Re: Installing newer kernels
On 03/18/2016 07:03 PM, David Wright wrote: Well, this Pentium III is the last machine I had on my desk at work, so I'll probably run it until it dies, for sentimental reasons. I'm retired; you're probably running machines for professional reasons, which carries responsibilities I no longer have. I'm don't work on computers for pay any more -- my vocation is electrician (when work is available). So, my SOHO network and computers are a hobby (vice?). I can understand your reasons for favouring reinstallations, BTW. And I can understand the reasons for dist-upgrade. It's nice that we have more than one choice. :-) David
Re: Installing newer kernels
On 03/18/2016 01:06 PM, David Wright wrote: On Fri 18 Mar 2016 at 10:22:49 (-0700), David Christensen wrote: https://puppetlabs.com/ I can get a lot of hardware for $3000! That's why I would use the Debian version: 2016-03-18 18:20:22 dpchrist@t7400 ~ $ cat /etc/debian_version 7.9 2016-03-18 18:20:35 dpchrist@t7400 ~ $ apt-cache search puppet | egrep '^puppet' puppet - Centralized configuration management - agent startup and compatibility scripts puppet-common - Centralized configuration management puppet-el - syntax highlighting for puppet manifests in emacs puppet-testsuite - Centralized configuration management - test suite puppetmaster - Centralized configuration management - master startup and compatibility scripts puppetmaster-common - Puppet master common scripts puppetmaster-passenger - Centralised configuration management - master setup to run under mod passenger puppet-lint - check puppet manifests for style guide conformity David
Re: Installing newer kernels
On 19/03/16 09:06, David Wright wrote: >>> I'm currently using manual procedures and home-grown scripts. >>> The next step up would be a deployment/ management automation >>> tool such as Puppet: >>> >>> https://puppetlabs.com/ > I can get a lot of hardware for $3000! Puppet Enterprise is $3000. The normal version is Free (and in Debian). Richard
Re: Does anyone know how to configure a Brother MFC-J5720DW with cups?
On Fri 18 Mar 2016 at 14:41:04 +0200, Jarle Aase wrote: > Den 10. mars 2016 21:01, skrev Brian: > >Did you go through all this to set up scanning on the device? Of course > >you didn't. So why not do the same with printing and not make a song and a > >dance about it. > Scanning was simple, as the device use standard protocols. Currently I scan > to a FTP server on my PC. I trust the FTP server because I wrote it :) Thank you for that response. It helps to clarify the situation. Have you considered acting on the advice in points 3. and 4. of https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/03/msg00401.html Unless someone comes up with another technique to avoid using a proprietary driver it seems to me the only way for you print with that printer. (You can forget about points 1. and 2.).
Re: Throughput riddle
On 19/03/16 15:07, David Christensen wrote: > On 03/18/2016 06:47 PM, Richard Hector wrote: >> On 19/03/16 14:01, David Christensen wrote: >>> I use category 5E cables for Gigabit. Category 5 and category >>> 6 cables were not reliable for me. >> >> Cat 5 cables _should_ work, in theory, though I gather some don't >> work so well. If you have any cat5 or better cables that are >> unreliable, I'd suspect the individual cable, not the stated >> spec. They may just be badly made. > > Along with the tester, I also bought a 1,000 foot spool of category > 5E riser cable, a crimping tool, and crimp connectors. Now I make > my own cables and test them. :-) FWIW, most cabling professionals (of which definitely I'm not one) don't make their own cables unless they absolutely have to. Factory ones are so much more reliable. Riser cable, being intended for fixed installation, is solid core. The appropriate cable for patch leads and other flexible applications is stranded. To go with the 2 cable types, there are also different connectors for each. Since most flexible cables are stranded, so are most available connectors. If you're using solid cable with stranded connectors, you're quite likely to get an unreliable connection. As well as that, the solid cables are likely to fail sooner if they get flexed more than they're designed for. More specifically, stranded connectors have spikes intended to go through between the strands, while solid ones have springy things a bit like the connectors in a mains socket (for flat blades), but much smaller, that go either side and grip the solid wire. http://www.cableorganizer.com/articles/difference-between-solid-stranded-rj45-plugs.html Richard
Re: Throughput riddle
On 03/18/2016 09:48 AM, Celejar wrote: Hi, I'm trying to understand the throughput across the different links of my little home network, and am perplexed by the measured wireless throughput. The three main devices I'm interested in: Router: Buffalo WZR-HP-G300NH running OpenWrt (Chaos Calmer 15.05). Gigabit WAN and LAN, 802.11bgn wireless. https://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/buffalo/wzr-hp-g300h Laptop: Thinkpad T61 running Jessie 8.3. Gigabit ethernet, 802.11abgn wireless. NAS: Seagate GoFlex Net [STAK100] runninng Debian Jessie 8.3. https://archlinuxarm.org/platforms/armv5/seagate-goflex-net All throughput measurements taken with iperf (run three times and using the median result), unless specified otherwise. These first results are with the laptop connected to the router via cat5: Laptop - NAS: ~874 Mbps. I use category 5E cables for Gigabit. Category 5 and category 6 cables were not reliable for me. Perhaps the NAS has an automatic crossover feature on it's Gigabit port. If you do a computer-cable-computer test, you will want a (category 5E) crossover cable. Make sure