My FC33->FC34 bind-chroot upgrade notes

[ToddAndMargo via users]

Hi All,

Thank you all for the enormous help in me getting bind-chroot
working after upgrading to Fedora 34.  Here are my notes.

Hope this helps someone else.

-T


Broken bind-chroot repair after upgrading to Fedora 34:


# means root
$ means user

1) temporary workaround so you can surf the Internet for help:

   Change /etc/resolv.conf to
   # search your_domain
   # nameserver your_IP
   nameserver 208.67.222.123


2) in their "ultimate wisdom", the rpm maintainers disabled
   the service after upgrading it.  See the following bug I posted
   on 2021-06-14:

   Bind-chroot upgrade from FC3 to FC34 disables the service 
breaking a server

   https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1972000

   To repair:

  # systemctl enable  named-chroot.service
  # systemctl start   named-chroot.service

   Other useful command(s):

  # systemctl stopnamed-chroot.service
  # systemctl status  named-chroot.service
  # systemctl restart named-chroot.service


3) the new version of bind-chroot enables "dns security validation" by 
default.


   To repair, place the following in your named.conf:

  by itself at the bottom:
  include "/etc/named.root.key";

  add the following to your "options" block:
  dnssec-validation yes;


   Other useful command(s):

   Validation check:

 $ delv @$IP com ds
 $ delv @208.67.222.123 com ds
 ; fully validated
 ...


4) check (and repair) your configurations:

named.conf:

 # named-checkconf -l -t /var/named/chroot /etc/named.conf

 Note: if you get the following error message,

   `/etc/named.root.key:1: option 'managed-keys' is 
deprecated`


   it is a bug in named-checkconf.

   See the following I posted on 2021-06-14.  Just ignore 
the message.


   named-checkconf gives confusing depreciated 
'managed-keys' message

   https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1972022

Zones:
 # named-checkzone -t directory domain filename

 Note: the "domain name" in the following comes from named.conf
   zone, not `domainname`.  For example:

zone "abc.local" {
   type master;
   file "slaves/rent-a-nerd.hosts";
   allow-update { key DHCP_UPDATER; };
 };
 The "domain" is the name of the "zone".  "abc.local" in the above

 # named-checkzone -t /var/named/chroot/var/named/slaves 
abc.local abc.hosts

 zone abc.local/IN: loaded serial 265
 OK

 # named-checkzone -t /var/named/chroot/var/named/slaves 
255.168.192.in-addr.arpa abc.hosts.rev

 zone 255.168.192.in-addr.arpa/IN: loaded serial 213
 OK


5) restart the bind-chroot service:

   Change /etc/resolv.conf back to
  search your_domain
  nameserver your_IP
  # nameserver 208.67.222.123


 # systemctl restart named-chroot.service

   check for and repair errors with:

 $ systemctl status named-chroot.service
 # tail -f /var/log/messages


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: 'managed-keys' is deprecated ??

[ToddAndMargo via users]

On 6/14/21 9:42 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

On 6/14/21 9:16 PM, Todd Zullinger wrote:

ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

Placing
    include "/etc/named.root.key";
in my bind.conf, give me the following error


# named-checkconf -l -t /var/named/chroot /etc/named.conf
/etc/named.root.key:1: option 'managed-keys' is deprecated

What do I use it its place?  (The Duck is failing me.)


The fine manual¹ covers this:

 managed-keys

 Is identical to trust-anchors; this option is
 deprecated in favor of trust-anchors with the
 initial-key keyword, and may be removed in a future
 release.

¹ https://bind9.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reference.html#index-0

Bind has some very thorough documentation.  It's even
easily searchable if you view it online.  That's better than
any general search engine.


Hi Todd,

Then I do believe I just tripped across a bug:

# cat --number named.root.key
  1    trust-anchors {

Line 1 is NOT 'managed-keys'.

Or perhaps it was just a warning to confuse
the dickens out of the uninitiated?

-T


Just posted:

named-checkconf gives confusing depreciated 'managed-keys' message

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1972022
-T
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: 'managed-keys' is deprecated ??

[ToddAndMargo via users]

On 6/14/21 9:16 PM, Todd Zullinger wrote:

ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

Placing
include "/etc/named.root.key";
in my bind.conf, give me the following error


# named-checkconf -l -t /var/named/chroot /etc/named.conf
/etc/named.root.key:1: option 'managed-keys' is deprecated

What do I use it its place?  (The Duck is failing me.)


The fine manual¹ covers this:

 managed-keys

 Is identical to trust-anchors; this option is
 deprecated in favor of trust-anchors with the
 initial-key keyword, and may be removed in a future
 release.

