Re: [gentoo-user] eject and util-linux blocker
On Wednesday 18 March 2015 04:33:18 Dale wrote: Well, /boot doesn't change to much, plus it is fairly small anyway. The root partition doesn't change a whole lot either. /usr tho, it tends to grow. If nothing else, it grows as KDE grows but it grows with the number of kernels I have too. Of course, other packages grows too. /var is good to have on a separate partition since sometimes a log file can grow to some outrageous sizes. I've actually had that happen twice over the years. Something goes goofy and fills up a log file until it is seriously huge and fills up /var. /home is separate for obvious reasons plus mine is really huge. 1.8TBs right now. It started out that it was advised to set up partitions like this. Then LVM came along and made it even more reasonable since I can grow the partitions that need it. The init thingy because of some packages being moved to /usr didn't hurt the cause I guess either. So, I have it set up the way I do because for my setup, it is the best way. I can adjust things without having to have spare drives to move things around with. Yes, I see all that, except for /usr. It does grow, but under some sort of control, which (it seems to me) isn't enough cause to submit to all the indignities involved in getting your init thingy working. Here's the relevant part of my fstab: /dev/sda1 /boot ext2 relatime,noauto 1 2 /dev/md5 / ext4 relatime1 1 /dev/vg7/home /home ext4 relatime1 2 /dev/vg7/common/home/prh/common ext4 relatime1 3 /dev/vg7/boinc /home/prh/boincext4 relatime1 2 /dev/vg7/virt /home/prh/.VirtualBox ext4 relatime1 3 /dev/vg7/portage /var/portage ext4 relatime1 2 /dev/vg7/packages /usr/portage/packages ext4 relatime1 3 /dev/vg7/distfiles /usr/portage/distfiles ext4 relatime1 3 /dev/vg7/local /usr/local ext4 relatime1 3 /dev/vg7/opt /opt ext4 relatime1 2 /dev/vg7/tmp /tmp ext2 relatime1 2 /dev/vg7/vartmp/mnt/scratch/ ext2 relatime1 2 I ought to move /var to its own partition, for the reason you gave, and it's also time I put /boot back on /dev/md1 where it used to be (/dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1). -- Rgds Peter.
Re: [gentoo-user] getting blocks for system and world update not resolved
On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 05:11:25 +0100, Tamer Higazi wrote: Hi people! I have problems getting these blocks at a system update solved... I executed: emerge --backtrack=30 -fuDN @system @world ... ... [blocks B ] perl-core/ExtUtils-Install-1.670.0 (perl-core/ExtUtils-Install-1.670.0 is blocking virtual/perl-ExtUtils-Install-1.670.0) [blocks B ] media-libs/libpostproc (media-libs/libpostproc is blocking media-video/ffmpeg-1.2.6-r1) [blocks B ] perl-core/Parse-CPAN-Meta-1.441.400 (perl-core/Parse-CPAN-Meta-1.441.400 is blocking virtual/perl-Parse-CPAN-Meta-1.441.400) [blocks B ] media-video/ffmpeg:0 (media-video/ffmpeg:0 is blocking media-video/libav-9.17, media-libs/libpostproc-10.20140517-r1) [blocks B ] perl-core/ExtUtils-Manifest-1.630.0 (perl-core/ExtUtils-Manifest-1.630.0 is blocking virtual/perl-ExtUtils-Manifest-1.630.0-r1) [blocks B ] perl-core/version-0.990.900 (perl-core/version-0.990.900 is blocking virtual/perl-version-0.990.900-r1) [blocks B ] perl-core/CPAN-Meta-YAML-0.12.0 (perl-core/CPAN-Meta-YAML-0.12.0 is blocking virtual/perl-CPAN-Meta-YAML-0.12.0) eselect news list Then read the item titled ffmpeg/libav conflict management. The perl issue has been covered several times already, including once a few days ago. Remove all references to perl-core from your world file emerge --deselect y $(qlist -IC perl-core) -- Neil Bothwick The trouble with the world is that everybody in it is three drinks behind. pgpFhy7NB8w8o.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] eject and util-linux blocker
Peter Humphrey wrote: On Tuesday 17 March 2015 16:07:29 Dale wrote: I don't have / on lvm. /boot and / are on regular partitions. Everything else, /usr, /var and /home, are on lvm. Keep in mind, I was trying to avoid that init thingy. I remember something of that discussion, but not why you wanted to keep /usr on a separate partition. Why is that? Is it one of those sacred cows that just growed like Topsy?:) Well, /boot doesn't change to much, plus it is fairly small anyway. The root partition doesn't change a whole lot either. /usr tho, it tends to grow. If nothing else, it grows as KDE grows but it grows with the number of kernels I have too. Of course, other packages grows too. /var is good to have on a separate partition since sometimes a log file can grow to some outrageous sizes. I've actually had that happen twice over the years. Something goes goofy and fills up a log file until it is seriously huge and fills up /var. /home is separate for obvious reasons plus mine is really huge. 1.8TBs right now. It started out that it was advised to set up partitions like this. Then LVM came along and made it even more reasonable since I can grow the partitions that need it. The init thingy because of some packages being moved to /usr didn't hurt the cause I guess either. So, I have it set up the way I do because for my setup, it is the best way. I can adjust things without having to have spare drives to move things around with. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] eject and util-linux blocker
