Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] busybox fsck vs. fsck.ext4 ... experiences?

[Adam Carter]

Wikipedia says "*BusyBox* is software that provides several stripped-down Unix
tools  in a
single executable
file ."

Its also statically linked, so you dont need any libraries;
$ file /bin/busybox
/bin/busybox: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (GNU/Linux),
statically linked, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, stripped, with debug_info

>
The fsck.*'s are built in

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] busybox fsck vs. fsck.ext4 ... experiences?

[tuxic]

On 03/30 06:49, Jonathan Callen wrote:
> On 03/29/2017 10:42 PM, tu...@posteo.de wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Before doing the wrong decision:
> > How "secure" is it to use fsck of busybox in a limited environment
> > (SoC) to check sdcard partitions (etx4) occasionally instead of using
> > fsck.ext4 ?
> > Does someone has some experiences with this ?
> > 
> > Thanks a lot in advance for any help!
> > Cheers
> > Meino
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> The fsck applet provided by busybox is just the fsck(8) driver, which calls
> the fsck.${FSTYPE} command to actually check the filesystem.  You still need
> fsck.ext4/e2fsck from e2fsprogs to actually do the check.
> 
> -- 
> Jonathan Callen
> 

Hi Jonathan,

thanks for your reply! :)

That means, that one or both of the other binaries have to be
somewhere on the sdcard...
I have to search deeper ;)

Cheers
Meino

[gentoo-user] Re: [OT] busybox fsck vs. fsck.ext4 ... experiences?

[Jonathan Callen]

On 03/29/2017 10:42 PM, tu...@posteo.de wrote:

Hi,

Before doing the wrong decision:
How "secure" is it to use fsck of busybox in a limited environment
(SoC) to check sdcard partitions (etx4) occasionally instead of using
fsck.ext4 ?
Does someone has some experiences with this ?

Thanks a lot in advance for any help!
Cheers
Meino






The fsck applet provided by busybox is just the fsck(8) driver, which 
calls the fsck.${FSTYPE} command to actually check the filesystem.  You 
still need fsck.ext4/e2fsck from e2fsprogs to actually do the check.


--
Jonathan Callen

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Firefox occasionally stalls

[Dale]

Kai Krakow wrote:
> Am Thu, 30 Mar 2017 07:39:04 -0500
> schrieb Dale :
>
>> Kai Krakow wrote:
>>> Am Wed, 29 Mar 2017 17:08:39 -0500
>>> schrieb Dale :
>>>  
 Peter Humphrey wrote:  
>>  [...]  
>>  [...]  
>>  [...]  
 I tried it on one profile I have and it was not good.  It slowed
 Firefox to a crawl.  It took a good ten minutes just to get the
 add-ons manager to open and me to disable Ghostery.  Once I did
 that, it got better. After I restarted Firefox, it was back to
 normal. 

 I suspect it clashes with another add-on I use.  I'm not sure which
 one so I'll have to play with it when I have more time to spend on
 it. Right now, forestry and gardening is taking up my time tho.   
>>> This suggests that one of the other addons is your real problem...
>>>
>>>  
>> How is that?  It works fine without Ghostery?  What I suspect is
>> happening, Ghostery and some other addon clashes.  I suspect that if I
>> removed the other addons and installed Ghostery, it would work fine. 
>> After all, if it was as slow as it was when I installed it for
>> everyone else, people would be complaining, a lot.  It renders
>> Firefox basically unusable.  I just don't have time to test it to see
>> which one it clashes with right now. 
>>
>> I have quite a few addons installed.  This isn't the first time I've
>> had two addons clash. 
> Okay, point for you: The clash is maybe your real problem. ;-)
>
> But as I read in the other reply, you fixed it by rebuilding some
> packages. I think I stopped using Firefox completely when those
> graphics acceleration problems started. BTW, this is even a problem
> with older Intel drivers in Windows.
>
> And I eventually also stopped using Firefox because it becomes a
> sluggish monster with many addons installed. Poor quality addons are a
> real problem for it.
>


That would be Alan not me.  There's where the confusion came in. 
Ghostery was mentioned, I mentioned trying it, did try it and then
posted the results for me.  The thread sort of went slightly off topic
for just a bit. 

