Re: [arch-general] LXC Containers
Am Mittwoch, den 19.09.2012, 20:22 -0400 schrieb Jameson: > On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Bjoern Franke wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, den 19.09.2012, 16:09 -0400 schrieb Jameson: > >> I'm trying to setup my first LXC containers. I've managed to > >> bootstrap an Arch container, but can't login to it even after manually > >> adding a password to root in it's shadow file. I've also tried using > >> /usr/lib/lxc/templates/lxc-ubuntu to setup an Ubuntu container. That > >> seems to always return E: Invalid Release file, no entry for > >> main/binary-x86_64/Packages no matter which release I try. Does > >> anyone happen to know how to solve one or both of these problems > > > > Did you try lxc-console after starting the arch container? > > No. I set it up to run in virt-manager, and for some reason > lxc-console says that it's not running if I start it from there. I'm > going to have to hammer on the config to get lxc-start to be able to > start it. > Hm, I start my Arch-container with lxc-start. Config under https://trash.ctdo.de/a/101podmz867 regards bjo -- xmpp: b...@schafweide.org bjo.nord-west.org | nord-west.org | freifunk-ol.de
Re: [arch-general] LXC Containers
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Bjoern Franke wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 19.09.2012, 16:09 -0400 schrieb Jameson: >> I'm trying to setup my first LXC containers. I've managed to >> bootstrap an Arch container, but can't login to it even after manually >> adding a password to root in it's shadow file. I've also tried using >> /usr/lib/lxc/templates/lxc-ubuntu to setup an Ubuntu container. That >> seems to always return E: Invalid Release file, no entry for >> main/binary-x86_64/Packages no matter which release I try. Does >> anyone happen to know how to solve one or both of these problems > > Did you try lxc-console after starting the arch container? No. I set it up to run in virt-manager, and for some reason lxc-console says that it's not running if I start it from there. I'm going to have to hammer on the config to get lxc-start to be able to start it. =-Jameson
Re: [arch-general] Problem with radeon driver
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 01:27:30PM -0300, Martín Cigorraga wrote: > Which ATi card does your system have? 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI Radeon RV250 [Mobility FireGL 9000] (rev 02) (prog-if 00 [VGA controller]) Subsystem: IBM Device 0531 Flags: bus master, stepping, fast Back2Back, 66MHz, medium devsel, latency 66, IRQ 10 Memory at e000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=128M] I/O ports at 3000 [size=256] Memory at c010 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=64K] [virtual] Expansion ROM at c012 [disabled] [size=128K] Capabilities: [58] AGP version 2.0 Capabilities: [50] Power Management version 2 > My laptop have this[0] and here is my /etc/X11/xorg.conf (I haven't > splitted it yet): http://pastebin.com/jc2tfRPT. Thanks. I solved the error by ensuring that intel_agp gets loaded before radeon. This is actually mentioned in the wiki but I didn't notice it at first. But that didn't make any difference for the X11 results. I got X11 working by disabling KMS (kernel option 'nomodeset'). Still strange, since the original system worked fine with 'late' KMS enabled. The only difference (apart from all the updates) is that I replaced grub-legacy by syslinux. Ciao, -- FA A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
Re: [arch-general] LXC Containers
Am Mittwoch, den 19.09.2012, 16:09 -0400 schrieb Jameson: > I'm trying to setup my first LXC containers. I've managed to > bootstrap an Arch container, but can't login to it even after manually > adding a password to root in it's shadow file. I've also tried using > /usr/lib/lxc/templates/lxc-ubuntu to setup an Ubuntu container. That > seems to always return E: Invalid Release file, no entry for > main/binary-x86_64/Packages no matter which release I try. Does > anyone happen to know how to solve one or both of these problems Did you try lxc-console after starting the arch container? -- xmpp: b...@schafweide.org bjo.nord-west.org | nord-west.org | freifunk-ol.de
Re: [arch-general] LXC Containers
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Jameson wrote: > I'm trying to setup my first LXC containers. I've managed to > bootstrap an Arch container, but can't login to it even after manually > adding a password to root in it's shadow file. I've also tried using > /usr/lib/lxc/templates/lxc-ubuntu to setup an Ubuntu container. That > seems to always return E: Invalid Release file, no entry for > main/binary-x86_64/Packages no matter which release I try. Does > anyone happen to know how to solve one or both of these problems? Well, I answered one of my questions, already. x86_64 is not a valid architecture for Debian based systems. They call it amd64. :) Thanks, =-Jameson
[arch-general] LXC Containers
I'm trying to setup my first LXC containers. I've managed to bootstrap an Arch container, but can't login to it even after manually adding a password to root in it's shadow file. I've also tried using /usr/lib/lxc/templates/lxc-ubuntu to setup an Ubuntu container. That seems to always return E: Invalid Release file, no entry for main/binary-x86_64/Packages no matter which release I try. Does anyone happen to know how to solve one or both of these problems? Thanks, =-Jameson
Re: [arch-general] Problem with radeon driver
My dmesg message: [1.363595] [drm:radeon_agp_init] *ERROR* Unable to acquire AGP: -19 Stock arch kernel, up to date system, Ati Radeon X800Pro and add radeon module in mkinitcpio.conf. But X ok, 3D ok, play movies ok. So everything fine.
