Re: [gentoo-user] Rename /dev/nvme0n1 to /dev/sda

[Canek Peláez Valdés]

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 6:26 AM, J. Roeleveld  wrote:
> On 3 September 2017 20:11:51 GMT+02:00, "Canek Peláez Valdés" <
can...@gmail.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
> >The label by itself works at boot since it's just another kernel
> >parameter;
> >for example in my latop (that uses NVME, by the way) uses the following
> >in
> >the kernel command line: "root=LABEL=Dell".
>
> Since when does the kernel support labels? Last time I checked, you need
an initramfs to make that work.

You are absolutely right; the kernel only supports "PARTUUID="
out-of-the-box (/usr/src/linux/init/do_mounts.c:218), the "LABEL=" ids are
implemented by the initramfs, dracut in my case
(/usr/lib/dracut/modules.d/98dracut-systemd/rootfs-generator.sh:87).

The "LABEL=" id  gets translated to the corresponding /dev/disks/by-label
link, so those are the ones that should be used all the time.

Thanks for the clarification.

Regards.
--
Dr. Canek Peláez Valdés
Profesor de Carrera Asociado C
Departamento de Matemáticas
Facultad de Ciencias
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

Re: [gentoo-user] Rename /dev/nvme0n1 to /dev/sda

[J. Roeleveld]

On 3 September 2017 20:11:51 GMT+02:00, "Canek Peláez Valdés" 
 wrote:
>On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Grant  wrote:
>>
>> >> My new laptop uses /dev/nvme0n1 instead of /dev/sda which
>conflicts
>> >> with the script I use to manage about 12 similar laptops running
>> >> Gentoo.  Is there a udev method for renaming the disk that will
>work
>> >> well with any USB disks that happen to also be attached?
>> >>
>> >> crw--- 1 root root 252, 0 Aug 31 11:34 /dev/nvme0
>> >> brw-rw 1 root disk 259, 0 Aug 31 11:34 /dev/nvme0n1
>> >> brw-rw 1 root disk 259, 1 Aug 31 11:34 /dev/nvme0n1p1
>> >> brw-rw 1 root disk 259, 2 Aug 31 11:34 /dev/nvme0n1p2
>> >
>> > Isn't so much easier to use labels? Those are automatically
>available on
>> > /dev/disk/by-label, and you can use them in basically any type of
>partition,
>> > including Windows (NTFS and vfat) and swaps.
>>
>>
>> Do labels work with root= in grub and stuff like dd, fdisk, and mkfs?
>
>The label by itself works at boot since it's just another kernel
>parameter;
>for example in my latop (that uses NVME, by the way) uses the following
>in
>the kernel command line: "root=LABEL=Dell".

Since when does the kernel support labels? Last time I checked, you need an 
initramfs to make that work.

--
Joost 



-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Re: [gentoo-user] Rename /dev/nvme0n1 to /dev/sda

[Rich Freeman]

On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 9:26 PM, Mike Gilbert  wrote:
>
> I would suggest you utilize the existing symlinks in one of the
> /dev/disk/ sub-directories, or create some udev rules to create your
> own symlinks based on whatever metadata you wish. I would also suggest
> you read the udev(7) manual page.
>

++

Labels are the most obvious solution to this sort of problem
(especially if you want a generic system image that you can install in
multiple places and not have to tweak).  UUIDs are the other obvious
solution, but that does need to be tailored to each install.

I have used extra symlinks with udev in other situations.  For
example, I used to control two tuners via pl2303 serial ports and I
used a rule to add a symlink based on the physical USB port each was
plugged into, since otherwise I couldn't rely on the two devices being
enumerated consistently.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Rename /dev/nvme0n1 to /dev/sda

[Mike Gilbert]

On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Grant  wrote:
> My new laptop uses /dev/nvme0n1 instead of /dev/sda which conflicts
> with the script I use to manage about 12 similar laptops running
> Gentoo.  Is there a udev method for renaming the disk that will work
> well with any USB disks that happen to also be attached?

 I'm not certain what you mean by that, but I would guess that you want
 the nvme disk to show up as /dev/sda, and the USB disk(s) to show up
 as /dev/sd[b-z].