On Tuesday 17 March 2015 16:07:29 Dale wrote: I don't have / on lvm. /boot and / are on regular partitions. Everything else, /usr, /var and /home, are on lvm. Keep in mind, I was trying to avoid that init thingy. I remember something of that discussion, but not why you wanted to keep /usr on a separate partition. Why is that? Is it one of those sacred cows that just growed like Topsy?:) -- Rgds Peter.
Re: [gentoo-user] eject and util-linux blocker
On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 08:54:40 +, Peter Humphrey wrote: I don't have / on lvm. /boot and / are on regular partitions. Everything else, /usr, /var and /home, are on lvm. Keep in mind, I was trying to avoid that init thingy. I remember something of that discussion, but not why you wanted to keep /usr on a separate partition. Why is that? Is it one of those sacred cows that just growed like Topsy?:) In order to avoid an init thingy[tm]. If you want root on LVM you need a thingy thingy, a separate root avoids that. I used to run a similar configuration for the same reason, separate /root on ext4 but no separate /boot. Nowadays, I don't use LVM and I've grown to like dracut. -- Neil Bothwick If someone with multiple personalities threatens to kill himself, is it considered a hostage situation? pgpqk4vYJYc2v.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] eject and util-linux blocker
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: Alan McKinnon wrote: You are reading it wrong. That means: util-linux needs to be built with USE=static-libs because lvm2 is already built with USE=static None of which explains why you originally built lvm2 that way. It was because emerge told me it needed it for some reason. It is very rare that I just put something in package.use on my own. This was probably required by some script for mounting /usr or by some initramfs you were using before you switched to dracut. Dracut is pretty advanced by initramfs standards. It handles dynamic linking just fine (bundling libraries/etc as needed). Simpler initramfs tools and such don't, and to make things easier there is a tendency to build anything needed to mount root/usr static so that it is certain to run correctly. You can look inside an initramfs by doing the following: mkdir /tmp/ext cd /tmp/ext zcat /boot/initramfs-3.18.9-gentoo.img | cpio -i find usr find lib64 ... There is quite a bit of dynamic linking going on in a typical dracut initramfs, and quite a bit of stuff installed in /usr it utilizes either to mount root/usr or just for operator convenience (it is nice to be able to use less in an emergency shell, and so on). It is also really easy to tell dracut to add stuff to an initramfs. I tweaked my btrfs module to add btrfstune to the initramfs so that I could easily enable skinny metadata without a boot CD. In some sense, you could think of an initramfs as the rescue CD you always have ready (though I also keep systemrescuecd handy on a USB stick). -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] eject and util-linux blocker
Peter Humphrey wrote: On Wednesday 18 March 2015 04:33:18 Dale wrote: Well, /boot doesn't change to much, plus it is fairly small anyway. The root partition doesn't change a whole lot either. /usr tho, it tends to grow. If nothing else, it grows as KDE grows but it grows with the number of kernels I have too. Of course, other packages grows too. /var is good to have on a separate partition since sometimes a log file can grow to some outrageous sizes. I've actually had that happen twice over the years. Something goes goofy and fills up a log file until it is seriously huge and fills up /var. /home is separate for obvious reasons plus mine is really huge. 1.8TBs right now. It started out that it was advised to set up partitions like this. Then LVM came along and made it even more reasonable since I can grow the partitions that need it. The init thingy because of some packages being moved to /usr didn't hurt the cause I guess