you are using the right cables and that they are known good. I own an Ideal LinkMaster cable tester, and it has been worth every penny: http://www.amazon.com/Linkmaster-UTP-stp-Cable-Tester/dp/B000LDC3LA I suppose this is close enough to the gigabit theoretical max, and there isn't any significant bottleneck. Router - NAS: ~217 Mbps Router - laptop:~198 Mbps Here the router CPU is apparently the bottleneck (top shows close to 100% CPU utilization by iperf for at least part of the 10 second iperf runs). I suppose that this is due to the bits needing to be copied out of the kernel networking stack into iperf's userspace memory, or something like that. I don't understanding why the NAS seems to be doing better, but I suppose it could be an artifact of the data. The numbers are within 10%, so I'd call them the same as far as router performance is concerned. What happens if you connect two Gigabit computers through the router and run iperf between the computers? What happens if you connect one Gigabit computer and one 802.11n computer through the router and run iperf between the computers? What happens if you connect two 802.11n computer through the router and run iperf between the computers? Here's the part that baffles me - these are with the laptop connected to the router wirelessly: Laptop - router:~11.8 Mbps These numbers actually exhibit significant variance, but they're generally at least this much, and at most about 15-20 Mbps. Laptop - NAS: ~14.7 Mbps Once again, these numbers vary widely, but are in line with the laptop - router numbers. Troubleshooting WiFi is tough. Location and orientation of antennas is critical. Understand that radio waves with a frequency of 2.4 GHz have a wavelength of ~12 cm. One-quarter wavelength (~1 inch) can change everything. You typically have little control over other WiFi devices or other sources of RF interference. All matter in the universe absorbs and re-radiates energy in curious ways, causing constructive/ destructive interference patterns throughout space. So, Murphy's Law is certain to strike. Try repositioning the router. You want the antennas up high, radiating horizontally (e.g. stick antennas oriented vertically), and far from all other conductive materials -- metal-frame or masonry walls, electrical wiring, metallic pipes, metallic ducts, HVAC grilles, metal-film windows, metal window screens, televisions, other appliances, etc.. Beware of items concealed inside wood-frame walls. Beware of metallic drywall corner bead. Test the laptop in several locations. Near-field radiation is more complex than far-field, so use a wired connection if the laptop anywhere near the router. A wired Gigabit connection is going to perform better than 802.11n even under the best conditions, so consider running category 5E cable to other usage locations. Adjust the router and laptop radios for minimum power that gives reliable service. But here's the kicker: Ookla's speedtest (run on the laptop with speedtest-cli) shows 29.01/5.89 (d/u), and this is fairly consistent. I'm paying Comcast for 25/5, and they apparently provision at 31.25/6.25, so I'm getting quite close to the theoretical max, even when the laptop is connected to the router wirelessly. Additionally, various Android phones also get close to the Comcast provisioned max when connecting wirelessly to the router. So the wireless link can apparently push at least 30 Mbps or so, so why are my local wireless throughput numbers so much lower? I was originally using one of the common 1/6/11 channels, and I switched to 3 since I saw a lot of other stations on those channels. This may have resulted in some improvement, but I'm still stuck locally as above. What's the explanation for this - how can I possibly be getting mu
Re: Further to my installation error
On Friday 18 March 2016 20:49:55 David Wright wrote: > It's far more likely that you forgot to format the partition, if > that's indeed what you wanted to do. No. I checked and double checked that the partitions on the disk which I wanted to use for installation were all marked with the F for format, and that nothing on the disk it had been told to leave alone had an F. It kept wanting to format the spare disk's swap, which I did not want. So whilst I certainly do not think that it did format properly, it was clearly, explicitly and repeatedly (all three times) asked to do so. Since it was clearly important that the partitions should be reformatted, it would have been remarkably stupid of me to have omitted to do so. On what basis are you accusing me of having forgotten? That this particular problem has not hit you? No, it has not hit me before. Lisi
Re: Installing newer kernels
On 03/18/2016 01:21 AM, Sven Arvidsson wrote: On Thu, 2016-03-17 at 19:27 -0700, David Christensen wrote: Debian 6 is obsolete. You're going to want to do a backup-wipe-install-restore cycle on both machines and move to Debian 7 (or 8). Why not do a dist-upgrade? 1. The few times I tried, I ran into problems. When I was done, I had no little confidence in the results. I was not alone in my experience; upgrade and post-upgrade issues are a common subject on this list. 2. By keeping my system drives small and putting data/ services on specific machines, backup-wipe-install-restore cycles don't take very long and I end up with a fresh machine that works as expected. 3. Maintaining proficiency with backup, wipe, install, and/or restore operations requires practice. Improvement requires investment of time and money. I'm currently using manual procedures and home-grown scripts. The next step up would be a deployment/ management automation tool such as Puppet: https://puppetlabs.com/ David
Re: Sound problems