¹ https://bind9.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reference.html#index-0

Bind has some very thorough documentation.  It's even
easily searchable if you view it online.  That's better than
any general search engine.


Hi Todd,

Then I do believe I just tripped across a bug:

# cat --number named.root.key
 1  trust-anchors {

Line 1 is NOT 'managed-keys'.

Or perhaps it was just a warning to confuse
the dickens out of the uninitiated?

-T
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: 'managed-keys' is deprecated ??

[Todd Zullinger]

ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
> Placing
>include "/etc/named.root.key";
> in my bind.conf, give me the following error
> 
> 
> # named-checkconf -l -t /var/named/chroot /etc/named.conf
> /etc/named.root.key:1: option 'managed-keys' is deprecated
> 
> What do I use it its place?  (The Duck is failing me.)

The fine manual¹ covers this:

managed-keys

Is identical to trust-anchors; this option is
deprecated in favor of trust-anchors with the
initial-key keyword, and may be removed in a future
release.

¹ https://bind9.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reference.html#index-0

Bind has some very thorough documentation.  It's even
easily searchable if you view it online.  That's better than
any general search engine.

-- 
Todd


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: remove doublets

[Oğuz Ersen via users]

This preserves line order:

$ cat file.txt
dd
aa
bb
cc
bb
aa

$ awk '!line[$0]++' file.txt
dd
aa
bb
cc

--
Best Regards, Oğuz
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: FC34 broke my bind

[ToddAndMargo via users]

# host google.com  127.0.0.1
Using domain server:
Name: 127.0.0.1
Address: 127.0.0.1#53
Aliases:

Host google.com  not found: 2(SERVFAIL)
[root@rn6 etc]# systemctl status named-chroot.service
● named-chroot.service - Berkeley Internet Name Domain (DNS)
...
Jun 13 01:40:05 rn6.abc.local named[32171]: broken trust chain
resolving
'google.com/A/IN ': 208.67.220.220#53 


Found in /var/log/messages:

Jun 13 01:43:12 rn6 named[32171]: validating google.com/A
: bad cache hit
(com/DS)
Jun 13 01:43:12 rn6 named[32171]: broken trust chain resolving
'google.com/A/IN ': 208.67.220.220#53


I added this to named.conf, options block:
dnssec-validation no;

and it fixed it.

How do I fix it without  dnssec-validation no; ?

-T


On 6/14/21 7:36 AM, Petr Mensik wrote:
dnssec-validation yes; should work, ensure include 
"/etc/named.root.key"; is in named.conf too. dnssec-validation auto; 
would work even without it.


It requires your forwarders to supply DNSSEC records. Check with:
dig @$IP +dnssec com ds

Or with validation:
delv @$IP com ds

Replace $IP with any IP you want to check, be it localhost, or OpenDNS 
servers. Should be recursive.


It has to include RRSIG also. All serious resolvers always include 
DNSSEC records.


You can use "rndc flushtree com" to flush that name from the cache. It 
should work after another query. If it happens again try changing 
forwarder servers to different set.


Cheers,
Petr



Hi Petr,

That fixed it.  I was missing the named.root.key.

Thank you!

-T

Open DNS's family friendly DNS server

$ delv @208.67.222.123 com ds
; fully validated
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

'managed-keys' is deprecated ??

[ToddAndMargo via users]

Hi All,

FC34
bin 9.16

Placing
   include "/etc/named.root.key";
in my bind.conf, give me the following error


# named-checkconf -l -t /var/named/chroot /etc/named.conf
/etc/named.root.key:1: option 'managed-keys' is deprecated

What do I use it its place?  (The Duck is failing me.)

Many thanks,
-T

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Live and PlayStation 4?

[ToddAndMargo via users]

On 6/14/21 7:45 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:

On 6/14/21 8:34 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:


Duck Duck Go.   Google censors political speech not to
its liking and it spies on you mercilessly.


This is why I use startpage.com.  It keeps no record of your IP address 
so that nobody can tie your searches to you.  YMMV, but that's my 
personal preference.


And why I adore ublock-orgin and Brave Browser
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Live and PlayStation 4?

[Joe Zeff]

On 6/14/21 8:34 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:


Duck Duck Go.   Google censors political speech not to
its liking and it spies on you mercilessly.


This is why I use startpage.com.  It keeps no record of your IP address 
so that nobody can tie your searches to you.  YMMV, but that's my 
personal preference.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Live and PlayStation 4?

[ToddAndMargo via users]

On 6/14/21 4:38 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 6/14/21 2:24 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

Anyone know if you can boot up a PlayStation
4 with a Fedora Live USB stick?