Firefox does get slow and I have removed some unused addons but some I
just have to have.  If I can find time and figure out which one, maybe I
can send some feedback and let the two addons devs hash out the
problem.  It may make both addons better for everyone, not just little
ole me. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

[gentoo-user] Re: Firefox occasionally stalls

[Kai Krakow]

Am Thu, 30 Mar 2017 07:39:04 -0500
schrieb Dale :

> Kai Krakow wrote:
> > Am Wed, 29 Mar 2017 17:08:39 -0500
> > schrieb Dale :
> >  
> >> Peter Humphrey wrote:  
>  [...]  
>  [...]  
>  [...]  
> >> I tried it on one profile I have and it was not good.  It slowed
> >> Firefox to a crawl.  It took a good ten minutes just to get the
> >> add-ons manager to open and me to disable Ghostery.  Once I did
> >> that, it got better. After I restarted Firefox, it was back to
> >> normal. 
> >>
> >> I suspect it clashes with another add-on I use.  I'm not sure which
> >> one so I'll have to play with it when I have more time to spend on
> >> it. Right now, forestry and gardening is taking up my time tho.   
> > This suggests that one of the other addons is your real problem...
> >
> >  
> 
> How is that?  It works fine without Ghostery?  What I suspect is
> happening, Ghostery and some other addon clashes.  I suspect that if I
> removed the other addons and installed Ghostery, it would work fine. 
> After all, if it was as slow as it was when I installed it for
> everyone else, people would be complaining, a lot.  It renders
> Firefox basically unusable.  I just don't have time to test it to see
> which one it clashes with right now. 
> 
> I have quite a few addons installed.  This isn't the first time I've
> had two addons clash. 

Okay, point for you: The clash is maybe your real problem. ;-)

But as I read in the other reply, you fixed it by rebuilding some
packages. I think I stopped using Firefox completely when those
graphics acceleration problems started. BTW, this is even a problem
with older Intel drivers in Windows.

And I eventually also stopped using Firefox because it becomes a
sluggish monster with many addons installed. Poor quality addons are a
real problem for it.

-- 
Regards,
Kai

Replies to list-only preferred.

[gentoo-user] Re: CPU flags unsatisfied

[Kai Krakow]

Am Thu, 30 Mar 2017 01:08:06 +0200
schrieb Alan McKinnon :

> On 29/03/2017 23:11, the...@sys-concept.com wrote:
> > When I try to emerge any application that require audio eg:
> > firefox, ffmpeg, asterisk etc. I get 
> > 
> > !!! The ebuild selected to satisfy
> > ">=media-video/ffmpeg-3.2.4:0=[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?]"
> > has unmet requirements.
> > - media-video/ffmpeg-3.2.4::gentoo USE="X alsa bzip2 encode gpl
> > hardcoded-tables iconv mp3 network opengl postproc sdl threads
> > truetype vorbis x264 xcb xvid zlib (-altivec) -amr -amrenc
> > (-armv5te) (-armv6) (-armv6t2) (-armvfp) -bluray -bs2b -cdio -celt
> > -chromaprint -cpudetection -debug -doc -ebur128 -fdk -flite
> > -fontconfig -frei0r -fribidi -gcrypt -gme -gmp -gnutls -gsm
> > -iec61883 -ieee1394 -jack -jpeg2k -kvazaar -ladspa -libass -libcaca
> > -libilbc -librtmp -libsoxr -libv4l -lzma (-mipsdspr1) (-mipsdspr2)
> > (-mipsfpu) (-mmal) -modplug (-neon) -nvenc -openal -openh264
> > -openssl -opus -oss -pic -pulseaudio -rubberband -samba
> > -schroedinger -snappy -speex -ssh -static-libs -test -theora
> > -twolame -v4l -vaapi -vdpau -vpx -wavpack -webp -x265 -zimg -zvbi"
> > ABI_X86="64 -32 -x32" CPU_FLAGS_X86="mmx sse sse2 -3dnow -3dnowext
> > -aes -avx -avx2 -fma3 -fma4 -mmxext -sse3 -sse4_1 -sse4_2 -ssse3
> > -xop" FFTOOLS="aviocat cws2fws ffescape ffeval ffhash fourcc2pixfmt
> > graph2dot ismindex pktdumper qt-faststart sidxindex trasher"
> > 
> >   The following REQUIRED_USE flag constraints are unsatisfied:
> > cpu_flags_x86_sse? ( cpu_flags_x86_mmxext )  
> 
> 
> Thelma,
> 
> Do you EVER bother to read what portage is telling you?
> 
> Or do you just by default see an error on-screen, not actually think
> for yourself, and dump a paste to gentoo-user expecting everyone here
> to do your thinking for you?

