164362.715479] ata6: SError: { DevExch }
[164362.715490] ata6: hard resetting link
[164363.433615] ata6: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 300)
[164363.446934] ata6: EH complete
Is it related to a disk drive, and if so, is there a way to know which
drive is on ata6?
PS: There are two drives attached to the system, reported by dmesg like so:
[0.872490] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 156301488 512-byte logical blocks:
(80.0 GB/74.5 GiB)
[0.874828] sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] 488397168 512-byte logical blocks: (250
GB/232 GiB)
There are a few approaches to try figuring it out explained here:
http://serverfault.com/questions/244944/linux-ata-errors-translating-to-a-device-name
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Stroller strol...@stellar.eclipse.co.uk wrote: On 31 July 2013, at 19:09, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 12:56 PM, Stroller strol...@stellar.eclipse.co.uk wrote: On 31 July 2013, at 18:23, Alan McKinnon wrote: ... Whinging about systemd binaries being installed is valid, but whinging about some data files is not. Anyone who does is letting their OCD show in ways they really should be keeping private. Hmmmn, it's a bit freaking weird - if I'm understanding correctly some of the statements made here about systemd - that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything. If you use systemd, all the files installed in /etc/init.d (except functions.sh) don't actually do nothing. Right, which is a bit freakin' odd, because on most every previous distro and other *nix system, that's where the system administrator goes to start and stop services. If they're not used, in this case, I don't think they should be installed. /etc/init.d is wholly different from /usr/share/package-name/examples There are many other directories on the system where it's no problem to have some idle, unused, wasted files, but /etc/init.d has long been an important directory. That was one of the reasons I started the gentoo-systemd-only overlay; if you used systemd, and tried to run /etc/init.d/whatever start, the results would vary from annoying to catastrophic. Nowadays you get the following warning: * You are attempting to run an openrc service on a * system which openrc did not boot. * You may be inside a chroot or you may have used * another initialization system to boot this system. * In this situation, you will get unpredictable results! * If you really want to do this, issue the following command: * touch /run/openrc/softlevel So it's pretty harmless. I believe the same applies for the files in /etc/init.d (or /usr/lib/systemd/system) that for the files in /etc/cron.daily, or /etc/bash_completion.d. They should be installed unconditionally. If you don't like it, INSTALL_MASK'd them. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31 July 2013, at 20:03, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Stroller strol...@stellar.eclipse.co.uk wrote: On 31 July 2013, at 19:24, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: ... If you use systemd, all the files installed in /etc/init.d (except functions.sh) don't actually do nothing. In English don't actually do nothing means do something; i.e. don't actually do anything != don't actually do nothing. I was using (on purpose) the exact same sentence that Stroller used. I believe he's German; I'm Mexican. I'm English. Oh, sorry; I thought I saw your email host ending with .de. It's no problem. Stroller.
Re: [gentoo-user] ata6: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x4000000 action 0xe frozen
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 09:11:22PM +0300, Thanasis wrote:
Early during booting phase, dmesg shows:
[0.515651] ata6: SATA max UDMA/133 abar m8192@0xfdefe000 port
0xfdefe180 irq 17
[0.833387] ata6: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 300)
But later, it reports lots like the following stanza:
[164362.715469] ata6: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x400
action 0xe frozen
[164362.715474] ata6: irq_stat 0x0040, connection status changed
[164362.715479] ata6: SError: { DevExch }
[164362.715490] ata6: hard resetting link
[164363.433615] ata6: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 300)
[164363.446934] ata6: EH complete
Is it related to a disk drive, and if so, is there a way to know which
drive is on ata6?
PS: There are two drives attached to the system, reported by dmesg like so:
[0.872490] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 156301488 512-byte logical blocks:
(80.0 GB/74.5 GiB)
[0.874828] sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] 488397168 512-byte logical blocks: (250
GB/232 GiB)
Short and sweet... bad SATA cable, bad controller, or bad drive.
Long and detailed later.
--
Happy Penguin Computers ')
126 Fenco Drive ( \
Tupelo, MS 38801 ^^
supp...@happypenguincomputers.com
662-269-2706 662-205-6424
http://happypenguincomputers.com/
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting
[gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo is so AWESOME
On 1/08/2013 04:34, Michael Orlitzky wrote: It seems a little rude to pop in, address them personally, and ask them each if they'd devote months of their time towards mentoring me. (Doing so can pressure someone into agreeing to something he doesn't want to do, or makes him reject you personally which many people find awkward.) I definitely understand that. I wonder if it would help if we had a page where developers could register their interest in being a mentor.