deloptes composed on 2016-03-17 0:05 (UTC+0100): Felix Miata wrote: /etc/modules.d/ Hi your post is interesting for me. on the debian one it is /etc/modprobe.d/ - no? I screwed up, fingers badly out of sync with eyeballs. :-p modprobe.d/ it is. I have similar chip if not same 00:03.0 Audio device: Intel Corporation Haswell-ULT HD Audio Controller (rev 0b) 00:1b.0 Audio device: Intel Corporation 8 Series HD Audio Controller (rev 04) so there I put sound.conf in /etc/modprobe.d/ and it has ## ALSA portion alias char-major-116 snd alias snd-card-0 snd-hda-intel alias snd-card-1 snd-usb-audio ## module options should go here options snd-hda-intel index=0 model=ref enable_msi=1 enable=0,1 options snd-usb-audio index=1 which means HDMI is disabled (enable=0,1) But according your proposal it should be possible to invert the order of how it is initialized - correct? I probably would never have figured out on my own to swap 0 and 1. https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=954824#c8 is where it came from. Follow-up to that bug comment begins here: https://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2015-12/msg00298.html Now for the setup above perhaps I should change to options snd-hda-intel index=1,0 model=ref enable_msi=1 options snd-usb-audio index=2 What do you think Mr Miata? Sound config makes me crazy, sometimes just working, other times impossible to make work, and occasionally working via minimal effort. I would have to try your proposal to begin to know what to think. As the machine it applies to is this one rather than one of my many test installations, and I have no current sound system complaints, I won't be disturbing the sleeping dog. Why should it be related to TDE? I do not think your statement is rectified here. However I did not test anything else. I only mentioned TDE because I know Lisi uses it. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
Re: Further to my installation error
Brian composed on 2016-03-16 20:49 (UTC): On Wed 16 Mar 2016 at 16:12:20 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: Brian composed on 2016-03-16 19:21 (UTC): >Why any Debian user should use an antiquated technology to install is >beyond me. USB sticks are two a penny. Isohybrid images rule; OK! USB sticks, being of a non-uniform variety of sizes, shapes, speed, and reliability, are a pain to library. Inferior amount of space on which to write on them contributes to the library problem. Pricing of USB sticks on a per device basis remains much higher than OM, making creation of a single device for single purpose generally much more expensive than OM. There still exist working puters that cannot boot USB. I have several. So do I. There are ways round it. Around which do you refer to with "it"? A round shiny disc could be her only solution to booting a Debian image. Of course. Not that I routinely burn OM to install Linux. For that I usually don't burn anything, instead installing by loading an installation kernel and initrd with an already installed bootloader. HTTP installation means up-to-date at the outset. This makes installing Debian straightforward for everyone? I wasn't suggesting anything about straightforward, just providing some context based on how things go around here. My installations are far more often pre-releases, so discs burned from isos would infrequently get repeated use. A lot of time would be wasted downloading isos full of never-to-be-installed packages instead of downloading needed packages that might be replaced on the mirrors even before the package completes downloading. Compared with just putting an image on a USB stick? With the result that the installation is already fully up-to-date when the installation process exits? Lots of ways to skin these Linux cats. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
Re: Iceweasel update error on Wheezy
On 16/03/2016 11:40 PM, John Hasler wrote: > Marc writes: >> I am perfectly happy to continue downloading from Mozilla if that will >> keep me current, and Debian's repo will not. > > Why do you need to keep current? Just curious. Well, security is a good reason to remain current; but those ESR versions get security updates. It /may/ be better to stick with ESR on the basis that Mozilla likes to change things up regularly and it breaks how Firefox works :( Latest case in point, Firefox 44.x would allow nice and easy copy of a section of a webpage (links, pictures, everything) -- ready to be pasted in to an email or a document of some type (fully formatted with relative link adjustments). It worked very well, better than saving entire pages or printing to PDF or similar. Now with Firefox 45, all you get is plain text; it seems to be formatted plain text (color?) .. but that's it. This is a significant change. Going forward, lots and lots of extensions will likely need complete re--writes due to Mozilla changing how they will support extensions (old extensions that are abandoned and have worked well for years, won't get any love). I want updates, but I don't want functionality to change so much that things that worked easily before are now impossible or much more difficult. Oh and they took away tab groups reently too, but there is a current extension that adds that facility back. Part of the problem with Firefox is that it is too driven to compete with Chrome -- all the reasons that I prefer Firefox are being destroyed, rather than fixed or cherished. And I don't want to use spyware that is Chrome unless I have no choice. Let Firefox stand on it's own, it doesn't need to be a Chrome clone; heck Chrome was born out of Firefox in the first place. Kind Regards AndrewM signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Firefox vis a vis source of Chrome (was: Iceweasel update error...)