To beginners those portage dumps may not be too obvious. Everyone has
to start somewhere. We all did this. If nobody asks those questions,
there's nothing to find easily in Google (or your favorite search
engine).

> Seriously, this is getting tiresome.
> I hope you are not being paid wages to work these Gentoo machine(s).

What I hope is that Thelma is maybe setting up a starters guide,
improve wikis or gives helpful answers in the future.

Explaining how to read this and give the hint is probably more helpful
than harsh comments without any helpful reference to what was asked.

The only thing that Thelma could maybe improve is the order of handling
this: Maybe first search, then ask. Not the other way 'round. OTOH some
other question show that simply the deep knowledge is missing: Those
problems are pretty obvious to us experts and explaining what's behind
is even more important.

;-)

-- 
Regards,
Kai

Replies to list-only preferred.

[gentoo-user] Re: Online hosting recommendation - VMs?

[Harry Putnam]

John Runyon  writes:

> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 10:08:41PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
>> In the course of about 2 hrs my connections were dropped at least 15
>> times and I think probably more.  At some points I have more than one
>> login going, and I noticed if I left one idle for a few minutes it
>> would b dropped when I next attemtpted to use it... I mean really a
>> few minutes like 3 or so.
>> 
> No issues that you've observed with other providers? Which location were
> you in? I've used Linode for years and never had issues (other than on
> certain connections where I need to enable keepalives due to my end
> closing it). But I've mostly stuck to their DFW location.

I do have a shell account on a server in Pittsburg area (jtan.com) that
I've had for yrs... Not my own vm.  Just an account on actual
hardware.  I've stayed connected to them for a week at a time a few
times. I do experience the odd drop now and then with them.

I've since closed out the linode account etc, but I was connecting
from the Atlanta GA area if that tells you anthing about where there
operation was.  Come to think of it, I did see something about Fremont
Calif.

It would not suprise me to learn that it was all happening on my end.
I'm on a Comcast Cable modem/router connection.

>
>> Remains to be seen how they respond.  I only turned my trouble ticket
>> 7 minutes ago.
>> 
> Their support is usually pretty quick and pretty customer-service-y. I'd
> be surprised if they didn't refund you in full (or at least pro-rated).

Yes, it is quick and all taken care of shortly after I posted the
note.

So they get an A rating from me for customer support.

But whatever the reason for getting dropped like that... just not worth
the hassle.

Re: [SOLVED] [gentoo-user] CPU flags unsatisfied

[thelma]

On 03/29/2017 11:40 PM, Arve Barsnes wrote:
> On 30 March 2017 at 02:24,  > wrote:
> 
> replace in make.conf CFLAGS=
> with (in my case)
> CPU_FLAGS_X86="aes avx avx2 fma3 mmx mmxext popcnt sse sse2 sse3
> sse4_1 sse4_2 ssse3"
> 
> 
> CFLAGS and CPU_FLAGS_X86 are NOT the same thing, you can't replace one
> with the other, you want both.

You are correct, thanks for the correction.