Did you try checking with Google first?  I see various videos and 
articles about it.  (Not specifically Fedora, so you'll have to adjust 
as necessary.)


Duck Duck Go.   Google censors political speech not to
its liking and it spies on you mercilessly.

And the Duck was confusing.  Told me with other Linux
OS's I needed special this and that.


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Live and PlayStation 4?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 6/14/21 2:24 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

Anyone know if you can boot up a PlayStation
4 with a Fedora Live USB stick?


Did you try checking with Google first?  I see various videos and 
articles about it.  (Not specifically Fedora, so you'll have to adjust 
as necessary.)

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: test message

[Frank McCormick]

The problem is still not resolved. I was dealing with the
weekend staff at my provider so we'll see if thing are  any better with 
the weekday staff :)


The strange thing today is that the list administrator flushed the queue 
this morning and several messages came in but nothing since then.



As far as switching to say Gmail that is something I am definitely 
considering. I am using my providers main address
less and less to try to avoid these problems. I guess the way is to set 
up a seperate inbox for fedora list mail. I am using imap with Google so 
that shouldn't be a problem.



___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Live and PlayStation 4?

[ToddAndMargo via users]

On 6/14/21 2:24 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

Anyone know if you can boot up a PlayStation
4 with a Fedora Live USB stick?


FC34 stick

And will it connect to the WiFi?
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Live and PlayStation 4?

[ToddAndMargo via users]

Anyone know if you can boot up a PlayStation
4 with a Fedora Live USB stick?
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Easiest way to move from BTRFS to EXT4 without losing data

[Sreyan Chakravarty]

On Tue, 15 Jun 2021, 1:27 am Garry T. Williams, 
wrote:

> On Monday, June 14, 2021 3:50:57 PM EDT Joe Zeff wrote:
> > On 6/14/21 1:12 PM, Sreyan Chakravarty wrote:
> > > I mean if I backup from BTRFS can I restore it into ext4 ?
> >
> > Your backup software neither knows nor cares how your filesystem is
> > formatted, so of course you can.  Unless, of course, you're cloning the
> > partition, in which case a restore will overwrite the partition with the
> > original formatting.
>
> I'm pretty sure Chris was correct.  You system is set up to boot from
> the btrfs file system -- not ext4.  Changing the file system will
> result in needed changes in boot loader, fstab, etc.
>
> Restoring to an ext4 file system will not result in a bootable system.
>

How does this sound?

I make a complete tar backup of my system.

Reinstall F33 to ext4.

Restore that tar, of course fstab and crypttab needs to be corrected.


Will this work? Does it make any sense?

Regards
Sreyan Chakravarty

>
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Easiest way to move from BTRFS to EXT4 without losing data

[Chris Murphy]

On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 1:57 PM Garry T. Williams  wrote:
>
> On Monday, June 14, 2021 3:50:57 PM EDT Joe Zeff wrote:
> > On 6/14/21 1:12 PM, Sreyan Chakravarty wrote:
> > > I mean if I backup from BTRFS can I restore it into ext4 ?
> >
> > Your backup software neither knows nor cares how your filesystem is
> > formatted, so of course you can.  Unless, of course, you're cloning the
> > partition, in which case a restore will overwrite the partition with the
> > original formatting.
>
> I'm pretty sure Chris was correct.  You system is set up to boot from
> the btrfs file system -- not ext4.  Changing the file system will
> result in needed changes in boot loader, fstab, etc.
>
> Restoring to an ext4 file system will not result in a bootable system.

Strictly speaking, restoring to a *new* file system will result in an
unbootable system. The FS UUID has changed, all the changes for
assembly need to be reflected in /etc/fstab, and the bootloader
configuration files (a minimum of four).  Even if this were LVM/ext4
being backedup and restored to LVM/ext4 it's the same problem and same
number of steps to fix all of it after the restore.

And to my knowledge no tool knows how to do that except the installer.
And the installer only knows how to do it in the context of a clean
install. Not a repair.


-- 
Chris Murphy
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Easiest way to move from BTRFS to EXT4 without losing data

[Garry T. Williams]

On Monday, June 14, 2021 3:50:57 PM EDT Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 6/14/21 1:12 PM, Sreyan Chakravarty wrote:
> > I mean if I backup from BTRFS can I restore it into ext4 ?
> 
> Your backup software neither knows nor cares how your filesystem is 
> formatted, so of course you can.  Unless, of course, you're cloning the 
> partition, in which case a restore will overwrite the partition with the 
> original formatting.

I'm pretty sure Chris was correct.  You system is set up to boot from
the btrfs file system -- not ext4.  Changing the file system will
result in needed changes in boot loader, fstab, etc.