Re: [gentoo-user] [~amd64] Some possibly (?) helpful hints re the big gnome-3.8 update
On Wed, 31 Jul 2013 13:43:55 -0400, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: The wiki says to emerge --ask --changed-use --deep @world One could make small additions/changes, but there is a large one that is not clear. Should you have --update ? --changed-use will re-emerge any packages affected by the changed flags, and update any of those for which new versions exist. --update will also update any other packages on your system, unaffected by the switch to systemd, for which updates are available. I think the Wiki advice is wise, leave the other updates until you have gone through the systemd conversion and made everything is working. Adding extra changes increases the chance of things going wrong, and the number of paces you have to look if they do. -- Neil Bothwick Sir! Romulan warbird decloaki»®õ÷üÁ NO CARRIER signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31/07/2013 20:54, Stroller wrote: On 31 July 2013, at 19:09, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 12:56 PM, Stroller strol...@stellar.eclipse.co.uk wrote: On 31 July 2013, at 18:23, Alan McKinnon wrote: ... Whinging about systemd binaries being installed is valid, but whinging about some data files is not. Anyone who does is letting their OCD show in ways they really should be keeping private. Hmmmn, it's a bit freaking weird - if I'm understanding correctly some of the statements made here about systemd - that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything. If you use systemd, all the files installed in /etc/init.d (except functions.sh) don't actually do nothing. Right, which is a bit freakin' odd, because on most every previous distro and other *nix system, that's where the system administrator goes to start and stop services. If they're not used, in this case, I don't think they should be installed. /etc/init.d is wholly different from /usr/share/package-name/examples There are many other directories on the system where it's no problem to have some idle, unused, wasted files, but /etc/init.d has long been an important directory. True, but this one is an oddity. The ebuild for the daemon installs those files, and the ebuild doesn't know when you change your mind about a service manager. If you omitted the init scripts, you get to remerge all your daemon packages just to get them. Yuck. And that's just crappy design. You *could* have them stored in /usr/share somewhere and eselect service-manager copies them around when changes are made, but that's just extra brittle layers of complexity for no good reason. A much better solution is something like a service daemon start|stop|reload wrapper which RH/Fedora/Ubuntu et al have been doing for like ages. It's not really any different to using rc-update instead of fiddling with classic SysV init symlinks. A presumably the sysadmin knows what service manager he is using so knows whether to use classic init scripts or not. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On Wed, 31 Jul 2013 19:54:54 +0100, Stroller wrote: If you use systemd, all the files installed in /etc/init.d (except functions.sh) don't actually do nothing. Right, which is a bit freakin' odd, because on most every previous distro and other *nix system, that's where the system administrator goes to start and stop services. And that is why it is possible to have systemd and openrc installed at the same time, because they keep their service files in completely different locations. If they're not used, in this case, I don't think they should be installed. Which is where this thread started, should every daemon package have a couple of extra USE flags just to decide which, or both, of the service manager files to install. Then you'd probably need some eclass code to determine that you have at least one of those USE flags enabled, and maybe some code to forbid both on packages that don't work with both service managers installed. Or you could allow each server's ebuild to install one redundant small file, bearing in mind that a different file may be redundant for the next user. So let the ebuild install both files and those of use with excessive OCD tendencies, or very limited storage, can use INSTALL_MASK t exclude not only the redundant service files but a lot more besides. -- Neil Bothwick Octal: (n.) a base-8 counting system designed so that one hand may count upon the fingers of the other. Thumbs are not used, and the index finger is reserved for the 'carry.' signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31 July 2013, at 20:09, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: … if you used systemd, and tried to run /etc/init.d/whatever start, … Nowadays you get the following warning: * You are attempting to run an openrc service on a * system which openrc did not boot. *... So it's pretty harmless. Oh, nice. That's very acceptable, then - a clean migration path. Stroller.