--
Thelma

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Firefox occasionally stalls

[Dale]

Kai Krakow wrote:
> Am Wed, 29 Mar 2017 17:08:39 -0500
> schrieb Dale :
>
>> Peter Humphrey wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 21 Mar 2017 14:59:48 Dale wrote:
>>>  
 Ublock is another option as well.  I use it on some Firefox
 profiles. It does seem to respond better than Adblock but some
 things I don't like about Ublock.

 I may look into that Ghostery too.  See if it is available for
 Firefox and Seamonkey.  
>>> I don't know about Seamonkey, but it is available for Firefox. It's
>>> a bit of an eye-opener too. I had no idea how many people are out
>>> there keeping watch over all our journeys around the web.
>>>  
>> I tried it on one profile I have and it was not good.  It slowed
>> Firefox to a crawl.  It took a good ten minutes just to get the
>> add-ons manager to open and me to disable Ghostery.  Once I did that,
>> it got better. After I restarted Firefox, it was back to normal. 
>>
>> I suspect it clashes with another add-on I use.  I'm not sure which
>> one so I'll have to play with it when I have more time to spend on
>> it. Right now, forestry and gardening is taking up my time tho. 
> This suggests that one of the other addons is your real problem...
>
>

How is that?  It works fine without Ghostery?  What I suspect is
happening, Ghostery and some other addon clashes.  I suspect that if I
removed the other addons and installed Ghostery, it would work fine. 
After all, if it was as slow as it was when I installed it for everyone
else, people would be complaining, a lot.  It renders Firefox basically
unusable.  I just don't have time to test it to see which one it clashes
with right now. 

I have quite a few addons installed.  This isn't the first time I've had
two addons clash. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Re: [gentoo-user] Bluetooth and hciconfig

[Mick]

On Wednesday 29 Mar 2017 14:10:36 Foster McLane wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 04:53:44PM +0100, Mick wrote:
> > # AutoEnable defines option to enable all controllers when they are found.
> > # This includes adapters present on start as well as adapters that are
> > plugged # in later on. Defaults to 'false'.
> > AutoEnable = true
> > ===
> 
> Can you remove the spaces around the '=' and try again?
> 
> Foster

Thanks Foster, I have tried with and without spaces, with and without single 
quotation marks.  It still errors out.  I'll wait until the next version 
stabilises, check if hciconfig has disappeared from my system (I'll try to 
remember to keep a backup of the binary) and and see what the logs show after 
that.
-- 
Regards,
Mick

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Firefox occasionally stalls

[Alan McKinnon]