Andrew McGlashan composed on 2016-03-17 02:52 (UTC+1100): ...Let Firefox stand on it's own, it doesn't need to be a Chrome clone; heck Chrome was born out of Firefox in the first place. Chrome/Blink was begotten/forked from Safari/WebKit. Blink was begotten/forked from WebKit. WebKit was begotten/forked from KHTML (Konqueror). Firefox (Mozilla/Gecko/SeaMonkey/Thunderbird) had nothing to do with Konq's, Safari's or Chrome's inceptions. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
Re: Throughput riddle
On 03/18/2016 06:47 PM, Richard Hector wrote: On 19/03/16 14:01, David Christensen wrote: I use category 5E cables for Gigabit. Category 5 and category 6 cables were not reliable for me. Cat 5 cables _should_ work, in theory, though I gather some don't work so well. If you have any cat5 or better cables that are unreliable, I'd suspect the individual cable, not the stated spec. They may just be badly made. Along with the tester, I also bought a 1,000 foot spool of category 5E riser cable, a crimping tool, and crimp connectors. Now I make my own cables and test them. :-) Perhaps the NAS has an automatic crossover feature on it's Gigabit port. If you do a computer-cable-computer test, you will want a (category 5E) crossover cable. There's no need for crossover cables for gigabit. Gigabit communicates both ways over all 4 pairs anyway, and autonegotiating is part of the spec. Thanks for the tip! :-) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_crossover_cable Make sure you are using the right cables and that they are known good. I own an Ideal LinkMaster cable tester, and it has been worth every penny: http://www.amazon.com/Linkmaster-UTP-stp-Cable-Tester/dp/B000LDC3LA A tester like that will tell you if there's continuity in the right places - a cat 3 cable will test fine, and you could make a cable with phone cable, power cable or whatever you like and get it to test fine. Testing to Cat5 or whatever takes a _much_ more expensive tester, to check impedance and capacitance (and variations of those down the cable) and suchlike. It's a good start, but probably won't help much for "it's a bit slow". I've spoken to sound/ communications technicians who talked about validating Ethernet cabling to X MHz and I've glanced at the expensive Fluke networking meters that I assume can do such measurements. Fortunately, a simple continuity tester and whatever utilities the OS provides have been enough to get me by. David
Re: Throughput riddle
On 03/18/2016 07:47 PM, Richard Hector wrote: FWIW, most cabling professionals (of which definitely I'm not one) don't make their own cables unless they absolutely have to. Factory ones are so much more reliable. Riser cable, being intended for fixed installation, is solid core. The appropriate cable for patch leads and other flexible applications is stranded. To go with the 2 cable types, there are also different connectors for each. Since most flexible cables are stranded, so are most available connectors. If you're using solid cable with stranded connectors, you're quite likely to get an unreliable connection. As well as that, the solid cables are likely to fail sooner if they get flexed more than they're designed for. More specifically, stranded connectors have spikes intended to go through between the strands, while solid ones have springy things a bit like the connectors in a mains socket (for flat blades), but much smaller, that go either side and grip the solid wire. http://www.cableorganizer.com/articles/difference-between-solid-stranded-rj45-plugs.html Thanks for the info! :-) David
Re: Installing newer kernels
On 03/18/2016 12:44 PM, David Wright wrote: On Thu 17 Mar 2016 at 19:27:31 (-0700), David Christensen wrote: If/ when you get the Debian installer going, install to a HDD, don't use encryption, and only install: SSH server Standard system utilities You can add things carefully after that, but 512 MB of RAM, USB 1.1, IDE HDD's, etc., will be limiting. That said, if you have some spare network card(s) and the machine supports them, it would make a decent firewall. That's a very pessimistic view of a Pentium III clocking 800MHz. My Pentium III runs jessie with 3.16.0-4-686-pae #1 SMP Debian 3.16.7-ckt20-1+deb8u4 (2016-02-29) i686 GNU/Linux kernel. I run the fvwm window manager as on all my machines, and it has 512MB memory and 500GB PATA disk, running at 650MHz. You're a better man than myself. :-) I recycled all of my Pentium III machines. My 32-bit Pentium 4's will soon follow... David
Re: Installing newer kernels
On 03/18/2016 01:22 PM, David Christensen wrote: On 03/18/2016 01:21 AM, Sven Arvidsson wrote: On Thu, 2016-03-17 at 19:27 -0700, David Christensen wrote: Debian 6 is obsolete. You're going to want to do a backup-wipe-install-restore cycle on both machines and move to Debian 7 (or 8). Why not do a dist-upgrade? 1. The few times I tried, I ran into problems. When I was done, I had no little confidence in the results. I was not alone in my experience; upgrade and post-upgrade issues are a common subject on this list. I agree. The dist upgrade was problematic and I finally had to wipe the root partition for a clean install. Thankfully, from my Caldera days, I use /opt on a separate partition. There I have a $USER/ directory where I keep all of the usual /home$USER/ sub-directories such as Music, Video, Downloads, Documents, .mozilla , .thunderbird and the like. After re-install I merely restore the links and I am cleanly back in business. My two cents, Ric -- My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say: "There are two Great Sins in the world... ..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity. Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad. http://linuxcounter.net/user/44256.html
Re: Installing newer kernels
On Fri 18 Mar 2016 at 16:09:47 -0500, David Wright wrote: > On Fri 18 Mar 2016 at 20:06:32 (+), Brian wrote: > > On Fri 18 Mar 2016 at 14:44:31 -0500, David Wright wrote: > > > > > But I've had no difficulty booting Debian from CD on any of my machines. > > > Obviously USBs are unsuitable for the ancient ones, though I await > > > a response to > > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/03/msg00677.html > > > with bated breath. > > > > Your proper route for eliciting a response would be in the referenced > > thread and not as an aside on an unrelated matter. > > Felix Miata asked a question of you in that post. Felix Miata asked a question of the List. Directing it at something I said does not oblige me to answer it nor prevent anyone searching with 'usb boot without bios support' and providing a response. > Should I ask the same question and attach it to the same post as Felix did? > Or should I say "Me Too!" and attach it to Felix's post? > I can't see any role for me in that subthread besides those. Not having anything to contribute is always a good reason for keeping quiet. > OTOH mentioning the thread here might cause William Lee Valentine, > or others, to take an interest if his Pentium III, like mine, won't > boot from USB without "ways around it". Is mentioning one thread > in another improper? It's not as if one can talk behind someone's > back in a public list. William Lee Valentine's only post is about installing newer kernels and has nothing to with booting a Debian image. Bringing up the latter topic is not improper, just pointless.