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31/07/2013 20:54, Stroller wrote: On 31 July 2013, at 19:09, Alan McKinnon wrote: On 31/07/2013 19:56, Stroller wrote: On 31 July 2013, at 18:23, Alan McKinnon wrote: ... Whinging about systemd binaries being installed is valid, but whinging about some data files is not. Anyone who does is letting their OCD show in ways they really should be keeping private. Hmmmn, it's a bit freaking weird - if I'm understanding correctly some of the statements made here about systemd - that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything. You are understanding it wrong. No. According to Canek, I'm not. Only one of those sets of teeny weeny files can be used at a time, Heck! Even according to yourself, in the same email, I'm not understanding it wrong! I've asked you this before - would you stop wrongly telling people they're wrong, please? Would you please just stop and think could it be me who is misunderstanding this? Could you please just rephrase yourself I think you may be mistaken. Whenever it is *you* who is mistaken, you are always assertively and authoritatively so. This makes it harder for people to question or challenge you, and it ensures those you misadvise will waste their time with greater determination. Well, Alan knows what he's on about, and he said this definitely - there was no doubt in his statement. Not only that, it's just plain annoying to be told one is wrong when one is not. Stroller. Sure, I can do that. I read that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything different to what you intended. English can be very ambiguous. If we take You are understanding it wrong. out of my mail is the rest OK? -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 01:24:29PM -0500, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Bruce Hill da...@happypenguincomputers.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 01:09:03PM -0500, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: Hmmmn, it's a bit freaking weird - if I'm understanding correctly some of the statements made here about systemd - that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything. If you use systemd, all the files installed in /etc/init.d (except functions.sh) don't actually do nothing. If you use OpenRC, all the files installed in /urs/lib/systemd/system don't actually do nothing. Whichever you use (OpenRC or systemd), you will have files in both locations (actually, a bunch of them), and therefore one of those locations will have files that don't actually do nothing. Unless you use INSTALL_MASK, which is of course what this is all about. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México In English don't actually do nothing means do something; i.e. don't actually do anything != don't actually do nothing. I was using (on purpose) the exact same sentence that Stroller used. I believe he's German; I'm Mexican. Well, don't actually do anything is proper English; don't actually do nothing is not. -- Happy Penguin Computers ') 126 Fenco Drive ( \ Tupelo, MS 38801 ^^ supp...@happypenguincomputers.com 662-269-2706 662-205-6424 http://happypenguincomputers.com/ A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 06:31:36PM +, Grant Edwards wrote: In standard, formal English, that's correct. However, in some English dialects, a double-negatve does not equate to a positive. A double negative is simply a stronger negative. For example, don't do nothing is a stronger, more emphatic version of don't do anything. Languages like that have negative concord. Old and Middle English were that way, and some modern dialects of English are that way. This is incorrect -- don't do nothing, do not _do_nothing_ means do _something_, and don't do anything means just what it says, Do not do _anything_. -- Happy Penguin Computers ') 126 Fenco Drive ( \ Tupelo, MS 38801 ^^ supp...@happypenguincomputers.com 662-269-2706 662-205-6424 http://happypenguincomputers.com/ A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 01:22:21PM -0500, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: acero ~ # du -sh /usr/share/man 82M /usr/share/man acero ~ # du -sh /usr/lib/systemd/ 3.6M /usr/lib/systemd/ And /usr/share/doc is 2.5G in my laptop. That's due to USE=doc rather than USE=-doc -- Happy Penguin Computers ') 126 Fenco Drive ( \ Tupelo, MS 38801 ^^ supp...@happypenguincomputers.com 662-269-2706 662-205-6424 http://happypenguincomputers.com/ A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting
Re: [gentoo-user] ata6: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x4000000 action 0xe frozen
on 07/31/2013 10:06 PM Paul Hartman wrote the following: There are a few approaches to try figuring it out explained here: http://serverfault.com/questions/244944/linux-ata-errors-translating-to-a-device-name Looking into /sys/dev/block it seems like /dev/sda is on ata1 and /dev/sdb is on ata2, and since there is nothing else attached to the system, the ata6 problem may be related to a controller (as Bruce said), and hopefully not a disk drive.
