Re: Change Next DNF Mirror
On 13/9/23 04:51, Samuel Sieb wrote: On 9/12/23 01:14, Stephen Morris wrote: How do I change the mirror that DNF is going to try to use for a particular repository so I can avoid the following messages, which have been occurring for the last two days? Errors during downloading metadata for repository 'updates': - Curl error (23): Failed writing received data to disk/application for http://ftp.iinet.net.au/pub/fedora/linux/updates/38/Everything/x86_64/repodata/8e2eff8c9230bbe3551e671c8a009bd452f2259d6bd1474043e8 a553bc17-primary.xml.zck [Failure writing output to destination] - Curl error (23): Failed writing received data to disk/application for http://ftp.iinet.net.au/pub/fedora/linux/updates/38/Everything/x86_64/repodata/c7fc54d9b041ff20659eca58092c50cde2f4a589eaca20112b838095 Do other mirrors work? That looks like a local error on your system. I don't see how that would be anything to do with the mirror. Is your disk full? I don't know if other mirrors work as dnf terminates when it gets those errors. My disk isn't full, I have over 2TB of free space on my root disk. Due to pc issues I've had to reinstall all my OS's, so this issue has gone away atm, but I now have other issues. regards, Steve ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue OpenPGP_0x594338B1DE179AB2.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: OT but F38: Cisco SecureClient VPN suddenly stops connecting since this morning
On Fri Sep15'23 04:10:55PM, Ranjan Maitra wrote: > From: Ranjan Maitra > Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2023 16:10:55 -0500 > To: Community support for Fedora users > Reply-To: Community support for Fedora users > Subject: Re: OT but F38: Cisco SecureClient VPN suddenly stops connecting > since this morning > > On Fri Sep15'23 04:03:16PM, Ranjan Maitra wrote: > > From: Ranjan Maitra > > Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2023 16:03:16 -0500 > > To: Community Support for Fedora Users > > Reply-To: Community support for Fedora users > > Subject: OT but F38: Cisco SecureClient VPN suddenly stops connecting since > > this morning > > > > Hi, > > > > I have a strange problem, after last night's updates on F38. I am not > > actually sure that that is the cause, but I can no longer get Cisco's VPN > > to work. (I have to use Cisco's SecureClient because of the more "secure" > > 2-factor-authentication required to connect: before that, I used > > OpenConnect for a long time, and did not have a problem till I was forced > > to move to Cisco's version two years ago. I have till date not had any > > issue with Cisco either.) > > > > But that last statement in parenthesis only holds till last night. From > > this morning, I am unable to connect to Cisco's VPN. After logging in, and > > going through 2FA, all of which are successful, I get that: > > > > "Cisco Secure Client was not able to establish a connection to the > > specified secure gateway. Please try connecting again." > > > > which is on top of: > > > > "The certificate on the secure gateway is invalid. A VPN connection will > > not be established." > > > > > > Things I have tried: > > > > 1) Trying on a different machine, with an up to date, F38, I have the same > > issue. > > > > 2) Using my wife's F37 machine (possibly not very up to date) and I am able > > to connect on VPN using the same account, so the issue seems to be with me > > and F38. > > > > 3) Back to my F38 machine, I looked at /var/log/report as the connection > > was happening, and got the following, and was wondering if it shows > > anything that is fixable. > > > > After another reject: this time, the file is probably just over 60.001 KB > because of added header, etc information, I put this file at: > > https://paste.centos.org/view/6e50432b > Downgrading glibc (from 2.37-5 to 2.37-1) gets around the problem (in that I can log on). So, is this is a bug or an enhanced feature that Cisco or the people who control my certificate have not gotten around to? Best wishes, Ranjan ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: OT but F38: Cisco SecureClient VPN suddenly stops connecting since this morning
On Fri Sep15'23 05:24:55PM, Tom Horsley wrote: > From: Tom Horsley > Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2023 17:24:55 -0400 > To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org > Reply-To: Community support for Fedora users > Subject: Re: OT but F38: Cisco SecureClient VPN suddenly stops connecting > since this morning > > On Fri, 15 Sep 2023 16:10:55 -0500 > Ranjan Maitra wrote: > > > > "The certificate on the secure gateway is invalid. A VPN connection will > > > not be established." > > That usually means the server at the other end has an expired certificate. > That seems to happen quite frequently because the previous sysadmin > didn't set up any kind of reminder that the new admin would need to > renew the certs when they expire. (Or didn't set up a reminder for himself). Thanks very much! That is what I was originally thinking, also. But how is it that the same account works when I use the less up to date F37 machine (my wife's, who is now going to be even less convinced about being up to date)? Many thanks, Ranjan ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: OT but F38: Cisco SecureClient VPN suddenly stops connecting since this morning