Restoring to an ext4 file system will not result in a bootable system.

-- 
Garry T. Williams


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Easiest way to move from BTRFS to EXT4 without losing data

[Joe Zeff]

On 6/14/21 1:12 PM, Sreyan Chakravarty wrote:


I mean if I backup from BTRFS can I restore it into ext4 ?


Your backup software neither knows nor cares how your filesystem is 
formatted, so of course you can.  Unless, of course, you're cloning the 
partition, in which case a restore will overwrite the partition with the 
original formatting.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Easiest way to move from BTRFS to EXT4 without losing data

[Joe Zeff]

On 6/14/21 12:05 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:

The easiest to*explain*  is:
* backup /home
* clean install the OS using Custom partitioning's "LVM" preset
partitioning scheme
* restore /home from backup


Or, as I do, because I don't use LVM, do a clean install, using the 
current partitioning scheme and leaving /home as is, and having the 
backup of /home for emergencies.  So far, I've never needed it, but it's 
always good to know it's there, Just In Case.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Easiest way to move from BTRFS to EXT4 without losing data

[Sreyan Chakravarty]

On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 12:31 AM Sreyan Chakravarty 
wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 11:35 PM Chris Murphy 
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 10:38 AM Sreyan Chakravarty 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > BTRFS is not working out for me.
>> >
>> > What will be the easiest way to move to EXT4 ?
>> >
>> > I am on Fedora 33.
>> >
>> > Please note I also want to backup my root filesystem and not just my
>> home.
>> >
>>
>> I think if you ask 10 people you'll get 10 different answers.
>>
>> The easiest to *explain* is:
>> * backup /home
>> * clean install the OS using Custom partitioning's "LVM" preset
>> partitioning scheme
>> * restore /home from backup
>>
>> And that's because the installer does a lot of work you otherwise have
>> to do manually: creates and assembles the new setup, writes out the
>> correct bootloader and fstab information, etc.
>>
>> If you know how to do these things manually already, then that path is
>> probably easier than a clean install, and having to reinstall some
>> things and adjust settings. Explaining all that in detail is tedious,
>> but maybe someone knows of a guide how to do all that.
>>
>> But this process is the same whether the source is btrfs, xfs or
>> already ext4 and you need to migrate it to new file systems/layout.
>>
>
> A reinstall is not exactly what I am looking for.
>
> A reinstall will mean that I have reinstall all my applications like Zoom,
> Vim, etc.
>
> Is there any way I can restore my root partition also ?
>

What about partclone and TimeShift ?

Does it copy filesystem information also ?

I mean if I backup from BTRFS can I restore it into ext4 ?

-- 
Regards,
Sreyan Chakravarty
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Easiest way to move from BTRFS to EXT4 without losing data

[Sreyan Chakravarty]

On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 11:35 PM Chris Murphy 
wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 10:38 AM Sreyan Chakravarty 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > BTRFS is not working out for me.
> >
> > What will be the easiest way to move to EXT4 ?
> >
> > I am on Fedora 33.
> >
> > Please note I also want to backup my root filesystem and not just my
> home.
> >
>
> I think if you ask 10 people you'll get 10 different answers.
>
> The easiest to *explain* is:
> * backup /home
> * clean install the OS using Custom partitioning's "LVM" preset
> partitioning scheme
> * restore /home from backup
>
> And that's because the installer does a lot of work you otherwise have
> to do manually: creates and assembles the new setup, writes out the
> correct bootloader and fstab information, etc.
>
> If you know how to do these things manually already, then that path is
> probably easier than a clean install, and having to reinstall some
> things and adjust settings. Explaining all that in detail is tedious,
> but maybe someone knows of a guide how to do all that.
>
> But this process is the same whether the source is btrfs, xfs or
> already ext4 and you need to migrate it to new file systems/layout.
>

A reinstall is not exactly what I am looking for.

A reinstall will mean that I have reinstall all my applications like Zoom,
Vim, etc.

Is there any way I can restore my root partition also ?

-- 
Regards,
Sreyan Chakravarty
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Easiest way to move from BTRFS to EXT4 without losing data

[Chris Murphy]

On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 10:38 AM Sreyan Chakravarty  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> BTRFS is not working out for me.
>
> What will be the easiest way to move to EXT4 ?
>
> I am on Fedora 33.
>
> Please note I also want to backup my root filesystem and not just my home.
>

I think if you ask 10 people you'll get 10 different answers.

The easiest to *explain* is:
* backup /home
* clean install the OS using Custom partitioning's "LVM" preset
partitioning scheme
* restore /home from backup

And that's because the installer does a lot of work you otherwise have
to do manually: creates and assembles the new setup, writes out the
correct bootloader and fstab information, etc.