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31 July 2013, at 20:38, Alan McKinnon wrote: ... Heck! Even according to yourself, in the same email, I'm not understanding it wrong! I've asked you this before - would you stop wrongly telling people they're wrong, please? Would you please just stop and think could it be me who is misunderstanding this? Could you please just rephrase yourself I think you may be mistaken. Whenever it is *you* who is mistaken, you are always assertively and authoritatively so. This makes it harder for people to question or challenge you, and it ensures those you misadvise will waste their time with greater determination. Well, Alan knows what he's on about, and he said this definitely - there was no doubt in his statement. Not only that, it's just plain annoying to be told one is wrong when one is not. Sure, I can do that. I read that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything different to what you intended. English can be very ambiguous. If we take You are understanding it wrong. out of my mail is the rest OK? The problem with the rest of that message was that, although accurate, it stemmed from the assumption that someone else must have misunderstood. A similar explanation had already been given in this thread - I'd read that, and that's why I was responding. Had you instead asked what do you mean? or why does that bother you? you would have given me the opportunity to clarify. Had I shown a misunderstanding upon further elaboration, that would been your opportunity to demonstrate your wisdom. Everyone here respects your knowledge and experience, it just feels like you're in such a rush to be helpful that you assume someone else must've screwed up. Stroller.
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31/07/2013 23:22, Stroller wrote: On 31 July 2013, at 20:38, Alan McKinnon wrote: ... Heck! Even according to yourself, in the same email, I'm not understanding it wrong! I've asked you this before - would you stop wrongly telling people they're wrong, please? Would you please just stop and think could it be me who is misunderstanding this? Could you please just rephrase yourself I think you may be mistaken. Whenever it is *you* who is mistaken, you are always assertively and authoritatively so. This makes it harder for people to question or challenge you, and it ensures those you misadvise will waste their time with greater determination. Well, Alan knows what he's on about, and he said this definitely - there was no doubt in his statement. Not only that, it's just plain annoying to be told one is wrong when one is not. Sure, I can do that. I read that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything different to what you intended. English can be very ambiguous. If we take You are understanding it wrong. out of my mail is the rest OK? The problem with the rest of that message was that, although accurate, it stemmed from the assumption that someone else must have misunderstood. A similar explanation had already been given in this thread - I'd read that, and that's why I was responding. Had you instead asked what do you mean? or why does that bother you? you would have given me the opportunity to clarify. Had I shown a misunderstanding upon further elaboration, that would been your opportunity to demonstrate your wisdom. Everyone here respects your knowledge and experience, it just feels like you're in such a rush to be helpful that you assume someone else must've screwed up. This might sound a bit weird, but I type like I speak. I never developed a distinct writing style different from a spoken style, and people who know me in person comment on it often. And I don't proof-read enough either. My bad. I don't have any of these problems with face-to-face conversation, but it doesn't work too good over email. I'm not unaware of how I probably come across, and I'm working on it. Admittedly I'm not having a huge amount of success just yet, but I am working on it. Several smart folk tell me it takes time. Are we OK on this for now, or is there more to discuss? -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] ata6: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x4000000 action 0xe frozen
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Thanasis thana...@asyr.hopto.org wrote:
Early during booting phase, dmesg shows:
[0.515651] ata6: SATA max UDMA/133 abar m8192@0xfdefe000 port
0xfdefe180 irq 17
[0.833387] ata6: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 300)
But later, it reports lots like the following stanza:
[164362.715469] ata6: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x400
action 0xe frozen
[164362.715474] ata6: irq_stat 0x0040, connection status changed
[164362.715479] ata6: SError: { DevExch }
[164362.715490] ata6: hard resetting link
[164363.433615] ata6: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 300)
[164363.446934] ata6: EH complete
Is it related to a disk drive, and if so, is there a way to know which
drive is on ata6?
PS: There are two drives attached to the system, reported by dmesg like so:
[0.872490] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 156301488 512-byte logical blocks:
(80.0 GB/74.5 GiB)
[0.874828] sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] 488397168 512-byte logical blocks: (250
GB/232 GiB)
If no disks are attached, I wonder if something is probing it?
I checked my dmesg and every time I plug in my eSATA enclosure, I see
this very similar message:
[156541.724580] ata7: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x404
action 0xe frozen
[156541.724587] ata7: irq_stat 0x0040, connection status changed
[156541.724593] ata7: SError: { CommWake DevExch }
[156541.724604] ata7: hard resetting link
[156551.725559] ata7: softreset failed (device not ready)
[156551.725567] ata7: hard resetting link
(and then a bunch of lines initializing all of the disks in the enclosure).
