[gentoo-user] media-sound/sweep and ALSA
I've got media-sound/sweep-0.9.3 with useflags alsa mp3 vorbis -ladspa -libsamplerate. I only want to edit files, not record. But I can't get sweep to see an ALSA output device. It's got a box to enter the sound device. I've tried various things I found by googling, including /dev/snd/pcmC0D0p (which does exist), ALSA:default, ALSA:hw:0,0, and ALSA:hw:0. I've also tried using lowercase for alsa, omitting alsa, and putting 1s in place of the 0s. Any ideas? Here's the output of `aplay -l`, and I don't know what else to post. List of PLAYBACK Hardware Devices card 0: Intel [HDA Intel], device 0: STAC92xx Analog [STAC92xx Analog] Subdevices: 1/1 Subdevice #0: subdevice #0 -- »Q« Kleeneness is next to Gödelness.
Re: [gentoo-user] Rate limiting TCP connections...
Norberto Bensa wrote: Ah!! But Windows (XP) uses TC by default. It doesn't use 20% of the network bandwidth unless you tweak some registry setting and/or disable QoS in network properties. That sounds like a fine plan for me... but, erm, how does it know? Both Linux and Xp talk to my router at 100mbps - and my router talks to the outside world at 0.5mbps... so, while I'd be entirely happy to cap both machines at 80mbps, I don't see why this would have any effect on the competition for the 0.5mbps to the outside world. What's more to the point, it doesn't seem to be Linux competing with Xp, per se - but rather Linux competing with Linux - since my LAN works great - and I can communicate at will between Xp and Linux - it is only when Linux's bind competes with Linux's wget that I see a problem. This is with two processes on the same PC. Why? Is pretty obvious what's happening: your Linux box is eating all the bandwidth with the MB download because _by_default_ Linux doesn't do any TC at all. If the iptables thingy was too aggressive, try a --limit-rate (or --rate-limit; I can't never get it right) in wget. I presume this is what you mean (taken from man iptables): --limit rate Maximum average matching rate: specified as a number, with an optional `/second', `/minute', `/hour', or `/day' suffix; the default is 3/hour. This looks as if I can limit the rate at which my linux box talks on my LAN - but this isn't what I need to do. Interestingly, long downloads from two competing WinXp boxes don't cause a problem - but both will max-out my available download capacity... suggesting to me that fixed rate-limiting is not what is called for...
[gentoo-user] Re: Rate limiting TCP connections...
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 22:53:23 -0300, Norberto Bensa wrote: Ah!! But Windows (XP) uses TC by default. It doesn't use 20% of the network bandwidth unless you tweak some registry setting and/or disable QoS in network properties. This is not the case. Please read: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q31 The last paragraph could not be more clear on this. Much more likely is that the Gentoo (Linux) TCP Window sizing is more aggressive and/or the Windows app/stack does not do the same. The OP should ensure that window sizing is turned on (might be off) and bump up the initial window size. -h
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Rate limiting TCP connections...