On Fri, 15 Sep 2023 16:10:55 -0500 Ranjan Maitra wrote: > > "The certificate on the secure gateway is invalid. A VPN connection will > > not be established." That usually means the server at the other end has an expired certificate. That seems to happen quite frequently because the previous sysadmin didn't set up any kind of reminder that the new admin would need to renew the certs when they expire. (Or didn't set up a reminder for himself). ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: GPT Partition
On 09/15/2023 03:11 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote: The advantage btrfs has is that the volumes share the same space. So you can have / and /home be separate, but you don't have to decide on how much space each one gets. And you can still do a re-install while keeping the files in /home. Also, if the drive runs out of space, you can expand the filesystem onto another drive. Snapshots can also be nice in certain cases. Considering how big drives are today and that I specified a home user, how likely is it that you're going to run out of space? I have never seen the slightest need for LVM on a home box, but it's still the default on all of the workstation spins. ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: GPT Partition
On 9/15/23 14:05, Joe Zeff wrote: On 09/15/2023 02:20 PM, John Mellor wrote: Fedora desktop uses BTRFS by default for a number of really good reasons. BTRFS detects bit-rot on the fly. With mirrored or RAIDed disks it can also correct that bit-rot on the fly. And what advantages does either it or LVM have for a home user with one desktop and one laptop? The advantage btrfs has is that the volumes share the same space. So you can have / and /home be separate, but you don't have to decide on how much space each one gets. And you can still do a re-install while keeping the files in /home. Also, if the drive runs out of space, you can expand the filesystem onto another drive. Snapshots can also be nice in certain cases. ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: OT but F38: Cisco SecureClient VPN suddenly stops connecting since this morning
On Fri Sep15'23 04:03:16PM, Ranjan Maitra wrote: > From: Ranjan Maitra > Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2023 16:03:16 -0500 > To: Community Support for Fedora Users > Reply-To: Community support for Fedora users > Subject: OT but F38: Cisco SecureClient VPN suddenly stops connecting since > this morning > > Hi, > > I have a strange problem, after last night's updates on F38. I am not > actually sure that that is the cause, but I can no longer get Cisco's VPN to > work. (I have to use Cisco's SecureClient because of the more "secure" > 2-factor-authentication required to connect: before that, I used OpenConnect > for a long time, and did not have a problem till I was forced to move to > Cisco's version two years ago. I have till date not had any issue with Cisco > either.) > > But that last statement in parenthesis only holds till last night. From this > morning, I am unable to connect to Cisco's VPN. After logging in, and going > through 2FA, all of which are successful, I get that: > > "Cisco Secure Client was not able to establish a connection to the specified > secure gateway. Please try connecting again." > > which is on top of: > > "The certificate on the secure gateway is invalid. A VPN connection will not > be established." > > > Things I have tried: > > 1) Trying on a different machine, with an up to date, F38, I have the same > issue. > > 2) Using my wife's F37 machine (possibly not very up to date) and I am able > to connect on VPN using the same account, so the issue seems to be with me > and F38. > > 3) Back to my F38 machine, I looked at /var/log/report as the connection was > happening, and got the following, and was wondering if it shows anything that > is fixable. > After another reject: this time, the file is probably just over 60.001 KB because of added header, etc information, I put this file at: https://paste.centos.org/view/6e50432b Many thanks for any suggestions, and best wishes, Ranjan ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: GPT Partition
On 09/15/2023 02:20 PM, John Mellor wrote: Fedora desktop uses BTRFS by default for a number of really good reasons. BTRFS detects bit-rot on the fly. With mirrored or RAIDed disks it can also correct that bit-rot on the fly. And what advantages does either it or LVM have for a home user with one desktop and one laptop? ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
OT but F38: Cisco SecureClient VPN suddenly stops connecting since this morning