 It is not possible to accomplish this using udev; the kernel owns the
 /dev/sdX device namespace, and will sequentially create devices nodes
 for SCSI-like block devices using that namespace. There is no way to
 change that using a udev rule.
>>>
>>>
>>> Can I rename /dev/sda to /dev/sd[b-z] if it's attached via USB, and
>>> then rename /dev/nvme0n1 to /dev/sda if /dev/nvme0n1 exists?
>>>
>>> Alternatively, can I rename /dev/sda to /dev/sd[b-z] if /dev/sda and
>>> /dev/nvme0n1 exist, and then rename /dev/nvme0n1 to /dev/sda if
>>> /dev/nvme0n1 exists?
>>
>> You might technically be able to do it, but I would guess it would
>> cause some nasty race conditions between the kernel and udev. It's a
>> bad idea.
>
>
> Is it the conditionals that cause this to be a bad idea?  Because I
> believe udev has functionality designed to rename devices exactly like
> this.

udev doesn't provide any functionality to rename device nodes. You can
adjust their permissions, and create symlinks, but there is no direct
way to rename them.

To rename a device node in a udev rule, you would have to call an
external command, which udev knows nothing about. After having renamed
it this way, the information in the udev device database would no
longer be consistent, and any future device events would not work
properly.

I would suggest you utilize the existing symlinks in one of the
/dev/disk/ sub-directories, or create some udev rules to create your
own symlinks based on whatever metadata you wish. I would also suggest
you read the udev(7) manual page.

Trying to coerce your nvme device to look like an sd device is really
the wrong approach to solving your problem.

Re: [gentoo-user] Rename /dev/nvme0n1 to /dev/sda

[Grant]

 My new laptop uses /dev/nvme0n1 instead of /dev/sda which conflicts
 with the script I use to manage about 12 similar laptops running
 Gentoo.  Is there a udev method for renaming the disk that will work
 well with any USB disks that happen to also be attached?
>>>
>>> I'm not certain what you mean by that, but I would guess that you want
>>> the nvme disk to show up as /dev/sda, and the USB disk(s) to show up
>>> as /dev/sd[b-z].
>>>
>>> It is not possible to accomplish this using udev; the kernel owns the
>>> /dev/sdX device namespace, and will sequentially create devices nodes
>>> for SCSI-like block devices using that namespace. There is no way to
>>> change that using a udev rule.
>>
>>
>> Can I rename /dev/sda to /dev/sd[b-z] if it's attached via USB, and
>> then rename /dev/nvme0n1 to /dev/sda if /dev/nvme0n1 exists?
>>
>> Alternatively, can I rename /dev/sda to /dev/sd[b-z] if /dev/sda and
>> /dev/nvme0n1 exist, and then rename /dev/nvme0n1 to /dev/sda if
>> /dev/nvme0n1 exists?
>
> You might technically be able to do it, but I would guess it would
> cause some nasty race conditions between the kernel and udev. It's a
> bad idea.


Is it the conditionals that cause this to be a bad idea?  Because I
believe udev has functionality designed to rename devices exactly like
this.

- Grant

Re: [gentoo-user] Rename /dev/nvme0n1 to /dev/sda

[Mike Gilbert]

On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Grant  wrote:
>>> My new laptop uses /dev/nvme0n1 instead of /dev/sda which conflicts
>>> with the script I use to manage about 12 similar laptops running
>>> Gentoo.  Is there a udev method for renaming the disk that will work
>>> well with any USB disks that happen to also be attached?
>>
>> I'm not certain what you mean by that, but I would guess that you want
>> the nvme disk to show up as /dev/sda, and the USB disk(s) to show up
>> as /dev/sd[b-z].
>>
>> It is not possible to accomplish this using udev; the kernel owns the
>> /dev/sdX device namespace, and will sequentially create devices nodes
>> for SCSI-like block devices using that namespace. There is no way to
>> change that using a udev rule.
>
>
> Can I rename /dev/sda to /dev/sd[b-z] if it's attached via USB, and
> then rename /dev/nvme0n1 to /dev/sda if /dev/nvme0n1 exists?
>
> Alternatively, can I rename /dev/sda to /dev/sd[b-z] if /dev/sda and
> /dev/nvme0n1 exist, and then rename /dev/nvme0n1 to /dev/sda if
> /dev/nvme0n1 exists?