Holger Hoffstaette wrote: On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 22:53:23 -0300, Norberto Bensa wrote Ah!! But Windows (XP) uses TC by default. It doesn't use 20% of the network bandwidth unless you tweak some registry setting and/or disable QoS in network properties. This is not the case. Please read: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q31 The last paragraph could not be more clear on this. Thanks... I was pretty sure that reserving a proportion of my LAN bandwidth wouldn't help - though I didn't have that reference to hand. I'd have been happy to rate-limit to 80mbps if that would have helped - though I saw no reason that it should. Much more likely is that the Gentoo (Linux) TCP Window sizing is more aggressive and/or the Windows app/stack does not do the same. The OP should ensure that window sizing is turned on (might be off) and bump up the initial window size. This sounds far more plausible to me... it certainly seems to be something to do with the TCP stack on Gentoo. I've had a look at http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_TCP_Tuning - which was interesting - but didn't suggest any clear answers to me. From sysctl, I discovered that tcp_congestion_control is cubic - which isn't even an option documented by the wiki... I wonder, does the C in BIC mean cubic - making these one and the same? The LWN article suggests not. Is cubic the defaut for everyone? Is this Gentoo specific? Is there a reason I've had it chosen over BIC for me by Gentoo magic? (I've not done any TCP tuning myself - everything is default on this score... I built my own kernel - but only to enable unrelated options.) (I think) I'm using a vanilla kernel configuration with respect to networking... uname reports 2.6.23-gentoo-r3. $ syctl net.iv4 net.ipv4.tcp_window_scaling = 1 net.ipv4.tcp_sack = 1 net.ipv4.tcp_retrans_collapse = 1 net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1 net.ipv4.ip_default_ttl = 64 net.ipv4.ip_no_pmtu_disc = 0 net.ipv4.ip_nonlocal_bind = 0 net.ipv4.tcp_syn_retries = 5 net.ipv4.tcp_synack_retries = 5 net.ipv4.tcp_max_orphans = 32768 net.ipv4.tcp_max_tw_buckets = 18 net.ipv4.ipfrag_high_thresh = 262144 net.ipv4.ipfrag_low_thresh = 196608 net.ipv4.ip_dynaddr = 0 net.ipv4.ipfrag_time = 30 net.ipv4.tcp_keepalive_time = 7200 net.ipv4.tcp_keepalive_probes = 9 net.ipv4.tcp_keepalive_intvl = 75 net.ipv4.tcp_retries1 = 3 net.ipv4.tcp_retries2 = 15 net.ipv4.tcp_fin_timeout = 60 net.ipv4.tcp_tw_recycle = 0 net.ipv4.tcp_abort_on_overflow = 0 net.ipv4.tcp_stdurg = 0 net.ipv4.tcp_rfc1337 = 0 net.ipv4.tcp_max_syn_backlog = 1024 net.ipv4.ip_local_port_range = 3276861000 net.ipv4.icmp_echo_ignore_all = 0 net.ipv4.icmp_echo_ignore_broadcasts = 1 net.ipv4.icmp_ignore_bogus_error_responses = 1 net.ipv4.icmp_errors_use_inbound_ifaddr = 0 net.ipv4.route.min_delay = 2 net.ipv4.route.max_delay = 10 net.ipv4.route.gc_thresh = 32768 net.ipv4.route.max_size = 524288 net.ipv4.route.gc_min_interval = 0 net.ipv4.route.gc_min_interval_ms = 500 net.ipv4.route.gc_timeout = 300 net.ipv4.route.gc_interval = 60 net.ipv4.route.redirect_load = 5 net.ipv4.route.redirect_number = 9 net.ipv4.route.redirect_silence = 5120 net.ipv4.route.error_cost = 250 net.ipv4.route.error_burst = 1250 net.ipv4.route.gc_elasticity = 8 net.ipv4.route.mtu_expires = 600 net.ipv4.route.min_pmtu = 552 net.ipv4.route.min_adv_mss = 256 net.ipv4.route.secret_interval = 600 net.ipv4.igmp_max_memberships = 20 net.ipv4.igmp_max_msf = 10 net.ipv4.inet_peer_threshold = 65664 net.ipv4.inet_peer_minttl = 120 net.ipv4.inet_peer_maxttl = 600 net.ipv4.inet_peer_gc_mintime = 10 net.ipv4.inet_peer_gc_maxtime = 120 net.ipv4.tcp_orphan_retries = 0 net.ipv4.tcp_fack = 1 net.ipv4.tcp_reordering = 3 net.ipv4.tcp_ecn = 0 net.ipv4.tcp_dsack = 1 net.ipv4.tcp_mem = 96576128768 193152 net.ipv4.tcp_wmem = 409616384 4120576 net.ipv4.tcp_rmem = 409687380 4120576 net.ipv4.tcp_app_win = 31 net.ipv4.tcp_adv_win_scale = 2 net.ipv4.icmp_ratelimit = 250 net.ipv4.icmp_ratemask = 6168 net.ipv4.tcp_tw_reuse = 0 net.ipv4.tcp_frto = 0 net.ipv4.tcp_frto_response = 0 net.ipv4.tcp_low_latency = 0 net.ipv4.ipfrag_secret_interval = 600 net.ipv4.ipfrag_max_dist = 64 net.ipv4.tcp_no_metrics_save = 0 net.ipv4.tcp_moderate_rcvbuf = 1 net.ipv4.tcp_tso_win_divisor = 3 net.ipv4.tcp_congestion_control = cubic net.ipv4.tcp_abc = 0 net.ipv4.tcp_mtu_probing = 0 net.ipv4.tcp_base_mss = 512 net.ipv4.tcp_workaround_signed_windows = 0 net.ipv4.tcp_slow_start_after_idle = 1 net.ipv4.tcp_available_congestion_control = cubic reno net.ipv4.tcp_allowed_congestion_control = cubic reno net.ipv4.tcp_max_ssthresh = 0 net.ipv4.neigh.default.mcast_solicit = 3 net.ipv4.neigh.default.ucast_solicit = 3 net.ipv4.neigh.default.app_solicit = 0 net.ipv4.neigh.default.retrans_time = 100 net.ipv4.neigh.default.base_reachable_time = 30 net.ipv4.neigh.default.delay_first_probe_time = 5 net.ipv4.neigh.default.gc_stale_time = 60 net.ipv4.neigh.default.unres_qlen = 3 net.ipv4.neigh.default.proxy_qlen
Re: [gentoo-user] Duplicate ca certs
On Sunday 17 August 2008, Albert Hopkins wrote: On Sun, 2008-08-17 at 10:39 +0100, Mick wrote: I am getting mixed up with update-ca-certificates. It reports that I have duplicates: = # update-ca-certificates . . . = When you updated the ca-certificates, you should have gotten a postinst message about broken symlinks that you need to remove. Oops! I had missed that. Looks good now: # update-ca-certificates Updating certificates in /etc/ssl/certsdone. Thank you Albert. :) -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Is gcc slotted? Do I have to manually remove old versions?
On Tue, 5 Aug 2008 15:04:17 +1000, Alan E. Davis wrote: # emerge -aC sys-devel/gcc-YOUR-NEW-GCC-VERSION Should one truly delete the NEW VERSION? That's removing all but the new version. A simpler command that won't destroy your system if you mis-type the version is emerge -Pa gcc -- Neil Bothwick Another casualty of applied metaphysics. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] test
test
[gentoo-user] Re: Rate limiting TCP connections...
gentoo_steve at shic.co.uk writes: I don't see why this would have any effect on the competition for the 0.5mbps to the outside world. It seems to me your router is less than desirable (or at least the current settings). Depending on the make/model of the router and your level of privileged access to the router, you may be able to create policies, in the router, to mitigate this situation. Alternatively, you can build a gentoo base router (or transparent bridge) to implement policies between these to systems and your router, if it is controlled and managed by your isp (employer) or whatever other external group. What's more to the point, it doesn't seem to be Linux competing with Xp, per se - but rather Linux competing with Linux - since my LAN works great - and I can communicate at will between Xp and Linux - it is only when Linux's bind competes with Linux's wget that I see a problem. This is with two processes on the same PC. If this is (indeed) your issue, just manually test various settings for the 'renice' command, on the offending linux process(es). Crude but once you find a value that slows down the offending process, you can make manual adjustments as you like, on a network with few systems/processes. This looks as if I can limit the rate at which my linux box talks on my LAN - but this isn't what I need to do. Interestingly, long downloads from two competing WinXp boxes don't cause a problem - but both will max-out my available download capacity... suggesting to me that fixed rate-limiting is not what is called for... A custom firewall or bridge, as mentioned above, would allow you to experiment with all sorts of mechanisms, until you find something you like. The down side is you have to invest quite some time, in learning and experimenting with all of the mechanisms that are available when you build a gentoo based firewall or bridge device. The journey is fantastic, but, not for those proned to quick frustration. It is also a very fluid area of linux, due to dynamics of network security. Many folks do not share the intimate details of how to explicitly do this, for a variety of reasons. Other will help with general ideas and suggestions. (caveat emptor!). Alternatively, there are many packages that you can use either on the linux system directly or on a firewall/bridge to implement a mix of mechanisms. Have a look here for some packages: /usr/portage/net-firewall/ hth, James
Re: [gentoo-user] Rate limiting TCP connections...