On 21/03/2017 21:50, Kai Krakow wrote:
> Am Tue, 21 Mar 2017 21:35:36 +0200
> schrieb Alan McKinnon :
> 
>> This post is rather vague, sorry about that in advance.
>>
>> I've spent much time on this and gotten absolutely nowhere. So I 
>> conclude all my thoughts and assumptions are wrong and not worth even 
>> sharing (on account of them being so wrong).
>>
>> I have firefox like this:
>>
>> [I] www-client/firefox
>>   Available versions:  45.7.0^d 45.8.0^d (~)51.0.1^d {bindist 
>> custom-cflags custom-optimization dbus debug ffmpeg +gmp-autoupdate 
>> +gstreamer gtk2 hardened hwaccel jack +jemalloc +jemalloc3 +jit neon
>> pgo pulseaudio rust selinux +skia startup-notification system-cairo 
>> system-harfbuzz system-icu system-jpeg system-libevent system-libvpx 
>> system-sqlite test wifi L10N="ach af an ar as ast az be bg bn-BD
>> bn-IN br bs ca cak cs cy da de dsb el en-GB en-ZA eo es-AR es-CL
>> es-ES es-MX et eu fa ff fi fr fy ga gd gl gn gu he hi hr hsb hu hy id
>> is it ja ka kk km kn ko lij lt lv mai mk ml mr ms nb nl nn or pa pl
>> pt-BR pt-PT rm ro ru si sk sl son sq sr sv ta te th tr uk uz vi xh
>> zh-CN zh-TW"} Installed versions:  51.0.1^d(21:30:20 21/02/2017)(dbus 
>> gmp-autoupdate jemalloc pulseaudio skia startup-notification 
>> system-harfbuzz system-icu system-jpeg system-libevent system-libvpx 
>> system-sqlite wifi -bindist -custom-cflags -custom-optimization
>> -debug -gtk2 -hardened -hwaccel -jack -neon -pgo -rust -selinux
>> -system-cairo -test L10N="en-GB en-ZA -ach -af -an -ar -as -ast -az
>> -bg -bn-BD -bn-IN -br -bs -ca -cak -cs -cy -da -de -dsb -el -eo
>> -es-AR -es-CL -es-ES -es-MX -et -eu -fa -ff -fi -fr -fy -ga -gd -gl
>> -gn -gu -he -hi -hr -hsb -hu -hy -id -is -it -ja -ka -kk -km -kn -ko
>> -lij -lt -lv -mai -mk -ml -mr -ms -nb -nl -nn -or -pa -pl -pt-BR
>> -pt-PT -rm -ro -ru -si -sk -sl -son -sq -sr -sv -ta -te -th -tr -uk
>> -uz -vi -xh -zh-CN -zh-TW") Homepage:
>> http://www.mozilla.com/firefox Description: Firefox Web
>> Browser
>>
>> with these plugins:
>> - adblockplus
>> - flashblock
>> - foxyproxy standard
>> - restart browser
>> - user agent switcher
>> - youtube all html5
>>
>> Occasionally, according to no discernable pattern, all my tabs on all 
>> some/most/all Firefox windows stop responding. Clicking and scrolling
>> in the content has no effect. Can't open new tabs, can't close tabs,
>> can't switch to existing tabs. Sometimes it affects only one firefox
>> window, sometimes all firefox windows.
>>
>> Imagine if you will that firefox is coded with one global loop that
>> gets user actions and responds, then that loop gets stuck somewhere.
>> The firefox window will not be affected (controlled by KDE), and
>> neither is the X-server but the tabs can all do nothing till the loop
>> unsticks. It's an effect like that.
>>
>> Sometimes it does work after a delay >30s.
>> The sysadmin in me says 30s? Hah, check DNS resolver timeouts.
>> Checked, found nothing unusual. Proxy looks OK, VPN looks OK, Chrome
>> never has this problem so it's firefox specific.
>>
>> Firefox itself is up, it responds correctly to moving around the
>> menus, just can't do some of the actions like open the Addons page
>> (that is regular content in a tab).
>>
>> The issue ALWAYS goes away if I restart firefox, either with the
>> restart addon or Alt-F4 and start from KDE menu. I have "load
>> previous tabs" set to true so those actions are pretty equivalent.
>>
>> DE is Plasma 5, and the problem isn't from a recent upgrade, I've
>> been battling with this for ages through MANY kde and firefox updates.
>>
>> My question:
>> Where the hell do I start to figure out what's really going on?
>> I used up all my sysadmin troubleshooting knowledge and have had to 
>> revert back to n00b status on this one.
> 
> I didn't use Firefox in a long time but remember similar effects until
> I stopped using AdBlock Plus (Chrome showed similar stalls with it,
> just not completely blocking, only one tab blocking). If this is what
> affects you, maybe try Ghostery instead (which is what I am using with
> Chrome now).
> 
> If it doesn't help, deactivate the next addon. Every addon hooking into
> web site rendering can create such problems easily, so start with those
> addons first.
> 


I got fed up dealing with Firefox addons, so took the alternate route I
used about every 6 months or so:

emerge -et world

and everything is nice and stable now after 48 hours running. I actually
suspect an intel driver/mesa problem as I would often also get visual
artifacts, plasma flashing the panel in odd ways and other stuff, often
co-incident with Firefox just stalling. It was recalling that Firefox
does some sophisticated accelaration that prompted me to try this.