If you know how to do these things manually already, then that path is
probably easier than a clean install, and having to reinstall some
things and adjust settings. Explaining all that in detail is tedious,
but maybe someone knows of a guide how to do all that.

But this process is the same whether the source is btrfs, xfs or
already ext4 and you need to migrate it to new file systems/layout.


-- 
Chris Murphy
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Easiest way to move from BTRFS to EXT4 without losing data

[Sreyan Chakravarty]

Hi,

BTRFS is not working out for me.

What will be the easiest way to move to EXT4 ?

I am on Fedora 33.

Please note I also want to backup my root filesystem and not just my home.

-- 
Regards,
Sreyan Chakravarty
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: FC34 broke my bind

[Petr Mensik]

dnssec-validation yes; should work, ensure include "/etc/named.root.key";
is in named.conf too. dnssec-validation auto; would work even without it.

It requires your forwarders to supply DNSSEC records. Check with:
dig @$IP +dnssec com ds

Or with validation:
delv @$IP com ds

Replace $IP with any IP you want to check, be it localhost, or OpenDNS
servers. Should be recursive.

It has to include RRSIG also. All serious resolvers always include DNSSEC
records.

You can use "rndc flushtree com" to flush that name from the cache. It
should work after another query. If it happens again try changing forwarder
servers to different set.

Cheers,
Petr

On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 10:52 AM ToddAndMargo via users <
users@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> On 6/13/21 1:29 AM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
> > On 6/12/21 11:39 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
> >> Oh poop!  Figured it out!
> >>
> >> # systemctl status named-chroot.service
> >> ● named-chroot.service - Berkeley Internet Name Domain (DNS)
> >>   Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/named-chroot.service;
> >> enabled; vendor preset: disabled)
> >>   Active: active (running) since Sat 2021-06-12 14:49:05 PDT; 8h ago
> >>  Process: 11410 ExecStartPre=/bin/bash -c if [ !
> >> "$DISABLE_ZONE_CHECKING" == "yes" ]; then /usr/sbin/named-checkconf -t
> >> /var/named/chroot -z "$NAMEDCONF"; else echo "Checki>
> >>  Process: 11446 ExecStart=/usr/sbin/named -u named -c ${NAMEDCONF}
> >> -t /var/named/chroot $OPTIONS (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
> >> Main PID: 11452 (named)
> >>Tasks: 14 (limit: 19025)
> >>   Memory: 141.5M
> >>  CPU: 14.612s
> >>   CGroup: /system.slice/named-chroot.service
> >>   └─11452 /usr/sbin/named -u named -c /etc/named.conf -t
> >> /var/named/chroot
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I was starting the wrong named !!!
> >>
> >> # systemctl disable daemon_name.service
> >> Fixed the problem
> >>
> >> Freaking FC34 upgrade disabled named-chroot on me!
> >>
> >> Sorry for putting your guys through all this.  Thank
> >> you all for the tips!
> >>
> >> -T
> > Okay, now I am REALLY confused!!!
> >
> >
> > # host 8.8.8.8 127.0.0.1
> > Using domain server:
> > Name: 127.0.0.1
> > Address: 127.0.0.1#53
> > Aliases:
> >
> > Host 8.8.8.8.in-addr.arpa not found: 2(SERVFAIL)
> >
> >
> >
> > This is my /etc/resolv.conf (same as in FC33):
> >
> > # cat /etc/resolv.conf
> >
> > # Generated by NetworkManager
> > search abc.local
> > nameserver 127.0.0.1
> > # nameserver 8.8.8.8
> >
> > Now what ?!?!?!
>
>
> A workaround i at the bottom
>
>
> # host google.com 127.0.0.1
> Using domain server:
> Name: 127.0.0.1
> Address: 127.0.0.1#53
> Aliases:
>
> Host google.com not found: 2(SERVFAIL)
> [root@rn6 etc]# systemctl status named-chroot.service
> ● named-chroot.service - Berkeley Internet Name Domain (DNS)
>   Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/named-chroot.service;
> enabled; vendor preset: disabled)
>   Active: active (running) since Sun 2021-06-13 01:39:12 PDT; 1min
> 12s ago
>  Process: 32167 ExecStartPre=/bin/bash -c if [ !
> "$DISABLE_ZONE_CHECKING" == "yes" ]; then /usr/sbin/named-checkconf -t
> /var/named/chroot -z "$NAMEDCONF"; else echo "Checki>
>  Process: 32170 ExecStart=/usr/sbin/named -u named -c ${NAMEDCONF}
> -t /var/named/chroot $OPTIONS (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
> Main PID: 32171 (named)
>Tasks: 14 (limit: 19025)
>   Memory: 97.2M
>  CPU: 180ms
>   CGroup: /system.slice/named-chroot.service
>   └─32171 /usr/sbin/named -u named -c /etc/named.conf -t
> /var/named/chroot
>
> Jun 13 01:40:05 rn6.abc.local named[32171]: network unreachable
> resolving 'com/DS/IN': 2001:503:c27::2:30#53
> Jun 13 01:40:05 rn6.abc.local named[32171]: network unreachable
> resolving 'com/DS/IN': 2001:500:1::53#53
> Jun 13 01:40:05 rn6.abc.local named[32171]: network unreachable
> resolving 'com/DS/IN': 2001:500:2::c#53
> Jun 13 01:40:05 rn6.abc.local named[32171]: network unreachable
> resolving 'com/DS/IN': 2001:500:200::b#53
> Jun 13 01:40:05 rn6.abc.local named[32171]: network unreachable
> resolving 'com/DS/IN': 2001:500:12::d0d#53
> Jun 13 01:40:05 rn6.abc.local named[32171]: network unreachable
> resolving 'com/DS/IN': 2001:500:9f::42#53
> Jun 13 01:40:05 rn6.abc.local named[32171]: network unreachable
> resolving 'com/DS/IN': 2001:7fd::1#53
> Jun 13 01:40:05 rn6.abc.local named[32171]: validating com/DS: no valid
> signature found
> Jun 13 01:40:05 rn6.abc.local named[32171]: no valid RRSIG resolving
> 'com/DS/IN': 192.36.148.17#53
> Jun 13 01:40:05 rn6.abc.local named[32171]: broken trust chain resolving
> 'google.com/A/IN': 208.67.220.220#53
>
>
> Found in /var/log/messages:
>
> Jun 13 01:43:12 rn6 named[32171]: validating google.com/A: bad cache hit
> (com/DS)
> Jun 13 01:43:12 rn6 named[32171]: broken trust chain resolving
> 'google.com/A/IN': 208.67.220.220#53
>
>
> I added this to named.conf, options block:
>dnssec-validation no;
>
> 