Re: [gentoo-user] [~amd64] Some possibly (?) helpful hints re the big gnome-3.8 update
On Wed, Jul 31 2013, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: I apologize for all the questions, but one still remains. The wiki says to emerge --ask --changed-use --deep @world One could make small additions/changes, but there is a large one that is not clear. Should you have --update ? Thank you canek and neil. allan
Re: [gentoo-user] ata6: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x4000000 action 0xe frozen
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:17:02PM +0300, Thanasis wrote: on 07/31/2013 10:06 PM Paul Hartman wrote the following: There are a few approaches to try figuring it out explained here: http://serverfault.com/questions/244944/linux-ata-errors-translating-to-a-device-name Looking into /sys/dev/block it seems like /dev/sda is on ata1 and /dev/sdb is on ata2, and since there is nothing else attached to the system, the ata6 problem may be related to a controller (as Bruce said), and hopefully not a disk drive. Sorry I don't have time to reply atm. If either drive has errors continuing, please change the SATA cable for a new one. Or, at least, reseat them, and aftewards report results. -- Happy Penguin Computers ') 126 Fenco Drive ( \ Tupelo, MS 38801 ^^ supp...@happypenguincomputers.com 662-269-2706 662-205-6424 http://happypenguincomputers.com/ A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31 July 2013, at 22:43, Alan McKinnon wrote: ... Are we OK on this for now, or is there more to discuss? Yes, that's great. I'm glad we can be open and honest when we've got these kinds of problems. On other occasions I've worried that you might have driven away someone who was seeking help here, but I've felt like it wasn't my place to intervene. The only advice I can perhaps give you is to read the question twice and hesitate before replying. If you wait an hour before hitting reply, maybe you'll be less likely to do so with your initial certainty. Stroller.
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 31 July 2013, at 20:28, Alan McKinnon wrote: Right, which is a bit freakin' odd, because on most every previous distro and other *nix system, that's where the system administrator goes to start and stop services. If they're not used, in this case, I don't think they should be installed. /etc/init.d is wholly different from /usr/share/package-name/examples There are many other directories on the system where it's no problem to have some idle, unused, wasted files, but /etc/init.d has long been an important directory. True, but this one is an oddity. The ebuild for the daemon installs those files, and the ebuild doesn't know when you change your mind about a service manager. If you omitted the init scripts, you get to remerge all your daemon packages just to get them. Yuck. In general, and personally, I would regard that as an acceptable compromise, for a migration that only needs to be carried out once. Each month we might upgrade numerous packages on our Gentoo systems, I don't think it's that ugly to reinstall a few packages just once for something major like this. On a binary distro this doesn't arise because they say we'll be sticking with init.d throughout 10.x, and with 11.0 we'll start using systemd. In Gentoo my objections are rendered moot by Canek's explanation that systemd replaces the init.d function helpers with a message that says hey, init.d isn't used by this system, so that those scripts exit gracefully. I find this quite an elegant migration path. Stroller.
[gentoo-user] Re: gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
On 07/31/2013 11:09 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote: There's an idea floating around that openrc could use systemd unit files but it's still just an idea. I must have crossed the line into grumpy-old-man-hood. That idea is insane. Someone is willing to re-write udev to use Lennart's config files but not Lennart's systemd binary? Go figure.
[gentoo-user] Re: [Preliminary report] Gnome-3.8 update works with openrc :)
On 07/29/2013 06:04 PM, walt wrote: I'm going to test cinnamon next, and I'll post results in a day or two. Sad to report that gentoo's cinnamon-1.6.7-r2 is out of date :( Arch linux installs gnome-3.8 and cinnamon-1.8.8-2, which work fairly well together but not perfectly. The reason cinnamon-1.8.x doesn't meet my needs perfectly is that the developers of cinnamon panel applets are lagging a bit behind. That's just the nature of open-source sigh. Meanwhile the gnome devs, damn their eyes, continue to rip out stuff that I use and depend on every day! Gnome-3.8 just stepped over the line by removing gnome-panel completely, thereby removing the gnome-panel applets I depend on, without providing replacements for them. G! Gnome-3.8 and systemd have a lot in common, I think. There is nothing wrong with either one except that they are still works in progress, and I want my gnome2 back because it did everything I need to do, and gnome3 just continues to rip stuff out. (I'm sure it will be okay eventually.) Thanks for listening patiently to my complaints, and have a nice day ;)
Re: [gentoo-user] Recommendation for CPU type in QEMU?