Re: [arch-general] Strange pacman problem with conflicting dependencies
On Wed, 2012-09-19 at 19:05 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Wed, 2012-09-19 at 07:11 +0300, Arthur Titeica wrote: > > On Tuesday 18 September 2012 22:19:07 Sébastien Luttringer wrote: > > > Should be fixed at the next db sync. > > > > Thanks. I confirm the fix here. > > Still borked here. > > :: Starting full system upgrade... > :: Replace virtualbox-additions with community/virtualbox-iso-additions? > [Y/n] y > :: Replace virtualbox-modules with community/virtualbox-host-modules? > [Y/n] y > :: Replace virtualbox-source with community/virtualbox-host-source? > [Y/n] y > resolving dependencies... > looking for inter-conflicts... > error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies) > :: virtualbox-hook: requires virtualbox-source Apologize. https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/vi/virtualbox-hook/PKGBUILD is fixed.
Re: [arch-general] Strange pacman problem with conflicting dependencies
On Wed, 2012-09-19 at 07:11 +0300, Arthur Titeica wrote: > On Tuesday 18 September 2012 22:19:07 Sébastien Luttringer wrote: > > Should be fixed at the next db sync. > > Thanks. I confirm the fix here. Still borked here. :: Starting full system upgrade... :: Replace virtualbox-additions with community/virtualbox-iso-additions? [Y/n] y :: Replace virtualbox-modules with community/virtualbox-host-modules? [Y/n] y :: Replace virtualbox-source with community/virtualbox-host-source? [Y/n] y resolving dependencies... looking for inter-conflicts... error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies) :: virtualbox-hook: requires virtualbox-source Regards, Ralf
Re: [arch-general] Wanted: advice dual-booting Arch and Windows 7 on new laptop
2012/9/19 Robbie Smith : > On 19/09/12 07:02, Guus Snijders wrote: >> >> 2012/9/18 Robbie Smith : >>> >>> Hi everyone >>> >>> TL;DR: I've just bought a new HP Pavilion g6-2103ax, and I'm having >>> difficulties trying to figure out how I can dual-boot it with Windows 7 >>> (which was preinstalled). >>> >>> Windows *still* defaults to using MBR partitions, and even though the >>> system >>> is UEFI, HP have used some trickery somewhere to make it boot from BIOS. >>> To >>> make matters worse, the disk table already has four partitions: >>> >>> SYSTEM: 199 MB NTFS >>> Windows C drive: ~ 450 GB NTFS >>> HP Recovery partition: 18.5 GB NTFS >>> HP_TOOLS: 99 MB FAT32 >> >> [...] >> >> Hmm, i'd guess that the recovery partition is bootable, so it's best >> not to modify it too much. The HP_Tools partition is probably just a >> data partition (and not a very interesting one, but ymmv). >> First of; do you have (or can you create) a recovery disk in case all >> goes wrong? >> [moving and deleting partitions] >> >> I'm not sure where the bootloader fits in best in the scenario, but >> that shouldn't be too hard. [...] > I can delete the recovery partition, as I've got the "recovery" (AKA factory > reset) disks from HP under warranty. The HP_TOOLS partition is at the end of > the disk, so in theory I can't add an extended partition before it, as > extended partitions are meant to be the last in the table. Although on this > Samsung netbook I've got an extended partition as the third (marked with *) > of four primaries, so it seems to work: [...] > Using that as a guide I could set up the new laptop in a similar way. Indeed. In fact an extended partition is just a "special" primary partition. In theory a single (MBR) harddisk could just as easily have 4 extended partitions. > It's a shame HP and Microsoft made it so difficult, and after this little > episode I'm beginning to suspect that the real reason Microsoft is pushing > Secure Boot is because UEFI+GPT makes it much easier to install multiple > operating systems on a machine without conflicts, but Secure Boot will > require an authorised and signed key, and guess who will control the key > distribution… I'm still not entirely sure what the real benefits of GPT are, but that's another discussion. That they made a it a bit more difficult; no argument there. I guess they assume users never touch the partition table anyway. As for secure boot: Redhead/Fedora were working (or perhaps already having) a secure bootloader. It would't be too hard to install that and use it to boot ArchLinux. ;) mvg, Guus