Hi, I have a strange problem, after last night's updates on F38. I am not actually sure that that is the cause, but I can no longer get Cisco's VPN to work. (I have to use Cisco's SecureClient because of the more "secure" 2-factor-authentication required to connect: before that, I used OpenConnect for a long time, and did not have a problem till I was forced to move to Cisco's version two years ago. I have till date not had any issue with Cisco either.) But that last statement in parenthesis only holds till last night. From this morning, I am unable to connect to Cisco's VPN. After logging in, and going through 2FA, all of which are successful, I get that: "Cisco Secure Client was not able to establish a connection to the specified secure gateway. Please try connecting again." which is on top of: "The certificate on the secure gateway is invalid. A VPN connection will not be established." Things I have tried: 1) Trying on a different machine, with an up to date, F38, I have the same issue. 2) Using my wife's F37 machine (possibly not very up to date) and I am able to connect on VPN using the same account, so the issue seems to be with me and F38. 3) Back to my F38 machine, I looked at /var/log/report as the connection was happening, and got the following, and was wondering if it shows anything that is fixable. However turning this file in pegs the message at 62KB (which is over the limit of 60KB, that I was not aware of and causes the post to be rejected) so I will send that in the next email. In the meantime, if you have some ideas on what is going on, please let me know. Many thanks and best wishes, Ranjan ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: GPT Partition
On 2023-09-15 2:07 p.m., Peter Boy wrote: Am 15.09.2023 um 17:23 schrieb Bill Cunningham : WHat is the reason Peter behind xfs being used on the server edition and btrfs on the workstation? I pretty much stick with ext3. I don't even use ext4 really. I've never used xfs. It is basically about data protection, performances, reliability and easy administration (seehttps://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/server-working-group/docs/server-technical-specification/) So, the Fedora server editions (i.e. Server and CoreOS) use LVM/xfs. And please, think twice when you read something like "BTRFS protects us from "silent" corruption of files, which is more of an issue with large volumes of data“ or „... large organizations with many users, btrfs is expected to reduce problems with data corruption…“. It’s more kind of marketing speech than any valid decision criteria or technically based argument. If you use the search engine of your preference you will find a lot of detailed and and technically based discussions of Fedora and Red Hat engineers about the topic. As in most cases, there is no „one absolute truth“ about filesystems as many missionaries claim again and again. It is a question of weighing and criteria for a use case or also for a type of use cases. Umm, no. Fedora server uses LVM because that's what most people have upgraded from. It adds another data layer to the i/o stack, increasing on-disk complexity. It is normally required under XFS to provide the missing pieces like RAID levels and snapshots, as XFS was designed in the 70s with hardware RAID in use. Its also what most sysadmins were trained to use, and its hard to change old habits. Its solid, but really old tech that BTRFS and ZFS can almost always do better. Unlike LVM, RAID-5/6 is currently a problem for BTRFS, as it has the write-hole bug that almost all hardware and software implementations also have with the exception of ZFS. Disks are really cheap, so 2 or 3-way mirroring or RAID-1 are currently the ways to go on BTRFS. It should be noted that imho the RAID-Z levels on ZFS are superior to all other solutions for reliable data preservation and performance. Fedora server uses XFS because that's what RHEL and therefore the certified sysadmins use. Consumer disks are actually more reliable than enterprise disks, but stall for very long periods when re-reading failing sectors. So, BTRFS actually works better on enterprise disks, as the stall is far smaller. It is probably the #3 or 4 filesystem around for performance and reliability, but managing it is positively arcane. There are a number of normal admin operations that are very difficult using XFS, such as shrinking a filesystem (even by a couple of sectors to use a replacement disk). It also does no runtime error detection/correction of your data, so you depend upon RAID hardware or LVM to do that for you. If you get an error detected during one of these repair sweeps, recovery is usually no better than an uncorrectable multi-bit BTRFS or ZFS failure. Putting XFS on a single disk is very questionable as a result. Fedora desktop uses BTRFS by default for a number of really good reasons. BTRFS detects bit-rot on the fly. With mirrored or RAIDed disks it can also correct that bit-rot on the fly. XFS cannot do that, and requires weekly error detection work. Putting ZFS or BTRFS on RAID hardware actually makes everything slower, as they do a better, faster and more reliable job in software. BTRFS and ZFS also have many operational advantages, like much faster migrations, near-instantaneous snapshotting and rollback (LVM takes hours to do the same), and much faster off-machine backups. While ZFS is the gold standard for reliable filesystems, with the exception of the Ubuntu and Oracle platforms, it cannot be used without paying Oracle lots of money. BTRFS reimplements much of ZFS in a legally unencumbered codebase. It is unclear why Fedora has not moved server installs to BTRFS by default, as the advantages in complexity, training and data reliability are huge. Those all make a BTRFS or ZFS server cheaper to operate, sometimes by a considerable margin. I know all the RHEL sysadmin people will come out of the woodwork and start shouting about that statement, but just maybe they are incorrect. YMMV of course. ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: GPT Partition