You might technically be able to do it, but I would guess it would
cause some nasty race conditions between the kernel and udev. It's a
bad idea.

Re: [gentoo-user] Is my SSD dying?

[R0b0t1]

On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 2:39 AM, Peter Humphrey  wrote:
> On Sunday, 3 September 2017 03:34:06 BST R0b0t1 wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Peter Humphrey 
> wrote:
>> > A week or two ago I was investigating some other weirdnesses and at one
>> > point I zeroed out the first partition: the unformatted one containing
>> > the UEFI data. It took longer than I expected, having only 2MB to fill.
>> > I wonder if it strayed outside the partition...
>>
>> Are you trimming your drive?
>
> Yes; this is root's crontab:
>
> 9 3,15 * * */sbin/fstrim -a
>

I think a reduction in drive performance (when you are maintaining it
properly) is the best argument for being ready to replace the drive,
as this seems unlikely to happen to me unless the drive is actually
wearing out.

At the same time I have seen this exact situation fixed by a firmware
upgrade. Still, this seems more alarming than the other issues you've
described.

Re: [gentoo-user] Ruby - 3 versions - seriously????

[R0b0t1]

On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 1:08 AM, Hans de Graaff  wrote:
> The situation with ruby really isn't different from python or perl at
> all. We also have multiple python versions in the tree just like with
> ruby. perl is not slotted but faces the same issues on each version (e.g.
> the "no . in INC path anymore" issue that made ruby 1.8 to 1.9 such a big
> deal).
>

I think the takeaway from Alan's comment is that Python is unnaturally
stable compared to other interpreted languages. One might be inclined
to think Python developers consider their work to be a widely used
tool as opposed to a toy to play with.

Consequently the number of breaking changes does seem to be far higher
in Ruby. Please see my reply to Marvin below.

> I find it very unlikely that you would *need* all three versions, unless
> you are doing ruby development and want to actively use all three. The
> RUBY_TARGETS="ruby22" advice matches the current default in the profile.
>

Then why does he have all three installed?


On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 5:31 AM, Marvin Gülker  wrote:
> Am 02. September 2017 um 21:18 Uhr -0500 schrieb R0b0t1 :
>> Seeing as the OP is saying there are 3 versions queued for merge and
>> he has not installed any of them by hand it looks like Alan is
>> right. Perhaps the OP is using "old" Ruby based software, but software
>> of that age in another language could work on new interpreters.
>
> I took a moment and looked up the release announcements for the minor
> version releases between the versions the OP has installed:
>
> * https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2015/12/25/ruby-2-3-0-released/
> * https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2016/12/25/ruby-2-4-0-released/
>
> 2.4.0 saw breaking changes, 2.3.0 not. In 2.4.0, the most notable
> breaking change was the unification of Fixnum and Bignum into
> Integer. Other breaking changes affected the standard library (stdlib):
>
> * Tk was dropped from the stdlib.
> * XMLRPC was dropped from the stdlib.
> * Support for OpenSSL <= 0.9.7 was dropped from the stdlib.
>
> For Tk specifically, the reason for the removal was that the maintainer
> got demotivated by useless and even hostile feedback[1] and since nobody
> wanted step up, the library was removed from the stdlib[2].
>
> The exact judgement of how grave these changes are is subjective. Fixnum
> and Bignum were not classes commonly used in Ruby code, so it may be
> viewed as a detail. They saw a more frequent use in C extensions, which
> may then be viewed more grave; the release announcement iself is pretty
> clear on this topic:
>
> Ruby 2.4.0 release announcment from 2016-12-25:
>> All C extensions which touch the Fixnum or Bignum class need to be
>> fixed.
>
> I was not too happy with this either, but most software continued to
> work.
>