Re: [arch-general] Problem with radeon driver
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Fons Adriaensen wrote: > Hello all, > > Yesterday I wanted to update my IBM R51. Since this hadn't seen any updates > for half a year or so I decided to go for a full install, also to try out > the new install procedures. > > This all went very smoothly, and there's only one remaining problem. > > X11 seems to work, but > > - GUI elements (e.g. buttons) remain black or some random texture. > - Xterm has problems when scrolling - lines get overprinted, or only > some rows of pixels show up. When hitting Enter on the bottom line > the bash prompt isn't printed, but the cursor moves to the right > place. Same for filename completion etc. > - Similar problems all over the place. > > Driver is video-ati aka radeon. No xorg.conf, and using the one > installed before makes no difference. Also added 20-radeon.conf > as explained in the wiki and modified individual options, no > improvement. No errors in Xorg.0.log. > > But I found this in errors.log: > > Sep 19 13:17:33 zita2 kernel: [5.002534] [drm:radeon_agp_init] *ERROR* > Unable to acquire AGP: -19 > > Booting via syslinux, late KMS. > > Any hints ? > > Ciao, > > -- > FA > > A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. > It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris > and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow) > > Which ATi card does your system have? My laptop have this[0] and here is my /etc/X11/xorg.conf (I haven't splitted it yet): http://pastebin.com/jc2tfRPT. [0] 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI Madison [Radeon HD 5000M Series
[arch-general] Problem with radeon driver
Hello all, Yesterday I wanted to update my IBM R51. Since this hadn't seen any updates for half a year or so I decided to go for a full install, also to try out the new install procedures. This all went very smoothly, and there's only one remaining problem. X11 seems to work, but - GUI elements (e.g. buttons) remain black or some random texture. - Xterm has problems when scrolling - lines get overprinted, or only some rows of pixels show up. When hitting Enter on the bottom line the bash prompt isn't printed, but the cursor moves to the right place. Same for filename completion etc. - Similar problems all over the place. Driver is video-ati aka radeon. No xorg.conf, and using the one installed before makes no difference. Also added 20-radeon.conf as explained in the wiki and modified individual options, no improvement. No errors in Xorg.0.log. But I found this in errors.log: Sep 19 13:17:33 zita2 kernel: [5.002534] [drm:radeon_agp_init] *ERROR* Unable to acquire AGP: -19 Booting via syslinux, late KMS. Any hints ? Ciao, -- FA A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
Re: [arch-general] Wanted: advice dual-booting Arch and Windows 7 on new laptop
> I can delete the recovery partition, as I've got the "recovery" (AKA > factory reset) disks from HP under warranty. Personally if you have a large enough separate drive and enough patience. I would do a bit level copy which if successful is guaranteed to put the disk back exactly. #/bin/dd bs=32k if=/dev/sd? | /usr/bin/gzip > /media/usb0/hpBACKUP.dd.gz Restore with #/bin/cat /media/usb0/hpBACKUP.dd.gz | /usr/bin/gunzip | /bin/dd bs=32k of=/dev/sd? -- ___ 'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface' (Doug McIlroy) ___
Re: [arch-general] Wanted: advice dual-booting Arch and Windows 7 on new laptop