> Am 15.09.2023 um 17:23 schrieb Bill Cunningham : > > >> ... >> >> WHat is the reason Peter behind xfs being used on the server edition and >> btrfs on the workstation? I pretty much stick with ext3. I don't even use >> ext4 really. I've never used xfs. > > Bill It is basically about data protection, performances, reliability and easy administration (see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/server-working-group/docs/server-technical-specification/) So, the Fedora server editions (i.e. Server and CoreOS) use LVM/xfs. And please, think twice when you read something like "BTRFS protects us from "silent" corruption of files, which is more of an issue with large volumes of data“ or „... large organizations with many users, btrfs is expected to reduce problems with data corruption…“. It’s more kind of marketing speech than any valid decision criteria or technically based argument. If you use the search engine of your preference you will find a lot of detailed and and technically based discussions of Fedora and Red Hat engineers about the topic. As in most cases, there is no „one absolute truth“ about filesystems as many missionaries claim again and again. It is a question of weighing and criteria for a use case or also for a type of use cases. Peter -- Peter Boy https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy p...@fedoraproject.org Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST /UTC+2) Fedora Server Edition Working Group member Fedora Docs team contributor and board member Java developer and enthusiast ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Problem with mediawriter on old Fedora installation
Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 9/14/23 17:21, Joe Zeff wrote: >> On 09/14/2023 03:49 PM, Mike Wright wrote: >>> dd if=f38.iso of=/dev/sdX bs=1m (see note below about bs=) >> >> I've always used mediawriter ever since it was available, and whatever >> came before that as well. This is the first time I've ever had to use >> dd, and I can now tell you that your suggestion works, except for two >> little things: one, you need to do it as root, and second, that should >> be bs=1MB. Thanx again! > > Maybe it just needs to be uppercase. "bs=1M" works. It does, although M and MB do mean slightly different things (not that it likely matters in this case). From dd(1): N and BYTES may be followed by the following multiplicative suffixes: c=1, w=2, b=512, kB=1000, K=1024, MB=1000*1000, M=1024*1024, xM=M, GB=1000*1000*1000, G=1024*1024*1024, and so on for T, P, E, Z, Y. Binary prefixes can be used, too: KiB=K, MiB=M, and so on. If N ends in 'B', it counts bytes not blocks. -- 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: GPT Partition
Bill Cunningham composed on 2023-09-15 11:23 (UTC-0400): >> WHat is the reason Peter behind xfs being used on the server edition and >> btrfs on the workstation? I pretty much stick with ext3. I don't even use >> ext4 really. I use EXT3 and EXT4. EXT4 is much faster. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: GPT Partition
On 9/15/2023 2:56 AM, Peter Boy wrote: Am 15.09.2023 um 04:57 schrieb Felix Miata : BTRFS devs seem to think only one is somehow better due to its inclusion of LVM technology. There is no „inclusion of LVM technology“ in BTRFS. LVM provides you with several separate filesystems, completely independent from each other. A file system failure in one LVM volume does not affect any of the other volumes. All data in other volumes are safe. In BTRFS, everything is a single huge file system, (sub)volumes are just logical groupings within a single, in the worst case faulty, file system. The advantage of BTRFS is greater flexibility and effectiveness of disk capacity usage, at the expense of data protection. WHat is the reason Peter behind xfs being used on the server edition and btrfs on the workstation? I pretty much stick with ext3. I don't even use ext4 really. I've never used xfs. Bill ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[389-users] Re: Migration: importing an OU to a new instance
An interesting suggestion, but part of my goal for the migration is to move to a simpler configuration and this will mostly likely be a one time import. ___ 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-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/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[389-users] Re: Migration: importing an OU to a new instance
That's a clever idea, thanks. That may be just what I need. ___ 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-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/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: OT: Inventory able to track racks, shelves and shelve sections?