Re: test message

[Tim via users]

Tim:
>> If you use an external one (e.g. gmail, yahoo, or many others),
>> you're not subject your provider's whims...

George N. White III:
> Or the whims of people who spend their time reporting content they
> don't like to blocklists.   The downside of the external email
> providers is that your data gets used for their benefit.   I try to
> limit use of gmail to email lists, e.g., only content that is widely
> available in list archives, etc., but my personal email is with a
> community organization that also hosts websites for local
> organizations.

I agree.  I used to have several email addresses, but discovered that
you just get more spam that way (to each address).  Now my method is
like yours.  For list mail, I'll use a service that was often a source
of spam, such as yahoo, so they can deal with any spam that public list
mail attracts (I think this is karma, as well as practical).  And my
personal mail is handled by a completely separate service.

-- 
 
uname -rsvp
Linux 5.11.21-100.fc32.x86_64 #1 SMP Fri May 14 18:03:50 UTC 2021 x86_64
 
Boilerplate:  All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted.
I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list.
 
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fwd: BTRFS partition corrupted after deleting files in /home

[Sreyan Chakravarty]

On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 12:23 PM Chris Murphy 
wrote:

>
> > 2) Since there is a high likelihood that my filesystem is not
> > completely fixed, then when I take a backup using partclone, dd or
> > clonezilla won't those errors be carried over ?
>
> Yes. I recommend a Pika Backup for a simple GUI solution to back
> things up. It doesn't have any file system specific dependencies. I'm
> sure if you look through the list archive for backups or start a new
> thread with your requirements you'll get more suggestions.
>
> >
> > Even if I buy a new drive and restore the backup, I still might get
> crashes.
>
> You definitely want a backup with its own independent file system. A
> dd/ddrescue/clone is mainly for troubleshooting and disaster recovery.
> It's not a great backup because a backup you want easy to keep up to
> date. Daily or weekly, depending on your tolerance for loss.
>


Hi Chris,

Resurrecting this thread after a long time. Hope you all are doing well.

I mainly have some questions regarding Pika Backup and what I can do with
it:

1) Can I back up my whole system using Pika/Borg Backup ?

Can I install Fedora 33 on LVM(thick) and Ext4, and get back my root
system as it were with Pika Backup ?

2) Or is it that I can just get back my /home directory, everything else
will have to be installed and setup ?

The reason I am asking these questions is because BTRFS did not work out
for me.