These are all fairly major changes for a minor release. I'm not really
sure any of this evidence supports the opinion that Ruby doesn't
experience breaking changes more regularly than other languages. E.g.
Python doesn't see name changes or standard class removals in minor
versions. There has only been one major set of breaking change to
date, Python 2 to Python 3, and it seems like the Python developers
will continue

> I don't know the reason why the OP was left with three versions of
> Ruby. Given the above release announcements, there are not too many
> reasons why his software should not work with newer versions of
> Ruby.
>
> All this only applies to the core language. Some RubyGems packages
> release very rigorously and some even make use of undocumented features
> of (the C interface of) the Ruby language. That's however a different
> problem.
>

Leading into my next point, I remember some conversations about people
discussing the Ruby parser and how there was no BNF description of the
language. Consequently (from memory) there was at least one
implementation of Ruby were encountering regressions in the parser
between versions that were undocumented and not detected until the
releases had already been made. The result was that code was
semantically different between some versions. Regrettably I'm having
trouble citing this one.

Situations like the above, and reliance on private C interfaces, are
what makes it seem plausible to me that there are packages that
require a version that has no listed breaking changes. I admit I have
not looked in great detail because I do not have the time.

> Am 02. September 2017 um 21:18 Uhr -0500 schrieb R0b0t1 :
>> One of the reasons I dislike Ruby is that there is no complete
>> specification of the language available, making this statement
>> (technically) untestable.
>
> There *is* a formal complete ISO specification of the language available,
> approved in 2012[3].
>

This statement makes me think you haven't tried to understand the
issue, as that ISO document - to the best of my knowledge, I can't
actually view it without paying money - implements Ruby 1.8.1 and

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Easiest way to block domains?

[Dale]

Mick wrote:
> On Sunday, 3 September 2017 08:37:11 BST Peter Humphrey wrote:
>> On Sunday, 3 September 2017 02:30:59 BST Dale wrote:
>>> Odd how some things work and some don't.
>> Allow me to introduce you to my old friend KMail ...
> Hmm ... mine was playing up since I moved to 5.5.3 and enabled USE=google for 
> kdepim.  It would not resync Gmail folders after the first time it connected 
> to the Gmail servers.  Changing imap.gmail.com to imap.googlemail.com fixed 
> this.  Meanwhile, an identical set up on another box, with the exception that 
> it runs the full Kontact PIM suite rather than Kmail alone, works fine with 
> imap.gmail.com and folders are updated regularly.  Go figure ...
>


Now y'all know me.  If I were still using Kmail, I'd run into a whole
host of issues, that no one else does or even thinks possible.  :/

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Rename /dev/nvme0n1 to /dev/sda

[Canek Peláez Valdés]

On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Grant  wrote:
>
> >> My new laptop uses /dev/nvme0n1 instead of /dev/sda which conflicts
> >> with the script I use to manage about 12 similar laptops running
> >> Gentoo.  Is there a udev method for renaming the disk that will work
> >> well with any USB disks that happen to also be attached?
> >>
> >> crw--- 1 root root 252, 0 Aug 31 11:34 /dev/nvme0
> >> brw-rw 1 root disk 259, 0 Aug 31 11:34 /dev/nvme0n1
> >> brw-rw 1 root disk 259, 1 Aug 31 11:34 /dev/nvme0n1p1
> >> brw-rw 1 root disk 259, 2 Aug 31 11:34 /dev/nvme0n1p2
> >
> > Isn't so much easier to use labels? Those are automatically available on
> > /dev/disk/by-label, and you can use them in basically any type of
partition,
> > including Windows (NTFS and vfat) and swaps.
>
>
> Do labels work with root= in grub and stuff like dd, fdisk, and mkfs?

The label by itself works at boot since it's just another kernel parameter;
for example in my latop (that uses NVME, by the way) uses the following in
the kernel command line: "root=LABEL=Dell".

For all the other utilities you mention the label by itself probably
doesn't work, but the links in /dev/disk/by-label are just symlinks to the
corresponding disks and partitions, so every single Unix utility works with
them. My links are like so:

dell ~ # ll /dev/disk/by-label/
total 0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 Aug 29 06:20 Dell -> ../../nvme0n1p2
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 Aug 29 06:20 EFI -> ../../nvme0n1p1
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 Aug 29 06:20 Swap -> ../../nvme0n1p3

And so /dev/disk/by-label/Dell is just the second partition of the first
NVME disk (or chip, or wathever). They work with anything, execept with
fdisk because there are no labels for whole disks, only for partitions.