On Fri, 15 Sep 2023 00:47:06 +0700 Frederic Muller wrote: > I've been looking for a inventory free software to track the mess I > have in my workshop and haven't found anything able to "adequately" > track shelves numbers and sub-divisions. > > It seemed to be something very obvious for me, imagining big > warehouses with shelves and cartons and people being easily able to > find that carton full of that, in row 18, rack 99, shelve 3 > inside section B. Well it is not. In fact warehouses are often > treated as "locations" with nothing else in most cases. > > So I am curious if anyone knows of any way (I thought of using the > comment section but that's not really a great way to do it) to handle > this, or any software if it exists? > > Thank you very much for your insights. It isn't a ready made solution, but this sounds like it is perfect for a relational database. The table has columns for each of the location characteristics, as well as a unique numerical key for each row, and an item description you can search on. When you want to find something you just run a sql query. Any application that performs this is probably going to do exactly this, except it will take the description of the item as input and create the query for you, returning the items that match. e.g. so, maybe there are several different types of bolts in inventory, but each of them has bolt in their description. When you run the query, the description and location are returned, and you can pick the one that you were looking for. The description can consist of several keywords, so you could also use a query that selects for two keywords to get an exact match. As you have probably figured out, the work here is all in the creation of the database, as every item has to be entered into the database. But, even with a tailor made application for this, you would have to do the same. And, you have to keep the database up to date, so if you replace an item in a location, you have to update the database to reflect that. Again, same with a tailor made application. Pretty much any sql database will be able to do this, as it isn't using any sophisticated sql characteristics, like triggers or stored procedures. No atomic transaction considerations either if you are the only one using the database. ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: GPT Partition
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 3:57 AM Peter Boy wrote: > > > > Am 15.09.2023 um 04:57 schrieb Felix Miata : > > > > BTRFS devs seem to > > think only one is somehow better due to its inclusion of LVM technology. > > There is no „inclusion of LVM technology“ in BTRFS. LVM provides you with > several separate filesystems, completely independent from each other. A > file system failure in one LVM volume does not affect any of the other > volumes. All data in other volumes are safe. In BTRFS, everything is a > single huge file system, (sub)volumes are just logical groupings within a > single, in the worst case faulty, file system. The advantage of BTRFS is > greater flexibility and effectiveness of disk capacity usage, at the > expense of data protection. > BTRFS protects us from "silent" corruption of files, which is more of an issue with large volumes of data. The greater flexibility and effectiveness of BTRFS minimizes the need to reorganize filesystems when a partition runs out of space. For large organizations with many users, btrfs is expected to reduce problems with data corruption, time spent paying users to do housekeeping tasks, and the added wear on flash memory of reorganizing filesystems. -- 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[389-users] Re: Migration: importing an OU to a new instance
On 9/13/23 19:57, tda...@arizona.edu wrote: Thanks for the quick reply. My issue is this: Server A has two OUs, call them ou=A and ou=B. Server B has two OUs, ou=A (empty) and ou=C. I want to copy the data from ou=A on server A to ou=A on server B. There are no ou=B entries in the export file from server A and for the import task I add to server B, I set this attribute: nsExcludeSuffix: ou=B When this task runs, it populates ou=A on server B but also completely deletes OU=C Any way around this? Except Mark's suggestion the only option I can think of would be to create dedicated backend/suffix for ou=A, ou=B and ou=C. If you plan to do frequent export/import or even setup replication that could be an option. regards thierry Thanks for the additional info on the other question, I guess my problem is that I don't understand the significance of entry USNs at all in 389 server, so I'm not sure how to deal with them in general and especially when it comes to instance migration. ___ 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-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/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ___ 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-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/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Problem with mediawriter on old Fedora installation
On 9/14/23 17:21, Joe Zeff wrote: On 09/14/2023 03:49 PM, Mike Wright wrote: I can't answer about mediawriter. dd works well for creating bootable devices. dd if=f38.iso of=/dev/sdX bs=1m (see note below about bs=) I've always used mediawriter ever since it was available, and whatever came before that as well. This is the first time I've ever had to use dd, and I can now tell you that your suggestion works, except for two little things: one, you need to do it as root, and second, that should be bs=1MB. Thanx again! Maybe it just needs to be uppercase. "bs=1M" works. ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: GPT Partition
Peter Boy composed on 2023-09-15 08:56 (UTC+0200): >> Felix Miata composed: >> BTRFS devs seem to >> think only one is somehow better due to its inclusion of LVM technology. > There is no „inclusion of LVM technology“ in BTRFS. LVM provides you with > several separate filesystems, completely independent from each other. A file > system failure in one LVM volume does not affect any of the other volumes. > All data in other volumes are safe. In BTRFS, everything is a single huge > file system, (sub)volumes are just logical groupings within a single, in the > worst case faulty, file system. You just described "LVM technology": keeping everything (except boot) in one or more partitions or disks logically combined as if only one, with subsections able to be allocated more or less size, and partitions and/or disks added or removed, all while actively in use. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: GPT Partition
> Am 15.09.2023 um 04:57 schrieb Felix Miata : > > BTRFS devs seem to > think only one is somehow better due to its inclusion of LVM technology. There is no „inclusion of LVM technology“ in BTRFS. LVM provides you with several separate filesystems, completely independent from each other. A file system failure in one LVM volume does not affect any of the other volumes. All data in other volumes are safe. In BTRFS, everything is a single huge file system, (sub)volumes are just logical groupings within a single, in the worst case faulty, file system. The advantage of BTRFS is greater flexibility and effectiveness of disk capacity usage, at the expense of data protection. -- Peter Boy https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy p...@fedoraproject.org Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST /UTC+2) Fedora Server Edition Working Group member Fedora Docs team contributor and board member Java developer and enthusiast ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