either. So, I have it set up the way I do because for my setup, it is the best way. I can adjust things without having to have spare drives to move things around with. Yes, I see all that, except for /usr. It does grow, but under some sort of control, which (it seems to me) isn't enough cause to submit to all the indignities involved in getting your init thingy working. Here's the relevant part of my fstab: /dev/sda1 /boot ext2 relatime,noauto 1 2 /dev/md5 / ext4 relatime1 1 /dev/vg7/home /home ext4 relatime1 2 /dev/vg7/common/home/prh/common ext4 relatime1 3 /dev/vg7/boinc /home/prh/boincext4 relatime1 2 /dev/vg7/virt /home/prh/.VirtualBox ext4 relatime1 3 /dev/vg7/portage /var/portage ext4 relatime1 2 /dev/vg7/packages /usr/portage/packages ext4 relatime1 3 /dev/vg7/distfiles /usr/portage/distfiles ext4 relatime1 3 /dev/vg7/local /usr/local ext4 relatime1 3 /dev/vg7/opt /opt ext4 relatime1 2 /dev/vg7/tmp /tmp ext2 relatime1 2 /dev/vg7/vartmp/mnt/scratch/ ext2 relatime1 2 I ought to move /var to its own partition, for the reason you gave, and it's also time I put /boot back on /dev/md1 where it used to be (/dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1). Well, since I set this rig up, I have had to grow /usr twice. The only reason I have not had to grow it recently is because I moved all the portage stuff to /var. In the past, I had to move everything to another drive, rework the partitions, move everything back and then hope for the best. With my current setup, I just grow the partition and carry on as usual, generally while I am doing stuff on the system since I don't think I even have to unmount the partitions. As I said, this is what works best for me. As long as it works, it is the way it is. I may later switch to the new btrfs, (sp?), but that may be a while. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] eject and util-linux blocker
On Wednesday 18 March 2015 11:14:43 Dale wrote: Well, since I set this rig up, I have had to grow /usr twice. The only reason I have not had to grow it recently is because I moved all the portage stuff to /var. In the past, I had to move everything to another drive, rework the partitions, move everything back and then hope for the best. With my current setup, I just grow the partition and carry on as usual, generally while I am doing stuff on the system since I don't think I even have to unmount the partitions. Seems I'm not getting through. Never mind - doesn't matter. As I said, this is what works best for me. As long as it works, it is the way it is. Indeed. To each his own. -- Rgds Peter.
Re: [gentoo-user] eject and util-linux blocker
Poncho wrote: On 18.03.2015 17:37, Rich Freeman wrote: [...] You can look inside an initramfs by doing the following: mkdir /tmp/ext cd /tmp/ext zcat /boot/initramfs-3.18.9-gentoo.img | cpio -i find usr find lib64 ... [...] dracut comes with the /usr/bin/lsinitrd tool. pretty convenient. With the -f option, you can print the contents of file as well. I thought there was a tool that just lists the contents. Things is, I'm not sure what I would be looking at. I figure the contents of some of the files is more important than whether it is there or not. I guess. I have a bad history with these init thingys. It was one reason I switched to Gentoo. Keep in mind, I switched way back in 2003 when it was rare that a init thingy was needed in Gentoo. It seems someone screwed that up. Anyway. I try to keep a few fall back plans around. Spare kernels etc. ;-) Dale :-) :-)
[gentoo-user] Re: Lisp is not Lisp is... ?
Meino.Cramer at gmx.de writes: Then I installed dev-lisp/gcl there (which compiles fine). You might want to cross-compile the codes and dependent codes on a x86 machine and move them over, as another test I'd first try by only setting the minimum you need to get the codes to compile. Then test and see if they work on the arm(target) as you expect with some know valid lisp codes. On SoC often operands are said to be supported, but it's in software only and that causes severe to critical timing problems when desired codes are actually run on the target. Find a working lisp for a common/similar arm chip, like R. pi? good-hunting, James
Re: [gentoo-user] eject and util-linux blocker
On 18.03.2015 17:37, Rich Freeman wrote: [...] You can look inside an initramfs by doing the following: mkdir /tmp/ext cd /tmp/ext zcat /boot/initramfs-3.18.9-gentoo.img | cpio -i find usr find lib64 ... [...] dracut comes with the /usr/bin/lsinitrd tool. pretty convenient. With the -f option, you can print the contents of file as well.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is this a bug in firefox-36.0?