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Norberto Bensa wrote: Ah!! But Windows (XP) uses TC by default. It doesn't use 20% of the network bandwidth unless you tweak some registry setting and/or disable QoS in network properties. That sounds like a fine plan for me... which one? remove qos from windows? nope. that would just overload your router. but, erm, how does it know? Both Linux and Xp talk to my router at 100mbps - and my router talks to the outside world at 0.5mbps... That's the problem. It's common, don't worry. You just need to control how much and in which order packages are delivered to your router so it doesn't have to decide how to route traffic (its queue is not that intelligent.) It's all explained in latrc which I recommend you to read. so, while I'd be entirely happy to cap both machines at 80mbps, I don't see why this would have any effect on the competition for the 0.5mbps to the outside world. Yes. My iptables example was too aggresive, I know. It was just an example. You can modify it like this: iptables -I INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT iptables -I INPUT -s 192.168.0.0/24 -j ACCEPT iptables -I INPUT -p tcp -m limit --limit 50/sec -j ACCEPT iptables -I INPUT -p tcp -j DROP The first one takes care of localhost. You don't want to limit traffic on that interface :) The seccond one permits everything from the local network (change 192.168.0.0/24 for the rights values for your local/home network) Third and fourth are the same rules I posted before. With those rules you'll get full speed on the local network and 50 packets per second on everything else (internet.) What's more to the point, it doesn't seem to be Linux competing with Xp, per se - but rather Linux competing with Linux - since my LAN works great - and I can communicate at will between Xp and Linux - it is only when Linux's bind competes with Linux's wget that I see a problem. This is with two processes on the same PC. wget and bind compete for internet access. wget is eating all the bandwidth and bind doesn't have a chance. Do you have forward first in named.conf? If it is, comment it; it will help a bit. try a --limit-rate (or --rate-limit; I can't never get it right) in wget. I presume this is what you mean (taken from man iptables): nope. wget's --limit-rate. This looks as if I can limit the rate at which my linux box talks on my LAN - but this isn't what I need to do. Interestingly, long downloads from two competing WinXp boxes don't cause a problem - but both will max-out my available download capacity... suggesting to me that fixed rate-limiting is not what is called for... Nope. fixed rate limiting is not the answer. You need QoS at the router level, but if it doesn't support it, you'll need to change how your Linux box talks and listen to internet packages. That's what I said -more or less- on my first reply. Let's make an experiment: 1. Terminate all downloads and activity on the internet. 2. Restart your bind (so it flushes its cache) 3. in XP1 download something huge (an ISO image) from one souce in the internet and wait 'til it is at full speed (does it go up to 0.5Mb??) 4. in XP2 start to ping different sources. Does XP2 lost packets? Regards, Norberto This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
[gentoo-user] test
webmail test, please ignore -- Email.it, the professional e-mail, gratis per te: http://www.email.it/f Sponsor: Aggiorna la playlist del cellulare con tante nuove suonerie! Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=7748d=20080818
[gentoo-user] Re: Re: Rate limiting TCP connections...