errors found in my device.msges recevied from kernel version.pls stop that
Sent from Samsung Mobile
Re: Installing newer kernels
On 03/18/2016 02:13 PM, Curt wrote: I have never had a failed dist-upgrade. Of course, you gotta follow the goddamn directions, do about five or ten minutes of reading of the appropriate material, which isn't too much to ask I wouldn't think. This wipe business strikes me as vaguely scatological. Clean and cruftless and wiped (and do they wash their hands fifty times a day too, just to be impeccable)? I'm not a good Debian owner. I download and install 3rd party software. I modify system configuration files. I'm too lazy to identify and understand all of the ramifications of the two prior sentences, so reverting the changes so that a dist-upgrade can work cleanly is not practical. Basically, I'm lazy. I want to pop in a disk/USB, get to a known good state, and then start my butchery all over again. ;-) David
Re: Installing newer kernels
On Fri 18 Mar 2016 at 22:52:25 (+), Brian wrote: > On Fri 18 Mar 2016 at 16:09:47 -0500, David Wright wrote: > > > On Fri 18 Mar 2016 at 20:06:32 (+), Brian wrote: > > > On Fri 18 Mar 2016 at 14:44:31 -0500, David Wright wrote: > > > > > > > But I've had no difficulty booting Debian from CD on any of my machines. > > > > Obviously USBs are unsuitable for the ancient ones, though I await > > > > a response to > > > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/03/msg00677.html > > > > with bated breath. > > > > > > Your proper route for eliciting a response would be in the referenced > > > thread and not as an aside on an unrelated matter. > > > > Felix Miata asked a question of you in that post. > > Felix Miata asked a question of the List. I merely meant that the question was posed under a piece of text written by you. I'm sorry if writing "asked a question of you" offends you in some way. It wasn't designed to offend or provoke. > Directing it at something I > said does not oblige me to answer it nor prevent anyone searching with > 'usb boot without bios support' and providing a response. Agreed; that's what mailing lists are all about. > > Should I ask the same question and attach it to the same post as Felix did? > > Or should I say "Me Too!" and attach it to Felix's post? > > I can't see any role for me in that subthread besides those. > > Not having anything to contribute is always a good reason for keeping > quiet. Precisely; that's why I left the subthread alone, "proper route" or not. > > OTOH mentioning the thread here might cause William Lee Valentine, > > or others, to take an interest if his Pentium III, like mine, won't > > boot from USB without "ways around it". Is mentioning one thread > > in another improper? It's not as if one can talk behind someone's > > back in a public list. > > William Lee Valentine's only post is about installing newer kernels and > has nothing to with booting a Debian image. Bringing up the latter > topic is not improper, just pointless. David Christensen's recommendation for upgrading such an old kernel is a move to wheezy. He prefers installation to upgrading (supported by Ric Moore) but thinks the machine might not be able to boot the Debian installer from USB or CD. I disagreed about the CD, which is why I wrote my post. I then made a casual remark about booting from a USB. Why? Because I was intrigued by the possibility of your knowing a workaround. If Felix hadn't written his post, I might have posted something. But I can't work out why an aside attracted criticism enough for you to bring it to everyone's attention; a breach of etiquette to mention one thread in another? And don't be afraid that I will asphyxiate if nobody answers Felix's question straight away. :) Cheers, David.
Re: Throughput riddle
On 19/03/16 14:01, David Christensen wrote: > I use category 5E cables for Gigabit. Category 5 and category 6 > cables were not reliable for me. Cat 5 cables _should_ work, in theory, though I gather some don't work so well. If you have any cat5 or better cables that are unreliable, I'd suspect the individual cable, not the stated spec. They may just be badly made. > Perhaps the NAS has an automatic crossover feature on it's Gigabit > port. If you do a computer-cable-computer test, you will want a > (category 5E) crossover cable. There's no need for crossover cables for gigabit. Gigabit communicates both ways over all 4 pairs anyway, and autonegotiating is part of the spec. > Make sure you are using the right cables and that they are known > good. I own an Ideal LinkMaster cable tester, and it has been worth > every penny: > > http://www.amazon.com/Linkmaster-UTP-stp-Cable-Tester/dp/B000LDC3LA A > tester like that will tell you if there's continuity in the right places - a cat 3 cable will test fine, and you could make a cable with phone cable, power cable or whatever you like and get it to test fine. Testing to Cat5 or whatever takes a _much_ more expensive tester, to check impedance and capacitance (and variations of those down the cable) and suchlike. It's a good start, but probably won't help much for "it's a bit slow". Richard
Re: Installing newer kernels