I want to go back to LVM(thick) with ext4. That gave no problems.

-- 
Regards,
Sreyan Chakravarty


-- 
Regards,
Sreyan Chakravarty
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: test message

[George N. White III]

On Mon, 14 Jun 2021 at 02:43, Tim via users 
wrote:

> On Sun, 2021-06-13 at 15:11 -0400, Frank McCormick wrote:
> > My provider is refusing messages from this list.
> > I'm chccking to see if that's still true.
> >
>
> Well, it worked.  But might I suggest not using your service provider's
> email.
>

Good advice.

Service providers can get blocklisted when a spammer manages to get
a (stolen?) account or when they host web sites for organizations that
some individuals find objectionable.   Many professional organizations
and university alumni groups offer free email forwarding.  This provides
a stable address you can provide to others, while allowing you to quickly
switch to a different provider.


> If you use an external one (e.g. gmail, yahoo, or many others), you're
> not subject your provider's whims.  And if, in the future, you don't
> like your service provider you're free to leave without having to care
> that people won't be able to contact you at your email address any
> more.
>

Or the whims of people who spend their time reporting content they
don't like to blocklists.   The downside of the external email providers
is that your data gets used for their benefit.   I try to limit use of
gmail
to email lists, e.g., only content that is widely available in list
archives,
etc., but my personal email is with a community organization that also
hosts websites for local organizations.  People who dislike one of
these groups sometimes generate complaints that result in blocklisting,
and my outgoing mails to family and friends get blocked.   I investigated
one instance and found that the blocklist was maintained by a company
that Google purchased.  So far, gmail has not been blocked, despite
being a source of spam (probably sent from stolen accounts).

-- 
George N. White III
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Long wait for start job

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Mon, 2021-06-14 at 11:10 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Sun, 2021-06-13 at 14:38 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > I actually use a udev rule for idle spin down:
> > 
> >  $ cat /etc/udev/rules.d/69-hdparm.rules
> > ACTION=="add", SUBSYSTEM=="block", \
> >   KERNEL=="sd*[!0-9]", \
> >   ENV{ID_SERIAL_SHORT}=="WDZ47F0A", \
> >   RUN+="/usr/sbin/hdparm -B 100 -S 252 /dev/disk/by-id/wwn-
> > 0x5000c500a93cae8a"
> > $
> 
> BTW, the reason I don't do this is that one of the drives doesn't
> accept the APM spin-down command:
> 
> $ sudo hdparm -B 100 -S 24 /dev/disk/by-id/wwn-0x50014ee058f952e1
> 
> /dev/disk/by-id/wwn-0x50014ee058f952e1:
>  setting Advanced Power Management level to 0x64 (100)
>  HDIO_DRIVE_CMD failed: Input/output error
>  setting standby to 24 (2 minutes)
>  APM_level  = not supported

Turns out that the problem isn't with the -S but with the -B. I can
just set the standby time directly on this drive, so I'm going to try
your udev idea instead of my elaborate dock-watch workaround.

poc
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Long wait for start job

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Mon, 2021-06-14 at 18:02 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 14/06/2021 17:52, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > On Mon, 2021-06-14 at 03:42 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> > > On 13/06/2021 23:57, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > > I did the same and it has made a big difference, i.e. I no
> > > > longer
> > > > have
> > > > the very long delay waiting for usb-settle.
> > > > 
> > > > I still don't know why my external dock is being mounted at
> > > > boot,
> > > > but I
> > > > can live with it for now.
> > > I've not thought about these issues you're having in quite some
> > > time.  But, while servicing a cat
> > > at 3AM I started to wonder.
> > > 
> > > If you were to disable the dock-watch.service does the boot
> > > process
> > > complete quickly?
> > > 
> > I tried 'systemctl disable dock-watch' but for some reason it's
> > being
> > re-enabled on boot, so that has no effect.
> 
> Are you saying that after doing a "systemctl disable" it shows up as
> "enabled" after
> a reboot?
> 
> I wonder if getting started is due to Wants=dock-watch.service in
> raid.mount.
> 
> 
> > I physically disconnected the dock and it does make a big
> > difference,
> > so there's no doubt where the problem lies.
> > 
> > > If it does, might there be a way to start the service after the
> > > boot
> > > process is completed?
> > > 
> > If I can manage to actually disable dock-watch from starting
> > automatically then presumably I could run it from crontab using an
> > '@reboot' line.
> 
> For a "test" you may want to try masking the service.

I commented out the Wants line in raid.mount and removed the dock-
watch.service file (masking it gave an error). This effectively removed
the boot delay.