On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 4:41:25 PM walt wrote: On 03/17/2015 04:49 PM, walt wrote: I get a certificate verification error when visiting https://www.att.com using firefox-36.0, but not when using chrome-41.0.2272.76. Thanks to all who replied. I'm surprised by the variety of different results you reported. (BTW, I'm running firefox-bin-36.0, so the behavior may be a bit different from the gentoo build.) FF will not even show me the secure att.com webpage. I get an entire html page with this (very big) error message: Secure Connection Failed An error occurred during a connection to www.att.com. The OCSP server experienced an internal error. (Error code: sec_error_ocsp_server_error) The page you are trying to view cannot be shown because the authenticity of the received data could not be verified. Please contact the website owners to inform them of this problem. That sounds more like a networking issue. Are you behind a firewall? Is it possible that you somehow blocked their OCSP server? Can you bypass the firewall for testing? It also looks like firefox caches the error: http://superuser.com/questions/755755/sec-error-ocsp-server-error-when-trying-to-open-a-https-page but you're having this issue for a while and more than one device now so it's not likely that it was a temporary problem. -- Fernando Rodriguez
Re: [gentoo-user] eject and util-linux blocker
On Wednesday 18 March 2015 13:12:47 Dale wrote: I switched way back in 2003 when it was rare that a init thingy was needed in Gentoo. It seems someone screwed that up. I still don't have one, nor do I foresee a need. I try to keep a few fall back plans around. Spare kernels etc. One old kernel has always been enough for me, together with the current one of course. -- Rgds Peter.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is this a bug in firefox-36.0?
On 03/18/2015 04:41 PM, walt wrote: On 03/17/2015 04:49 PM, walt wrote: I get a certificate verification error when visiting https://www.att.com using firefox-36.0, but not when using chrome-41.0.2272.76. Thanks to all who replied. I'm surprised by the variety of different results you reported. (BTW, I'm running firefox-bin-36.0, so the behavior may be a bit different from the gentoo build.) FF will not even show me the secure att.com webpage. I get an entire html page with this (very big) error message: Secure Connection Failed An error occurred during a connection to www.att.com. The OCSP server experienced an internal error. (Error code: sec_error_ocsp_server_error) The page you are trying to view cannot be shown because the authenticity of the received data could not be verified. Please contact the website owners to inform them of this problem. Am I the only one seeing this error message on firefox? I'll try compiling the gentoo version to see if the behavior is different. I'm using: # equery list firefox * Searching for firefox ... [IP-] [ ] www-client/firefox-36.0.1:0 (not the -bin) and I also get the triangle in the URL stating the website doesn't supply identify information. It does load for me, though. Dan
Re: [gentoo-user] Will a 64-bit-no-multilib machine cross-compile 32-bit code?
On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 9:56:12 PM Walter Dnes wrote: My situation... * I've dug up my ancient netbook, and got Gentoo re-installed on it * The cpu is a dual-core Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU Z520 * It's 32-bit only; YES! * Compiling just the Seamonkey binary (ignoring its dependancies) took 14 hours I obviously want to offload compiling to another machine. As per the subject, will a 64-bit no-multilb install be able to cross compile 32-bit code? I've done it with distcc by adding the -m32 option to cflags. I used a script (named after the compiler on the gentoo box) to call the compiler with the - m32 flag and placed on the PATH environment (just for the distccd service) before anything else and it worked. I got a 64 bit arch box to compile for a 32 bit gentoo (not nearly as fast as compiling locally on the arch box but much faster than the gentoo box). It should work similarly with other cross- compile scenarios. -- Fernando Rodriguez signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] [offtopic] GNU Root Gentoo on Android
Amazing and with real potential! I have partially updated the image but can't update python and some other packages because they want /dev/shm. The Android kernel uses /dev/ashmem with a different API to /dev/shm - other than a custom kernel, is there another workaround? BillK On 17 March 2015 2:17:14 am AWST, Urs Schütz u.sch...@bluewin.ch wrote: On 03/16/15 09:08, Helmut Jarausch wrote: Hi, I've installed GNU Root Gentoo on Android from Google Play on my Android-4.4.2 device. Does anybody know how to use it. Many thanks for a hint, Helmut Install GNURoot also. GnuRoot is necessary to unpack and start GNURoot Gentoo. Just follow the screenshots of GNURoot on Google Play. Urs
[gentoo-user] Re: Is this a bug in firefox-36.0?