On 2016-03-18, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> I agree. The dist upgrade was problematic and I finally had to wipe the root >> partition for a clean install. Thankfully, from my Caldera days, I use /opt > > Hmm.. just to give a counter-point, almost all my current Debian > installs are the result of a stream of upgrades+clones from the first > install I performed, back in 2006. > I have never had a failed dist-upgrade. Of course, you gotta follow the goddamn directions, do about five or ten minutes of reading of the appropriate material, which isn't too much to ask I wouldn't think. This wipe business strikes me as vaguely scatological. Clean and cruftless and wiped (and do they wash their hands fifty times a day too, just to be impeccable)? > Stefan > > -- Hypertext--or should I say the ideology of hypertext?--is ultrademocratic and so entirely in harmony with the demagogic appeals to cultural democracy that accompany (and distract one’s attention from) the ever-tightening grip of plutocratic capitalism. - Susan Sontag
Re: Further to my installation error
On Fri 18 Mar 2016 at 22:21:58 (+), Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Friday 18 March 2016 20:49:55 David Wright wrote: > > It's far more likely that you forgot to format the partition, if > > that's indeed what you wanted to do. > > No. I checked and double checked that the partitions on the disk which I > wanted to use for installation were all marked with the F for format, and > that nothing on the disk it had been told to leave alone had an F. It kept > wanting to format the spare disk's swap, which I did not want. So whilst I > certainly do not think that it did format properly, it was clearly, > explicitly and repeatedly (all three times) asked to do so. > > Since it was clearly important that the partitions should be reformatted, it > would have been remarkably stupid of me to have omitted to do so. On what > basis are you accusing me of having forgotten? That this particular problem > has not hit you? No, it has not hit me before. Um, the quotation "It's far...to do." above was written in response to two paragraphs by Adam Wilson "Is it possible...if you will.", and had nothing to do with you or your problem/situation at all. The "you" in "you forgot" is Adam. So I won't comment further on what you've just written above. So why did I write "I can't see why Lisi came to that conclusion from what she reported here." Because I read the OP which AFAICT talked about corrupt files, checksums, and old firmware. Your next post said the crisis was over. Your next post (new thread) mentioned a download problem. The next post said you had the same problem as before. At this point, you also mentioned repartitioning, reformatting and wiping a disk thoroughly. In the last post (which I commented on when the second paragraph was quoted in Adam Wilson's post) you said that trying to use CD1 to do a net install made you realise that "if you want to format an existing partition properly, so the stuff on it actually goes, use Gparted not the partitioner in the Jessie installer." Maybe I'm thick, but I can't see why the Debian installer's performance at re-partition/format/wipe would cause the reported download problems, checksum failures, corrupt files and old firmware. Sorry. I'm no great fan of the d-i partitioner, but I haven't had it fail to do what it promised. (Not that I understand precisely the term "wipe".) I'm also sorry if placing my comment to you where I did caused you or other people to think my later paragraphs were also directed at you. I assumed that my use of the standard ">" and "> >" conventions would make the referents clear, and they obviously didn't. I just tried to avoid making two posts where one would suffice. Failed again. This post makes two. Cheers, David.
Re: weak repository key
Jochen Spieker wrote: > Floris: >> After updating to apt version 1.2.7 I get a warning on apt-get update: >> W: >> gpgv:/var/lib/apt/lists/partial/dl.google.com_linux_chrome_deb_dists_stable_Release.gpg: >> The repository is insufficiently signed by key >> 4CCA1EAF950CEE4AB83976DCA040830F7FAC5991 (weak digest) >> >> and the repository is ignored >> >> Is there a way that apt re-trust the old SHA1 key, or do we have to report >> this to Google and all other repos? > Report it: > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2016/03/msg6.html According to https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=594414 this should be fixed with the next repository update. Grüße, Sven. -- Sigmentation fault. Core dumped.
Re: Password protecting grub
I made all possible tries that came to my head with all your suggestions. Still, password : command not found. However, I think all of use should use grub-password, especially when we use mobile systems (as laptops), *UNLESS YOU USE A BIOS PASSWORD*. You can check Google for what to do when you forget root password (perhaps, you all know about that). That's just simple to give root access to anyone with physical possession of the system. I personally don't like BIOS passwords, because you have no simple way if you forget them. In fact, if you forget the root password, or even password, there remains an option for Live system, or complete Format in case the disk is encrypted. But, no way out if you forget the BIOS password. That's why I want to have GRUB password. Please tell some other way, you know or you have tried. I have done much googling on the topic, and still can't conclude. I am going to try now with Debian Stretch installed in VirtualBox in EFI mode. Let's see how far I go.