Regards.
--
Dr. Canek Peláez Valdés
Profesor de Carrera Asociado C
Departamento de Matemáticas
Facultad de Ciencias
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

Re: [gentoo-user] Rename /dev/nvme0n1 to /dev/sda

[Grant]

>> My new laptop uses /dev/nvme0n1 instead of /dev/sda which conflicts
>> with the script I use to manage about 12 similar laptops running
>> Gentoo.  Is there a udev method for renaming the disk that will work
>> well with any USB disks that happen to also be attached?
>
> I'm not certain what you mean by that, but I would guess that you want
> the nvme disk to show up as /dev/sda, and the USB disk(s) to show up
> as /dev/sd[b-z].
>
> It is not possible to accomplish this using udev; the kernel owns the
> /dev/sdX device namespace, and will sequentially create devices nodes
> for SCSI-like block devices using that namespace. There is no way to
> change that using a udev rule.


Can I rename /dev/sda to /dev/sd[b-z] if it's attached via USB, and
then rename /dev/nvme0n1 to /dev/sda if /dev/nvme0n1 exists?

Alternatively, can I rename /dev/sda to /dev/sd[b-z] if /dev/sda and
/dev/nvme0n1 exist, and then rename /dev/nvme0n1 to /dev/sda if
/dev/nvme0n1 exists?

- Grant

Re: [gentoo-user] Rename /dev/nvme0n1 to /dev/sda

[Grant]

>> My new laptop uses /dev/nvme0n1 instead of /dev/sda which conflicts
>> with the script I use to manage about 12 similar laptops running
>> Gentoo.  Is there a udev method for renaming the disk that will work
>> well with any USB disks that happen to also be attached?
>>
>> crw--- 1 root root 252, 0 Aug 31 11:34 /dev/nvme0
>> brw-rw 1 root disk 259, 0 Aug 31 11:34 /dev/nvme0n1
>> brw-rw 1 root disk 259, 1 Aug 31 11:34 /dev/nvme0n1p1
>> brw-rw 1 root disk 259, 2 Aug 31 11:34 /dev/nvme0n1p2
>
> Isn't so much easier to use labels? Those are automatically available on
> /dev/disk/by-label, and you can use them in basically any type of partition,
> including Windows (NTFS and vfat) and swaps.


Do labels work with root= in grub and stuff like dd, fdisk, and mkfs?

- Grant

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: High resolution on a 13 inch screen

[Grant]

>> My laptop's 13" screen has a native resolution of 3200x1800 which
>> makes everything crazy small on-screen.  Is there a good method for
>> telling Xorg or xfce4 to compensate, or should I one-at-a-time my
>> applications?
>
> Depends on your desktop. I'm not sure if XFCE supports this, but in KDE
> everything scales to my monitor's DPI automatically.
>
> What is the output of:
>
>   xdpyinfo | grep -i resolution
>
> (The utility is in the x11-apps/xdpyinfo package.)
>
> On such a small screen, the result should be a very high DPI (around 282.)
> If that's not the number you get, then your graphics driver is reporting it
> wrong to Xorg, and you need to set it manually.


This led me to the DisplaySize parameter for xorg.conf which helps a lot.

Thanks,
Grant

Re: [gentoo-user] Ruby - 3 versions - seriously????

[Marvin Gülker]

Am 02. September 2017 um 21:18 Uhr -0500 schrieb R0b0t1 :
> Seeing as the OP is saying there are 3 versions queued for merge and
> he has not installed any of them by hand it looks like Alan is
> right. Perhaps the OP is using "old" Ruby based software, but software
> of that age in another language could work on new interpreters.