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:45:48AM +0100, Kerin Millar wrote Please provide the content of /proc/cpuinfo on the host. The first one is my shiney almost new desktop (Dell Inspiron 660) and the second one is my hot backup (more like emergency backup, 6-year-old Dell Dimension 530). I'll be on the new machine unless it breaks. But I do want to be able to port the QEMU VM to the older machine as part of its hot backup status. On any other distro, it wouldn't matter, but I have -march=native in make.conf, so I do have to worry about keeping binaries compatable. If I build for Intel Core 2 Duo CPU E4600 on both machines, would I be losing noticable performance? Right now, it's just one Windows program that I'll be running occasionally. So I'd rather trade off a bit less speed on the new machine, versus compatability issues. I also prefer to be able to scp the VM disk images to the backup machine, rather than having to do a separate install on each machine. processor : 0 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 58 model name : Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3330 CPU @ 3.00GHz stepping: 9 microcode : 0x15 cpu MHz : 2993.981 cache size : 6144 KB physical id : 0 siblings: 4 core id : 0 cpu cores : 4 apicid : 0 initial apicid : 0 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 13 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx rdtscp lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good nopl xtopology nonstop_tsc aperfmperf eagerfpu pni pclmulqdq dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr pdcm pcid sse4_1 sse4_2 x2apic popcnt tsc_deadline_timer aes xsave avx f16c rdrand lahf_lm ida arat epb xsaveopt pln pts dtherm tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority ept vpid fsgsbase smep erms bogomips: 5987.96 clflush size: 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: processor : 0 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 15 model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E4600 @ 2.40GHz stepping: 13 microcode : 0xa1 cpu MHz : 2400.000 cache size : 2048 KB physical id : 0 siblings: 2 core id : 0 cpu cores : 2 apicid : 0 initial apicid : 0 fdiv_bug: no hlt_bug : no f00f_bug: no coma_bug: no fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 10 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe nx lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts aperfmperf pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr pdcm lahf_lm dtherm bogomips: 4788.45 clflush size: 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: -- Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org I don't run desktop environments; I run useful applications
Re: [gentoo-user] which VM do you recommend?
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 07:40:36AM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote On 2013-07-30 8:30 PM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: Why do you need vmware tools? From the host, execute... ssh root@guest /sbin/poweroff Two reasons this isn't sufficient... 1. Extended power outage If my UPS sends a shutdown command to the host, I (obviously) want it to safely shutdown ALL running VMs. 2. Manual host shutdown I have my hosts configured so that if I press/release the power button, the host goes through a full power down process. I (obviously) want this process to also initiate safe shutdowns on all running VM's. I do not want to have to SSH in and manually run a command to uncooperative VM's first, I want to just be able to press/release the power button, and have the host safely shut down all running VMs, then itself. ***IT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE MANUAL*** I have a 1-line script that shuts down my hot-backup machine, which I bring up once a month for updates. Here it is... #!/bin/bash ssh waltdnes@d531 sudo /sbin/poweroff ...with an appropriate entry in /etc/sudoers.d. In your case, you can have your script run like so (assuming the VM's port 22 is redirected to 60022) #!/bin/bash ssh -P 60022 root@localhost /sbin/poweroff I repeat, this is scriptable, and does not have to be manual. -- Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org I don't run desktop environments; I run useful applications
[gentoo-user] how to tell you are using systemd?
Can a shell script tell if systemd is the init? I have a couple of places where it would be nice to know this. Thanks in advance for any suggestions. -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici cov...@ccs.covici.com
Re: [gentoo-user] how to tell you are using systemd?
在 2013-8-1 上午10:26， cov...@ccs.covici.com写道： Can a shell script tell if systemd is the init? I have a couple of places where it would be nice to know this. Thanks in advance for any suggestions. Check /proc/1/comm or something like that, IIRC...
Re: [gentoo-user] how to tell you are using systemd?
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Wang Xuerui idontknw.w...@gmail.com wrote: 在 2013-8-1 上午10:26， cov...@ccs.covici.com写道： Can a shell script tell if systemd is the init? I have a couple of places where it would be nice to know this. Thanks in advance for any suggestions. Check /proc/1/comm or something like that, IIRC... Yep: if grep -q systemd /proc/1/comm; then echo systemd else echo not systemd fi Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] which VM do you recommend?
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 09:40:04PM -0400, Walter Dnes wrote ssh -P 60022 root@localhost /sbin/poweroff Oops... that should read... ssh -p 60022 root@localhost /sbin/poweroff scp uses uppercase P for port number. It goes without saying, but I probably should say it; ssh needs to have login via keyauthentication enabled, and the appropriate key set up. -- Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org I don't run desktop environments; I run useful applications