On 19/09/12 07:02, Guus Snijders wrote: 2012/9/18 Robbie Smith : Hi everyone TL;DR: I've just bought a new HP Pavilion g6-2103ax, and I'm having difficulties trying to figure out how I can dual-boot it with Windows 7 (which was preinstalled). Windows *still* defaults to using MBR partitions, and even though the system is UEFI, HP have used some trickery somewhere to make it boot from BIOS. To make matters worse, the disk table already has four partitions: SYSTEM: 199 MB NTFS Windows C drive: ~ 450 GB NTFS HP Recovery partition: 18.5 GB NTFS HP_TOOLS: 99 MB FAT32 [...] Hmm, i'd guess that the recovery partition is bootable, so it's best not to modify it too much. The HP_Tools partition is probably just a data partition (and not a very interesting one, but ymmv). First of; do you have (or can you create) a recovery disk in case all goes wrong? There might be a way to repartition the drive without losing features: 1. Resize the Windows "C" partition to free up space. Either defragment first or use windows's diskpart utitility. 2. move (don't delete!) the recovery partition next to the resized Windows partition. Now the tricky part: 3. either create an image of the tools partition or write down the *exact* sectors it's using and the partition type number. 4. create a new extended partition in the free space, size: all available. 5a. create a logical partition using the type and sectors written down at step 3 OR 5b. create a logical partition of the same type and size as written down at step 3 and restore the image to this part. 6. If you used step 5a, move this (new!) logical partition to the beginning of the free space. This is important for Windows drive letters (not sure). 7. Use the rest of the extended partition to create your Linux partitions. I'm not sure where the bootloader fits in best in the scenario, but that shouldn't be too hard. When you boot up Windows after all this, you might want to delete the driveletters it will probably create for the Linux partitions to avoid accidentally formatting them ;). Hope that helps. Note: this is just theoretical. It might work or it might not work... mvg, Gus I can delete the recovery partition, as I've got the "recovery" (AKA factory reset) disks from HP under warranty. The HP_TOOLS partition is at the end of the disk, so in theory I can't add an extended partition before it, as extended partitions are meant to be the last in the table. Although on this Samsung netbook I've got an extended partition as the third (marked with *) of four primaries, so it seems to work: # parted GNU Parted 3.1 Using /dev/sda Welcome to GNU Parted! Type 'help' to view a list of commands. (parted) p Model: ATA Hitachi HTS54323 (scsi) Disk /dev/sda: 320GB Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B Partition Table: msdos Disk Flags: Number Start End SizeType File system Flags 1 1049kB 106MB 105MB primary ntfs 2 106MB 98.9GB 98.8GB primary ntfs * 3 98.9GB 303GB 205GB extended * 5 98.9GB 233GB 134GB logical ntfs * 6 233GB 233GB 57.5MB logical ext2 boot * 7 233GB 303GB 70.0GB logicallvm 4 303GB 320GB 16.6GB primary ntfs diag Using that as a guide I could set up the new laptop in a similar way. It's a shame HP and Microsoft made it so difficult, and after this little episode I'm beginning to suspect that the real reason Microsoft is pushing Secure Boot is because UEFI+GPT makes it much easier to install multiple operating systems on a machine without conflicts, but Secure Boot will require an authorised and signed key, and guess who will control the key distribution…
Re: [arch-general] Shutdown's SIGTERM [FAIL]
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 4:17 AM, Lukas Jirkovsky wrote: > On 19 September 2012 09:02, Tom Gundersen wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 6:56 AM, Martín Cigorraga > wrote: > >> Hi, I noticed I'm getting a [FAIL] message for SIGTERM on system > >> shutdown[0], how can I debug it? I already checked /var/log but found > >> nothing :( > > > > This means that some process did not terminate before the timeout > > ended. To find out which, you could insert a call to "ps aux > > > /root/my-processes" just after the SIGTERM in rc.shutdown. > > > > -t > > Just a minor correction: it is in /etc/rc.d/functions > > Lukas > Thank you very much guys, it's just the networkmanager bug mentioned by @morris (yes, I'm using KDE SC): http://pastebin.com/YWM0GuvL.