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Setting up shorewall

[Peter Humphrey]

On Thursday 30 Mar 2017 17:23:13 Adam Carter wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:59 AM, Peter Humphrey 
> 
> wrote:
> > Hello list,
> > 
> > I've been using shorewall happily for many years, but now I have a LAN
> > setup
> > that the docs seem not to cover. The new web-server box I mentioned
> > recently
> > has two Ethernet ports, which I want to connect as follows:
> > 
> > Port 1 (enp1s0) will be connected to a spare port on my vDSL
> > modem/router
> > and be accessible from outside. An HTTP hole* will be opened in the
> > router for this.
> > 
> > Port 2 (enp2s0) is connected to my LAN switch, which is connected in
> > turn
> > to
> > another port on the vDSL modem, which has no holes open to this port.
> > Once the server goes into service this interface will be down most of
> > the time.
> > 
> > I want to ensure that no bridging occurs between the two ports in the
> > web
> > server.
> 
> The term "bridging" implies layer 2 forwarding, like what a hub or switch
> does. You have to do a little work to set that up, so it wont happen by
> accident.
> 
> Routing, at layer 3, just requires /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward to be set
> to 1. However since you're allowing connections to the webserver, any
> compromise of that webserver means that any network connected to the
> webserver is available without restriction. This is why webservers are
> typically put in a DMZ, and a firewall used to connect the outside, the
> DMZ and the inside.

Yes, I understand that last.

> For HTTPS, get a LetsEntrypt cert.

Ah! Thanks for the pointer. I'll follow it up.

> FWIW i'm running my home system pretty much the way you propose, and
> AFAICT i haven't been compromised...but there's little of value there.

A little confidence, then. Thanks for that too.

-- 
Regards
Peter

[gentoo-user] Re: Firefox occasionally stalls

[Kai Krakow]

Am Wed, 29 Mar 2017 17:08:39 -0500
schrieb Dale :

> Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > On Tuesday 21 Mar 2017 14:59:48 Dale wrote:
> >  
> >> Ublock is another option as well.  I use it on some Firefox
> >> profiles. It does seem to respond better than Adblock but some
> >> things I don't like about Ublock.
> >>
> >> I may look into that Ghostery too.  See if it is available for
> >> Firefox and Seamonkey.  
> > I don't know about Seamonkey, but it is available for Firefox. It's
> > a bit of an eye-opener too. I had no idea how many people are out
> > there keeping watch over all our journeys around the web.
> >  
> 
> I tried it on one profile I have and it was not good.  It slowed
> Firefox to a crawl.  It took a good ten minutes just to get the
> add-ons manager to open and me to disable Ghostery.  Once I did that,
> it got better. After I restarted Firefox, it was back to normal. 
> 
> I suspect it clashes with another add-on I use.  I'm not sure which
> one so I'll have to play with it when I have more time to spend on
> it. Right now, forestry and gardening is taking up my time tho. 

This suggests that one of the other addons is your real problem...


-- 
Regards,
Kai

Replies to list-only preferred.

Re: [gentoo-user] Setting up shorewall

[Adam Carter]

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:59 AM, Peter Humphrey 
wrote:

> Hello list,
>
> I've been using shorewall happily for many years, but now I have a LAN
> setup
> that the docs seem not to cover. The new web-server box I mentioned
> recently
> has two Ethernet ports, which I want to connect as follows:
>
> Port 1 (enp1s0) will be connected to a spare port on my vDSL modem/router
> and be accessible from outside. An HTTP hole* will be opened in the router
> for this.
>
> Port 2 (enp2s0) is connected to my LAN switch, which is connected in turn
> to
> another port on the vDSL modem, which has no holes open to this port. Once
> the server goes into service this interface will be down most of the time.
>
> I want to ensure that no bridging occurs between the two ports in the web
> server.
>

The term "bridging" implies layer 2 forwarding, like what a hub or switch
does. You have to do a little work to set that up, so it wont happen by
accident.

Routing, at layer 3, just requires /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward to be set
to 1. However since you're allowing connections to the webserver, any
compromise of that webserver means that any network connected to the
webserver is available without restriction. This is why webservers are
typically put in a DMZ, and a firewall used to connect the outside, the DMZ
and the inside.

For HTTPS, get a LetsEntrypt cert.

FWIW i'm running my home system pretty much the way you propose, and AFAICT
i haven't been compromised...but there's little of value there.