On 03/17/2015 04:49 PM, walt wrote: I get a certificate verification error when visiting https://www.att.com using firefox-36.0, but not when using chrome-41.0.2272.76. Thanks to all who replied. I'm surprised by the variety of different results you reported. (BTW, I'm running firefox-bin-36.0, so the behavior may be a bit different from the gentoo build.) FF will not even show me the secure att.com webpage. I get an entire html page with this (very big) error message: Secure Connection Failed An error occurred during a connection to www.att.com. The OCSP server experienced an internal error. (Error code: sec_error_ocsp_server_error) The page you are trying to view cannot be shown because the authenticity of the received data could not be verified. Please contact the website owners to inform them of this problem. Am I the only one seeing this error message on firefox? I'll try compiling the gentoo version to see if the behavior is different.
[gentoo-user] Will a 64-bit-no-multilib machine cross-compile 32-bit code?
My situation... * I've dug up my ancient netbook, and got Gentoo re-installed on it * The cpu is a dual-core Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU Z520 * It's 32-bit only; YES! * Compiling just the Seamonkey binary (ignoring its dependancies) took 14 hours I obviously want to offload compiling to another machine. As per the subject, will a 64-bit no-multilb install be able to cross compile 32-bit code? -- Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org I don't run desktop environments; I run useful applications
Re: [gentoo-user] Will a 64-bit-no-multilib machine cross-compile 32-bit code?
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 10:27:05PM -0400, Fernando Rodriguez wrote On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 9:56:12 PM Walter Dnes wrote: My situation... * I've dug up my ancient netbook, and got Gentoo re-installed on it * The cpu is a dual-core Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU Z520 * It's 32-bit only; YES! * Compiling just the Seamonkey binary (ignoring its dependancies) took 14 hours I obviously want to offload compiling to another machine. As per the subject, will a 64-bit no-multilb install be able to cross compile 32-bit code? I've done it with distcc by adding the -m32 option to cflags. I used a script (named after the compiler on the gentoo box) to call the compiler with the - m32 flag and placed on the PATH environment (just for the distccd service) before anything else and it worked. I got a 64 bit arch box to compile for a 32 bit gentoo (not nearly as fast as compiling locally on the arch box but much faster than the gentoo box). It should work similarly with other cross- compile scenarios. Thanks. I'll probably be back with a bunch of questions. As a matter of fact, I already have one. The docs say that it does not work if the -march=native cflag is used. It says to use the output of... gcc -march=native -E -v - /dev/null 21 | grep cc1 ...omitting /usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.8.3/cc1 -E -quiet -v - I presume. So on the 64-bit host, I would go from... CFLAGS=-O2 -march=native -mfpmath=sse -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -fno-unwind-tables -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables ...to... CFLAGS=-O2 -march=core2 -mcx16 -msahf -mno-movbe -mno-aes -mno-pclmul -mno-popcnt -mno-abm -mno-lwp -mno-fma -mno-fma4 -mno-xop -mno-bmi -mno-bmi2 -mno-tbm -mno-avx -mno-avx2 -mno-sse4.2 -mno-sse4.1 -mno-lzcnt -mno-rtm -mno-hle -mno-rdrnd -mno-f16c -mno-fsgsbase -mno-rdseed -mno-prfchw -mno-adx -mfxsr -mno-xsave -mno-xsaveopt --param l1-cache-size=32 --param l1-cache-line-size=64 --param l2-cache-size=2048 -mtune=core2 -fstack-protector -mfpmath=sse -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -fno-unwind-tables -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables And on the target (netbook), I'd go to... CFLAGS=-O2 -march=atom -mno-cx16 -msahf -mmovbe -mno-aes -mno-pclmul -mno-popcnt -mno-abm -mno-lwp -mno-fma -mno-fma4 -mno-xop -mno-bmi -mno-bmi2 -mno-tbm -mno-avx -mno-avx2 -mno-sse4.2 -mno-sse4.1 -mno-lzcnt -mno-rtm -mno-hle -mno-rdrnd -mno-f16c -mno-fsgsbase -mno-rdseed -mno-prfchw -mno-adx -mfxsr -mno-xsave -mno-xsaveopt --param l1-cache-size=24 --param l1-cache-line-size=64 --param l2-cache-size=512 -mtune=atom -fstack-protector -mfpmath=sse -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -fno-unwind-tables -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables Is that correct (assuming that's my output)? -- Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org I don't run desktop environments; I run useful applications
Re: [gentoo-user] eject and util-linux blocker
Peter Humphrey wrote: On Wednesday 18 March 2015 13:12:47 Dale wrote: I switched way back in 2003 when it was rare that a init thingy was needed in Gentoo. It seems someone screwed that up. I still don't have one, nor do I foresee a need. I didn't have one until I recently rebooted and got a bunch of errors. After posting those here, it seems I need to have one. I don't like it one bit tho. I try to keep a few fall back plans around. Spare kernels etc. One old kernel has always been enough for me, together with the current one of course. Well, I clean them out every once in a while. I don't have a issue with having a plan G just in case. ;-) Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Will a 64-bit-no-multilib machine cross-compile 32-bit code?