I took a moment and looked up the release announcements for the minor
version releases between the versions the OP has installed:

* https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2015/12/25/ruby-2-3-0-released/
* https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2016/12/25/ruby-2-4-0-released/

2.4.0 saw breaking changes, 2.3.0 not. In 2.4.0, the most notable
breaking change was the unification of Fixnum and Bignum into
Integer. Other breaking changes affected the standard library (stdlib):

* Tk was dropped from the stdlib.
* XMLRPC was dropped from the stdlib.
* Support for OpenSSL <= 0.9.7 was dropped from the stdlib.

For Tk specifically, the reason for the removal was that the maintainer
got demotivated by useless and even hostile feedback[1] and since nobody
wanted step up, the library was removed from the stdlib[2].

The exact judgement of how grave these changes are is subjective. Fixnum
and Bignum were not classes commonly used in Ruby code, so it may be
viewed as a detail. They saw a more frequent use in C extensions, which
may then be viewed more grave; the release announcement iself is pretty
clear on this topic:

Ruby 2.4.0 release announcment from 2016-12-25:
> All C extensions which touch the Fixnum or Bignum class need to be
> fixed.

I was not too happy with this either, but most software continued to
work.

I don't know the reason why the OP was left with three versions of
Ruby. Given the above release announcements, there are not too many
reasons why his software should not work with newer versions of
Ruby.

All this only applies to the core language. Some RubyGems packages
release very rigorously and some even make use of undocumented features
of (the C interface of) the Ruby language. That's however a different
problem.

Am 02. September 2017 um 21:18 Uhr -0500 schrieb R0b0t1 :
> One of the reasons I dislike Ruby is that there is no complete
> specification of the language available, making this statement
> (technically) untestable.

There *is* a formal complete ISO specification of the language available,
approved in 2012[3].

Marvin

[1]: Exact reasoning of the maintainer is here (in reply to me):
 http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/436401
[2]: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/8539
[3]: https://www.iso.org/standard/59579.html

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Easiest way to block domains?

[Mick]

On Sunday, 3 September 2017 08:37:11 BST Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Sunday, 3 September 2017 02:30:59 BST Dale wrote:
> > Odd how some things work and some don't.
> 
> Allow me to introduce you to my old friend KMail ...

Hmm ... mine was playing up since I moved to 5.5.3 and enabled USE=google for 
kdepim.  It would not resync Gmail folders after the first time it connected 
to the Gmail servers.  Changing imap.gmail.com to imap.googlemail.com fixed 
this.  Meanwhile, an identical set up on another box, with the exception that 
it runs the full Kontact PIM suite rather than Kmail alone, works fine with 
imap.gmail.com and folders are updated regularly.  Go figure ...

-- 
Regards,
Mick

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

[gentoo-user] Re: High resolution on a 13 inch screen

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 01/09/17 19:14, Grant wrote:

My laptop's 13" screen has a native resolution of 3200x1800 which
makes everything crazy small on-screen.  Is there a good method for
telling Xorg or xfce4 to compensate, or should I one-at-a-time my
applications?
Depends on your desktop. I'm not sure if XFCE supports this, but in KDE 
everything scales to my monitor's DPI automatically.


What is the output of:

  xdpyinfo | grep -i resolution

(The utility is in the x11-apps/xdpyinfo package.)

On such a small screen, the result should be a very high DPI (around 
282.) If that's not the number you get, then your graphics driver is 
reporting it wrong to Xorg, and you need to set it manually.

Re: [gentoo-user] Is my SSD dying?

[Peter Humphrey]

On Sunday, 3 September 2017 03:34:06 BST R0b0t1 wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Peter Humphrey  
wrote:
> > A week or two ago I was investigating some other weirdnesses and at one
> > point I zeroed out the first partition: the unformatted one containing
> > the UEFI data. It took longer than I expected, having only 2MB to fill.
> > I wonder if it strayed outside the partition...
> 
> Are you trimming your drive?

Yes; this is root's crontab:

9 3,15 * * */sbin/fstrim -a

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Easiest way to block domains?

[Peter Humphrey]

On Sunday, 3 September 2017 02:30:59 BST Dale wrote:

> Odd how some things work and some don't.

Allow me to introduce you to my old friend KMail ...

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

[gentoo-user] Re: Ruby - 3 versions - seriously????