Re: Password protecting grub
On Wed 16 Mar 2016 at 17:07:33 (+0530), Himanshu Shekhar wrote: >I wish to password protect grub bootloader. I tried the steps available on >online manuals as of RedHat, Ubuntu, etc. All experiments were on a >VirtualBox machine, so my system remains safe. However, I didn't get >success. >Every time I write the line to the config file and run update-grub, I get >the response >"password : command not found". >I made experiments with the following files: > /etc/grub.d/00_header > /etc/grub.d/40_custom > /boot/grub/grub.cfg >adding >" set superusers="root" > password root rootpassword >" >or >" password mypassword " >or >" password --md5 $$$%#$ " >different times. Each time, I had the same error generated. >My current system, where changes are expected has Debian Stretch on a UEFI >installation. So, I have no idea whether the things are same or different >for UEFI and Legacy. Nor me. I can only look at jessie/wheezy on BIOS. However... You've modified three files at various times with three changes. In particular, look at your changing /boot/grub/grub.cfg and then running update-grub. update-grub will immediately overwrite /boot/grub/grub.cfg so your change should be irrelevant. Because you saw an error message, you must have left a mistake in one of the /etc/grub.d/ files. 1) So the first thing to do is to make sure that all these /etc/grub.d/ files are correct. Then stick to modifying /etc/grub.d/40_custom which is the one provided for that purpose. When you modify it, make sure you don't change the lines at the top of this file. 2) As an alternative to (1), if those files are screwed but your /boot/grub/grub.cfg is OK, make your modifications (set superusers and password) directly to /boot/grub/grub.cfg but don't run update-grub (which would undo them). When you reboot, the extra lines will be read and acted upon. A scenario that could give the symptoms you describe: Modifying /etc/grub.d/40_custom but messing up the top few lines by inserting "password user1 insecure-password" into it. Now, whenever update-grub runs, it will try and execute the command "password" rather than writing that line into /boot/grub/grub.cfg. BTW the advice from jdd was poor. You don't want to be running the real passwd command in this context. As you say you've tried that, you should check that you haven't unintentionally changed any passwords; unlikely, I know, as there's normally an exchange of dialogue involved. >Also, when I tried to install grub (for grub-md5-crypt), it asked to >remove grub-efi and install grub-pc, grub-legacy and their team. >I need EFI because I have Windows as dual boot, I haven't used for long, >but I still want to retain it. I can't help you there. My jessie has grub2_2.02~beta2-22+deb8u1 grub2-common_2.02~beta2-22+deb8u1 grub-common_2.02~beta2-22+deb8u1 grub-pc_2.02~beta2-22+deb8u1 grub-pc-bin_2.02~beta2-22+deb8u1 and wheezy has grub2-common_1.99-27+deb7u3 grub-common_1.99-27+deb7u3 grub-pc_1.99-27+deb7u3 grub-pc-bin_1.99-27+deb7u3 and I don't know why you would get offered anything as old as 0.97-67/70. Cheers, David.
Re: flash? [OT]
On 2016-03-16, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Wednesday 16 March 2016 13:56:50 Lisi Reisz wrote: >> On Wednesday 16 March 2016 12:54:07 Liam O'Toole wrote: >> > On 2016-03-16, Lisi Reisz wrote: >> > > On Tuesday 15 March 2016 19:58:18 Brian wrote: >> > >> On Tue 15 Mar 2016 at 08:57:20 +, Lisi Reisz wrote: >> > >> > Even Channel 4, which relies on advertising for its revenue, is >> > >> > totally indifferent to the fact that Linux users can't watch it on a >> > >> > computer. Well, Brian probably can. But he hasn't let the rest of >> > >> > us into the secret. >> > >> >> > >> I am on Jessie. hal, libhal1, libhal-storage and hal-info from an >> > >> Ubuntu PPA gave me access to 4od. My belief is that hal on Wheezy >> > >> doesn't have what it takes. >> > > >> > > Thanks, Brian! I'll try it. >> > > >> > > I did have Channel 4 working well on Wheezy (my desktop), but have >> > > never managed to get it going on Jessie (my television). Channel 4 on >> > > Wheezy suddenly stopped working a few weeks ago after an update. So I >> > > am back to not being able to get 4oD at all. I can get live programmes >> > > by actually using the television!! I watch catch-up a lot more than >> > > live programmes. (I don't watch either much! But as I get older and >> > > more decrepit I watch more. :-( ) >> > > >> > > I have tried various things on Jessie without success. I'll have >> > > another go with your list in hand. >> > > >> > > Lisi >> > >> > I've just tried Channel 4 using Google Chrome[1] on jessie, and it seems >> > to work. I say "seems" because the site prompts me for account details I >> > don't have, whereas iceweasel/firefox on the same machine didn't even >> > get that far. >> > >> > 1: deb [arch=amd64] http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main >> >> Ah, yes. But after you have logged in and you click on "play", a nice >> little round white thing will start to go round in front of the picture you >> want to watch, and round, and round, and round ... until eventually you >> will realise that a rotating white almost-circle is all you are going to >> get. >> >> Anyhow, thanks Liam. I'll try again this afternoon in case the latest >> upgrade has actually done the trick. > > Did a full upgrade - 384 packages (there has been a point upgrade in TDE). > Tried Channel 4. Round and round and round went the white circle. :-( Sorry to hear that. I didn't have the motivation to go any further because I watch Channel 4 using their PS3 app. That doesn't require an account, or at least I don't remember setting one up. > > Next to try Brian's packages. If those don't work, you might consider picking up a second-hand PS3. :-) -- Liam
Re: Installing newer kernels
> I agree. The dist upgrade was problematic and I finally had to wipe the root > partition for a clean install. Thankfully, from my Caldera days, I use /opt Hmm.. just to give a counter-point, almost all my current Debian installs are the result of a stream of upgrades+clones from the first install I performed, back in 2006. Stefan
Re: Password protecting grub