Re: [arch-general] / mounted ro after update
On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 14:26:32 -0500 "David C. Rankin" wrote: > On 09/18/2012 03:53 AM, P .NIKOLIC wrote: > > On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 03:47:26 -0400 (EDT) > > Jude DaShiell wrote: > > > >> >Whenever does an install of archlinux, they also do a big update > >> >so it's safe to say I got nailed by this problem too. I'm not > >> >going to dismiss out of hand the probability that util-linux is > >> >at fault, but when I tried the installs this past weekend I > >> >suspected mkinitcpio or perhaps syslinux-install_update might be > >> >at fault. However if in this update process neither of those > >> >utilities were used, then both of them are cleared. It seems > >> >when util-linux finishes running after install or update it fails > >> >to set the sticky bits on partitions and lesser components in the > >> >linux file system at least in ext4 which is what I used to try > >> >the installs this past weekend in line with the installation > >> >guide on the archlinux wiki. > > HU you got me wondering now that could well be both partitions > > that have the problem are ext4 why i did not change them to my more > > normal XFS i dont know .. > > > > I may have to back a lot up and rebuild but this time i will let my > > normal hate of the entire EXT file system rule and go XFS never been > > let down there .. > > > > Pete . > > > > > > Pete, > >I have run Arch on several filesystems and I've been lucky I > guess. Currently on this box, I have ext3, ext4 and reiser (old SuSE > 10.0 partition). This box has been running since mid-2009 and updates > are usually weekly (sometimes I go a couple of weeks if I can't risk > a break due to workload) I have not had any of the mount ro weirdness > even after several multi-gigabyte updates. The current partitions I > have are: > > /dev/sdc5 on / type ext3 (rw,relatime,data=ordered) > /dev/sdc7 on /home type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered) > /dev/sda2 on /mnt/pv type reiserfs (rw,relatime) > /dev/sdb2 on /mnt/win type fuseblk > (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0,default_permissions,allow_other,blksize=4096) > >I don't know what is doing it in your case, but it seems like we > should be able to figure out where mount ro/rw logic for the resides > (I picture something like the following buried somewhere): > >if [conditional]; then > mount -o rw [whatever] >else > mount -o ro [whatever] >fi > >I suspect this may be complicated by the fact that mounting (or > remounting) takes place in several different places/processes during > the boot. Anybody familiar with this off-hand or any idea where Pete > might look to rule-in or rule-out the different parts of boot that > could effect this? Sorry I don't have more, I just haven't had the > need to dissect the boot mount process to that level before... > >I guess you are just lucky :) > Hi David yes i am torn right now between it being either SATA related or ext4 related both of which have caused me untold problems before i have had 2 previous SATA drives die because of the insult of a data connection causing crossed connections and ext4 several problems in the old Suse days . The laptop running exactly the same stuff (they are mirrors of each other) but on XFS and IDE is perfect I see a reinstall on the horizon worst luck Pete . -- Linux 7-of-9 3.5.3-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Sun Aug 26 09:14:51 CEST 2012 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Re: [arch-general] Shutdown's SIGTERM [FAIL]
On 19 September 2012 09:02, Tom Gundersen wrote: > On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 6:56 AM, Martín Cigorraga wrote: >> Hi, I noticed I'm getting a [FAIL] message for SIGTERM on system >> shutdown[0], how can I debug it? I already checked /var/log but found >> nothing :( > > This means that some process did not terminate before the timeout > ended. To find out which, you could insert a call to "ps aux > > /root/my-processes" just after the SIGTERM in rc.shutdown. > > -t Just a minor correction: it is in /etc/rc.d/functions Lukas
Re: [arch-general] Shutdown's SIGTERM [FAIL]
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 9:02 AM, Tom Gundersen wrote: > On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 6:56 AM, Martín Cigorraga > wrote: > > Hi, I noticed I'm getting a [FAIL] message for SIGTERM on system > > shutdown[0], how can I debug it? I already checked /var/log but found > > nothing :( > > This means that some process did not terminate before the timeout > ended. To find out which, you could insert a call to "ps aux > > /root/my-processes" just after the SIGTERM in rc.shutdown. > > -t > if you are using networkmanager, you could be affected by https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/31115 Morris
Re: [arch-general] Shutdown's SIGTERM [FAIL]
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 6:56 AM, Martín Cigorraga wrote: > Hi, I noticed I'm getting a [FAIL] message for SIGTERM on system > shutdown[0], how can I debug it? I already checked /var/log but found > nothing :( This means that some process did not terminate before the timeout ended. To find out which, you could insert a call to "ps aux > /root/my-processes" just after the SIGTERM in rc.shutdown. -t