On Thursday, March 19, 2015 12:20:26 AM Walter Dnes wrote: On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 10:27:05PM -0400, Fernando Rodriguez wrote On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 9:56:12 PM Walter Dnes wrote: My situation... * I've dug up my ancient netbook, and got Gentoo re-installed on it * The cpu is a dual-core Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU Z520 * It's 32-bit only; YES! * Compiling just the Seamonkey binary (ignoring its dependancies) took 14 hours I obviously want to offload compiling to another machine. As per the subject, will a 64-bit no-multilb install be able to cross compile 32-bit code? I've done it with distcc by adding the -m32 option to cflags. I used a script (named after the compiler on the gentoo box) to call the compiler with the - m32 flag and placed on the PATH environment (just for the distccd service) before anything else and it worked. I got a 64 bit arch box to compile for a 32 bit gentoo (not nearly as fast as compiling locally on the arch box but much faster than the gentoo box). It should work similarly with other cross- compile scenarios. Thanks. I'll probably be back with a bunch of questions. As a matter of fact, I already have one. The docs say that it does not work if the -march=native cflag is used. It says to use the output of... gcc -march=native -E -v - /dev/null 21 | grep cc1 ...omitting /usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.8.3/cc1 -E -quiet -v - I presume. So on the 64-bit host, I would go from... CFLAGS=-O2 -march=native -mfpmath=sse -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -fno- unwind-tables -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables ...to... CFLAGS=-O2 -march=core2 -mcx16 -msahf -mno-movbe -mno-aes -mno-pclmul -mno- popcnt -mno-abm -mno-lwp -mno-fma -mno-fma4 -mno-xop -mno-bmi -mno-bmi2 -mno- tbm -mno-avx -mno-avx2 -mno-sse4.2 -mno-sse4.1 -mno-lzcnt -mno-rtm -mno-hle - mno-rdrnd -mno-f16c -mno-fsgsbase -mno-rdseed -mno-prfchw -mno-adx -mfxsr - mno-xsave -mno-xsaveopt --param l1-cache-size=32 --param l1-cache-line-size=64 --param l2-cache-size=2048 -mtune=core2 -fstack-protector -mfpmath=sse -fomit- frame-pointer -pipe -fno-unwind-tables -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables And on the target (netbook), I'd go to... CFLAGS=-O2 -march=atom -mno-cx16 -msahf -mmovbe -mno-aes -mno-pclmul -mno- popcnt -mno-abm -mno-lwp -mno-fma -mno-fma4 -mno-xop -mno-bmi -mno-bmi2 -mno- tbm -mno-avx -mno-avx2 -mno-sse4.2 -mno-sse4.1 -mno-lzcnt -mno-rtm -mno-hle - mno-rdrnd -mno-f16c -mno-fsgsbase -mno-rdseed -mno-prfchw -mno-adx -mfxsr - mno-xsave -mno-xsaveopt --param l1-cache-size=24 --param l1-cache-line-size=64 --param l2-cache-size=512 -mtune=atom -fstack-protector -mfpmath=sse -fomit- frame-pointer -pipe -fno-unwind-tables -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables Is that correct (assuming that's my output)? The CFLAGS on the host won't be used so you don't need to change them. Now on the host create scripts with the exact full name of the compiler on the target and make distccd can find them (either put them on /usr/bin or make sure to add it's path to the PATH environment var for distccd, if you're using openrc I'm not sure if the init scripts allow it so you may have to start it manually or modify the scripts) and have them exec gcc with the -m32 switch. Make sure you have the same version of gcc selected on both boxes. -- Fernando Rodriguez
[gentoo-user] Re: Is this a bug in firefox-36.0?