I have been trying to achieve something similar on my system. Password protection in grub2 appears to be quite different from that in grub-legacy. In grub2, authentication is activated by the lines (from the grub info manual, the section on security): set superusers="root" password_pbkdf2 root grub.pbkdf2.sha512.1.biglongstring in the /boot/grub/grub.cfg file The command grub-mkpasswd-pbkdf2 can be used to generate the password. On debian systems, it is better to put those two lines in /etc/grub.d/40_custom to make sure that your changes remain after an `update-grub' command. But, be advised that once you do this, all the menu entries in grub will be inaccessible until the password is supplied. It would be nice to have a way of requiring a password only if it required to boot a non-default entry. On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 11:12 PM, Himanshu Shekhar wrote: > Ok! I understand GRUB password and other such passwords are ineffective. I > am also aware of the fact that hard drive can be read anywhere unless it is > encrypted. > The am eager to know a particular way (however bad it may be) to secure a > system, which I have not known yet. > All efforts yet just stop at one step : >password : command not found. LOL! > > Regards > Himanshu Shekhar >
Re: flash? [OT]
On Wednesday 16 March 2016 15:47:29 Liam O'Toole wrote: > On 2016-03-16, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > On Wednesday 16 March 2016 13:56:50 Lisi Reisz wrote: > >> On Wednesday 16 March 2016 12:54:07 Liam O'Toole wrote: > >> > On 2016-03-16, Lisi Reisz wrote: > >> > > On Tuesday 15 March 2016 19:58:18 Brian wrote: > >> > >> On Tue 15 Mar 2016 at 08:57:20 +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > >> > >> > Even Channel 4, which relies on advertising for its revenue, is > >> > >> > totally indifferent to the fact that Linux users can't watch it > >> > >> > on a computer. Well, Brian probably can. But he hasn't let the > >> > >> > rest of us into the secret. > >> > >> > >> > >> I am on Jessie. hal, libhal1, libhal-storage and hal-info from an > >> > >> Ubuntu PPA gave me access to 4od. My belief is that hal on Wheezy > >> > >> doesn't have what it takes. > >> > > > >> > > Thanks, Brian! I'll try it. > >> > > > >> > > I did have Channel 4 working well on Wheezy (my desktop), but have > >> > > never managed to get it going on Jessie (my television). Channel 4 > >> > > on Wheezy suddenly stopped working a few weeks ago after an update. > >> > > So I am back to not being able to get 4oD at all. I can get live > >> > > programmes by actually using the television!! I watch catch-up a > >> > > lot more than live programmes. (I don't watch either much! But as > >> > > I get older and more decrepit I watch more. :-( ) > >> > > > >> > > I have tried various things on Jessie without success. I'll have > >> > > another go with your list in hand. > >> > > > >> > > Lisi > >> > > >> > I've just tried Channel 4 using Google Chrome[1] on jessie, and it > >> > seems to work. I say "seems" because the site prompts me for account > >> > details I don't have, whereas iceweasel/firefox on the same machine > >> > didn't even get that far. > >> > > >> > 1: deb [arch=amd64] http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main > >> > >> Ah, yes. But after you have logged in and you click on "play", a nice > >> little round white thing will start to go round in front of the picture > >> you want to watch, and round, and round, and round ... until eventually > >> you will realise that a rotating white almost-circle is all you are > >> going to get. > >> > >> Anyhow, thanks Liam. I'll try again this afternoon in case the latest > >> upgrade has actually done the trick. > > > > Did a full upgrade - 384 packages (there has been a point upgrade in > > TDE). Tried Channel 4. Round and round and round went the white circle. > > :-( > > Sorry to hear that. I didn't have the motivation to go any further > because I watch Channel 4 using their PS3 app. That doesn't require an > account, or at least I don't remember setting one up. > > > Next to try Brian's packages. > > If those don't work, you might consider picking up a second-hand PS3. > > :-) If it actually works, I might! I have already bought a Firestick in fruitless hope. Lisi
Re: Password protecting grub
On Thu 17 Mar 2016 at 11:52:36 (+0530), Raj Kiran Grandhi wrote:
> I have been trying to achieve something similar on my system. Password
> protection in grub2 appears to be quite different from that in grub-legacy.
... and did you succeed?
> In grub2, authentication is activated by the lines (from the grub info
> manual, the section on security):
>
> set superusers="root"
> password_pbkdf2 root grub.pbkdf2.sha512.1.biglongstring
>
> in the /boot/grub/grub.cfg file
Well, my recommendation was to use the unencrypted version until the
OP was successful at getting grub to see it and act upon it. This
prevents any hashing mishaps complicating the issue; one step at
a time.
> The command grub-mkpasswd-pbkdf2 can be used to generate the password.
>
> On debian systems, it is better to put those two lines in
> /etc/grub.d/40_custom to make sure that your changes remain after an
> `update-grub' command.
"put those two lines in":
As I pointed out, it's very important to place those lines carefully,
obeying the instructions at the top of the file (if they haven't
already been mangled out of existence).
Unfortunately the OP keeps reporting the same old error message
(with LOL) but never posts what's in which file. This makes it hard to help.
> But, be advised that once you do this, all the menu entries in grub will be
> inaccessible until the password is supplied.
> It would be nice to have a way of requiring a password only if it required
> to boot a non-default entry.
That's what
menuentry "May be run by any user" --unrestricted {
is for. The documentation example runs thus:
set superusers="root"
password_pbkdf2 root grub.pbkdf2.sha512.1.biglongstring
password user1 insecure
menuentry "May be run by any user" --unrestricted {
set root=(hd0,1)
linux /vmlinuz
}
menuentry "Superusers only" --users "" {
set root=(hd0,1)
linux /vmlinuz single
}
menuentry "May be run by user1 or a superuser" --users user1 {
set root=(hd0,2)
chainloader +1
}
Cheers,
David.