[Hans de Graaff]

On Sat, 02 Sep 2017 22:57:12 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:

> OK, so disclaimer up front. I detest Ruby. I hate it with a passion.

Personally I find that passion is better reserved for positive things.

> You have to understand what Ruby is. It is not a language. It is 5
> languages. Like python27 and python3 are really different languages with
> much in common. The difference is the python devs have solid reasons for
> doing python3 and the transition has been mostly smooth. Each new minor
> version of ruby is a whole new language and the devs are OK with large
> breaking changes between minor version numbers.

I'm not sure this is fully fair to both ruby and python. Yes, there are 
incompatibilities between ruby versions, sometimes even large ones (1.8 
to 1.9 certainly had them), but recent versions haven't seen major 
changes and for the most part all ruby code in the gentoo repository 
works with all versions. To say that the python3 transition has been 
smooth probably doesn't do justice to the slow uptake.

> So why 3 rubys? Because they are 3 languages and you have packages that
> for whatever reason are tied to different rubys. Just pretend to
> yourself that they aren't really ruby22, ruby23 and ruby24 - they are
> php, perl and python (or whatever 3 language names you like that help
> you get past the 3 rubys! thing).

The situation with ruby really isn't different from python or perl at 
all. We also have multiple python versions in the tree just like with 
ruby. perl is not slotted but faces the same issues on each version (e.g. 
the "no . in INC path anymore" issue that made ruby 1.8 to 1.9 such a big 
deal).

> You probably need all 3. As housekeeping, you can put this in make.conf:
> RUBY_TARGETS="ruby22",
> and remove all ruby versions from world and let depclean, revdep-rebuild
> and emerge world take care of the details.

I find it very unlikely that you would *need* all three versions, unless 
you are doing ruby development and want to actively use all three. The 
RUBY_TARGETS="ruby22" advice matches the current default in the profile.

Until recently we had four different ruby versions, so we are already 
improving here. The end goal is to only have the two latest versions in 
the tree.

Hans

Re: [gentoo-user] conf.d/net routes

[Enzo Rapagnetta]

Maybe is this ...

#route add default gw IPgateway

Il 02/set/2017 21:14, "Branko Grubic"  ha scritto:
>
> On Sat, 2 Sep 2017 11:54:48 -0700
> Ian Zimmerman  wrote:
>
> > What is the exact syntax of the *_routes lines in the /etc/conf.d/net
> > file, or where is it documented?
> >
> > The wiki gives a couple of examples, but they are all either just for
> > dhcp (so no configurable routes) or else they are of the form
> >
> > eth0_routes="default via eth0"
> >
> > "via" is not something I can use on the command line of the route
> > command, at least according to its manpage.  So it can't be just
> > straight repetition of the command line.  But then, what is it?
> >
> > Motivation: I want to add a route for a point-to-point interface.
> >
>
> Some examples you can find
> in /usr/share/doc/netifrc-0.5.1/net.example.bz2
>
> Replace netifrc version with one installed on your system.
>
>

[gentoo-user] Re: Ruby - 3 versions - seriously????

[Hans de Graaff]

On Sat, 02 Sep 2017 21:33:31 +0800, Andrew Lowe wrote:

> Hi all,
>   I'm in the process of doing a world update and due to a failed 
compile,
> I have cause to look up through the list of stuff to compile/update.
> Imagine my surprise when I saw there were three versions of Ruby wanting
> to update:
> 
> [ebuild U  ] dev-lang/ruby-2.4.1-r4 [2.4.1-r3]
> [ebuild U  ] dev-lang/ruby-2.3.4-r4 [2.3.4-r3]
> [ebuild U  ] dev-lang/ruby-2.2.7-r4 [2.2.7-r3]

That is unusual unless you configured this yourself. Did you set 
RUBY_TARGETS in make.conf? Are you on stable or testing?

It would also be interesting to know what is pulling in these ruby 
versions.

>   I would prefer to get rid of Ruby, but, if memory serves me 
correctly,
> someone associated with the kernel decided it would be a good idea to
> use yet another language for something, obviously Python wasn't good
> enough

webkit-gtk and thin-provisioning-tools come to mind as pulling ruby for 
people that don't want it perse.

Hans