On Tue, 17 Mar 2015 17:47:04 -0700 Daniel Frey djqf...@gmail.com wrote: On 03/17/2015 04:49 PM, walt wrote: I get a certificate verification error when visiting https://www.att.com using firefox-36.0, but not when using chrome-41.0.2272.76. Anyone else see the same with firefox-36? FWIW, I don't see an error with firefox-36.0.1 and nss-3.17.4 BTW, I tried the latest firefox in a Win7 virtual machine and I was shocked to see that firefox was updating itself when I was logged in as an unprivileged user (i.e. *not* an Administrator). Are the idiots at M$ *really* that stupid? They've learned nothing, apparently, since Win 95 :( Remove the 'Mozilla Maintenance Service' from Programs Features (or whatever it's called) and it won't auto update. Mozilla installs a privileged service that auto updates its software. It will still auto-update, but it won't do so silently -- without the service, automagic updates will trigger Windows' warning prompt. To just turn off autoupdate, there's a checkbox in the Firefox GUI.
Re: [gentoo-user] eject and util-linux blocker
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: I thought there was a tool that just lists the contents. Things is, I'm not sure what I would be looking at. An initramfs is just a root filesystem. init is /sbin/init unless the kernel is told otherwise. If you took your entire root filesystem, compressed it into a cpio archive, and put that in grub as your initramfs, then your entire distro would run from a ramdisk and you might not even notice the difference (well, assuming you had enough RAM). The only real magic with an initramfs is that it mounts your real root somewhere, then swaps it out for the real root: http://manpages.courier-mta.org/htmlman8/switch_root.8.html This is a bit like chroot, but the old root filesystem is deleted in the process (so that your initramfs does not consume any RAM once the system actually boots). I'm not sure exactly how dracut does it with systemd, since my understanding is that during shutdown systemd actually pivots back to the initramfs (which allows all filesystems to be cleanly unmounted instead of merely being mounted read-only). -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] Is this a bug in firefox-36.0?
On Wednesday 18 Mar 2015 03:53:57 Fernando Rodriguez wrote: On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 4:49:54 PM walt wrote: I get a certificate verification error when visiting https://www.att.com using firefox-36.0, but not when using chrome-41.0.2272.76. Anyone else see the same with firefox-36? BTW, I tried the latest firefox in a Win7 virtual machine and I was shocked to see that firefox was updating itself when I was logged in as an unprivileged user (i.e. *not* an Administrator). Are the idiots at M$ *really* that stupid? They've learned nothing, apparently, since Win 95 :( BTW, the Win7 firefox also flagged an error when visiting the web site I mentioned above, but the error was displayed so subtly that I would have missed it if I hadn't been looking for it specifically. Very bad behavior. Technically the issue is with att's SSL certificate. It may be that they got a cheap certificate (meaning it's provides encryption but the CA did not verificy that ATT is a legit company) or it may be an issue with the certificate. It doesn't give any warning for me, it just shows an exclamation next to the address and the latest chromium does the same (it shows a triangle) and it gives you more info: The identity of this website has been verified by Verizon Akamai SureSever CA G14-SHA1 but does not have public audit records. If you're concerned about it contact ATT and let them know. I also don't see a (pop-up) warning on Firefox 31.5.0 and Chromium 41.0.2272.76, but both browsers complain for two things by means of exclamation marks in their address bar: 1. Some components on the page (pictures) are not secure. It is common practice to load pictures from a picture library on a different server to where the main web page content is served, but they should secure all content with the same keys to avoid confusion. 2. The lack of Audit records for the wildcard certificate the site is using. This is a new security check and relates to certificate transparency, which aims to protect us from rogue or compromised CAs: http://www.certificate-transparency.org/what-is-ct -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