On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:23:27 +0100, gentoo_stev wrote: Thanks... I was pretty sure that reserving a proportion of my LAN bandwidth wouldn't help - though I didn't have that reference to hand. I'd have been happy to rate-limit to 80mbps if that would have helped - though I saw no reason that it should. Like others have said this has nothing to do with your problem. Much more likely is that the Gentoo (Linux) TCP Window sizing is more aggressive and/or the Windows app/stack does not do the same. The OP OK so I misunderstood the problem - if even DNS from Linux is treated unfairly to a parallel http download then your router is..challenged. should ensure that window sizing is turned on (might be off) and bump up the initial window size. This sounds far more plausible to me... it certainly seems to be something to do with the TCP stack on Gentoo. And/or the stack on the router. Judging by your sysctl dump there is nothing obviously wrong that you can or should do on the Linux box. You *might* try 2.6.26.1 as there have been various bugfixes in TCP, but that seems unlikely in this case. Generally full-speed http can be a good bandwidth hog, but not to the point of total starvation of other clients. I've had a look at http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_TCP_Tuning - which was interesting - but didn't suggest any clear answers to me. From sysctl, I You don't need to mess with the tcp tuning knobs or the congestion control algorithms. None of that will help if your router is too cheap or if you only have 100mbit LAN ;) Is cubic the defaut for everyone? Is this Gentoo specific? Is there a cubic is the default. -h
[gentoo-user] How to get OpenOffice spell checker to work?
eselect oodict list says that myspell is selected as the dictionaries. I've got myspell-en installed. I've set the document language to English-US. But spell checking still doesn't do anything. I've also got aspell-en and hunspell-en installed. I'm running app-office/openoffice-2.4.1 (built from sources), but I notice that the USE flags didn't include -en or -en_US. Is that the problem? OOo takes ages to build, so I don't want to rebuild it unless there's a decent chance it'll actually fix the problem... -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! You were s'posed at to laugh! visi.com
Re: [gentoo-user] How to get OpenOffice spell checker to work?
eselect oodict list Installed dictionary sources that can be set: [1] myspell Installed language codes: en es it Il giorno lun, 18/08/2008 alle 20.32 +, Grant Edwards ha scritto: eselect oodict list says that myspell is selected as the dictionaries. I've got myspell-en installed. I've set the document language to English-US. But spell checking still doesn't do anything. I've also got aspell-en and hunspell-en installed.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: df and du difference
Platoali wrote: /dev/console (deleted) mysqld 5679mysql5u REG8,1 01009860 /tmp/iby8kN8L (deleted) mysqld 5679mysql6u REG8,1 01009861 /tmp/ib3OyWjn (deleted) mysqld 5679mysql7u REG8,1 01009862 /tmp/ibCqa6uY (deleted) mysqld 5679mysql8u REG8,1 01009863 /tmp/ibnDCmHz (deleted) mysqld 5679mysql 12u REG8,1 01009864 /tmp/ibaQcs5a (deleted) ... Nothing so big. just about 20 lines and the biggest ones are these. This server hosts accounting software for an ISP: just a couple python scripts, apache with PHP and a small Postgresql database. You're going to have to rebuild this server because someone is eventually going to break it. The number one rule of shared database servers is never put /tmp inside / because eventually some idiot will kick off some poorly thought out job to crunch some numbers and he will fill /tmp and therefore / and break your server. /tmp should always be it's own partition in this type of environment. I have also found 5GB to be a good size as well since most crazy jobs would die around 4GB on 32 bit systems. kashani
[gentoo-user] Re: How to get OpenOffice spell checker to work?
On 2008-08-18, Michele Schiavo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: eselect oodict list Installed dictionary sources that can be set: [1] myspell Installed language codes: en es it Right. That's what is shown on my system. Your point is? Il giorno lun, 18/08/2008 alle 20.32 +, Grant Edwards ha scritto: eselect oodict list says that myspell is selected as the dictionaries. I've got myspell-en installed. I've set the document language to English-US. But spell checking still doesn't do anything. I've also got aspell-en and hunspell-en installed. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! Did I say I was at a sardine? Or a bus??? visi.com
Re: [gentoo-user] How to get OpenOffice spell checker to work?
Michele Schiavo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: eselect oodict list Installed dictionary sources that can be set: [1] myspell Installed language codes: en es it I have a similar problem. I have installed and selected dictionaries, but openoffice will only allow me to select English as the language for spell checking. eselect oodict show OpenOffice.org configured dictionaries [1] myspell Configured language codes from /usr/share/myspell: cs en fr ro sk I posted a question on the forums (http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-698904.html) about this at the start of July but it has received no reply.