Now I'm considering whether to junk the whole dock-watch idea and use
Chris's suggestion of a udev rule to just set the drives' standby
values directly.

poc
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Long wait for start job

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Sun, 2021-06-13 at 14:38 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> I actually use a udev rule for idle spin down:
> 
>  $ cat /etc/udev/rules.d/69-hdparm.rules
> ACTION=="add", SUBSYSTEM=="block", \
>   KERNEL=="sd*[!0-9]", \
>   ENV{ID_SERIAL_SHORT}=="WDZ47F0A", \
>   RUN+="/usr/sbin/hdparm -B 100 -S 252 /dev/disk/by-id/wwn-
> 0x5000c500a93cae8a"
> $

BTW, the reason I don't do this is that one of the drives doesn't
accept the APM spin-down command:

$ sudo hdparm -B 100 -S 24 /dev/disk/by-id/wwn-0x50014ee058f952e1

/dev/disk/by-id/wwn-0x50014ee058f952e1:
 setting Advanced Power Management level to 0x64 (100)
 HDIO_DRIVE_CMD failed: Input/output error
 setting standby to 24 (2 minutes)
 APM_level  = not supported

poc
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Long wait for start job

[Ed Greshko]

On 14/06/2021 17:52, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:

On Mon, 2021-06-14 at 03:42 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:

On 13/06/2021 23:57, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:

I did the same and it has made a big difference, i.e. I no longer
have
the very long delay waiting for usb-settle.

I still don't know why my external dock is being mounted at boot,
but I
can live with it for now.

I've not thought about these issues you're having in quite some
time.  But, while servicing a cat
at 3AM I started to wonder.

If you were to disable the dock-watch.service does the boot process
complete quickly?


I tried 'systemctl disable dock-watch' but for some reason it's being
re-enabled on boot, so that has no effect.


Are you saying that after doing a "systemctl disable" it shows up as "enabled" 
after
a reboot?

I wonder if getting started is due to Wants=dock-watch.service in raid.mount.



I physically disconnected the dock and it does make a big difference,
so there's no doubt where the problem lies.


If it does, might there be a way to start the service after the boot
process is completed?


If I can manage to actually disable dock-watch from starting
automatically then presumably I could run it from crontab using an
'@reboot' line.


For a "test" you may want to try masking the service.

--
Remind me to ignore comments which aren't germane to the thread.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Long wait for start job

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Mon, 2021-06-14 at 03:42 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 13/06/2021 23:57, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > I did the same and it has made a big difference, i.e. I no longer
> > have
> > the very long delay waiting for usb-settle.
> > 
> > I still don't know why my external dock is being mounted at boot,
> > but I
> > can live with it for now.
> 
> I've not thought about these issues you're having in quite some
> time.  But, while servicing a cat
> at 3AM I started to wonder.
> 
> If you were to disable the dock-watch.service does the boot process
> complete quickly?
> 

I tried 'systemctl disable dock-watch' but for some reason it's being
re-enabled on boot, so that has no effect.

I physically disconnected the dock and it does make a big difference,
so there's no doubt where the problem lies.

> If it does, might there be a way to start the service after the boot
> process is completed?
> 

If I can manage to actually disable dock-watch from starting
automatically then presumably I could run it from crontab using an
'@reboot' line.

poc


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Long wait for start job

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Sun, 2021-06-13 at 19:06 -0400, Go Canes wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 5:30 PM Patrick O'Callaghan
>  wrote:
> > 
> > On Sun, 2021-06-13 at 13:44 -0400, Go Canes wrote:
> > > > I still don't know why my external dock is being mounted at
> > > > boot,
> > > > but I
> > > > can live with it for now.
> > > > 
> > > > poc
> > > 
> > > Maybe pvscan wants to check the drive(s) to see if it is a LVM
> > > volume?
> > >  Not sure how to confirm/refute, or how to tell LVM to ignore the
> > > USB
> > > dock if that is the case.
> > 
> > I'm not using LVM for any of my filesystems, only BTRFS (other than
> > /boot/efi of course).
> > 
> > poc
> 
> But LVM doesn't *know* you aren't using LVM until *after* it has
> scanned all of your disks to see if any of them are LVM PVs.  Hence I
> was wondering if pvscan is trying to access the disks in the dock,
> eventually the disks spin up, pvscan sees that they are not LVM, and
> then the boot proceeds.
> 
> I could also be way off base here.  Just trying to think of anything
> that in my limited experience would cause boot to (attempt to) access
> the disks in your USB dock.

OK, however spinning up the disks doesn't take more than 5-10 seconds
and I assume pvscan would be almost instantaneous, so I don't think
that's the problem.

poc
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure