Fwd: Re: Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]

[William Unruh]

>
>On 12/30/2014 5:49 PM, Don Armstrong wrote:
>> On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>> The people there have enough to do at work, and like to have a life
>>> outside of work. Believer it or not, not everyone is capable (or
>>> interested) in spending their life working on Linux.
>> 
>> If Debian is important to their business, then they should hire people
>> to work on the bits of Debian that matter to them. Pretty much everyone
>> who is serious about using Debian in production does this.
>>
>
>That's a great idea.  Who's going to pay these people - you?

They apparently pay you.
Who pays the hardware people who design the boards/etc? 

>
>My clients are not IT folks.  They don't need Debian per say - they DO
>need Linux.  And, like all companies, they have a limited budget for
>software implementations.

Fair enough, but then if it is critical to their business, they will
have to pay. 

...
>
>Again - these companies are not NOT IT companies.  They are
>manufacturers of equipment.  Right now, Debian just happens to be the

But now adays, software it the largest part of an equipment business. To
say they do not have software people is to say they do not have a
business. 

>distribution they are using.  Yes, they have a couple of people familiar
>with Linux administration, but that's about it.  And these administering
>Linux is only a very small part of their job.  That's why they hire
>people like me to write specific device drivers and other software.  But
>they are not going to spend money hiring consultants to work on the OS.

But they need to adapt the software for their use. 
That is a critical part of their business. In fact it is the part that
sets them apart from all their competitors. Hardware is easy these days. 

>
>They could use pretty much any distro.  They liked Debian because of its
>stability.  But they don't NEED Debian.  If they wanted to spend lots of
>time trying to maintain the OS, they would have gone to slackware.

Whether Debian is the best choice for them is of course something they
will have to decide. It is modular, stable, conservative, old
fashioned,... 

??? 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/20141231030747.c153710f...@wormhole.physics.ubc.ca

Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?

[William Unruh]

>On 12/29/2014 1:27 PM, Ric Moore wrote:
>> On 12/29/2014 06:44 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>> On 12/29/2014 1:22 AM, Ric Moore wrote:
 On 12/28/2014 10:58 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> On 12/28/2014 5:54 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
>> On Sunday 28 December 2014 00:20:20 Celejar wrote:
>>> On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 14:02:52 -0500
>>>
>>> Jerry Stuckle  wrote:
 On 12/11/2014 1:23 PM, Brian wrote:
> On Thu 11 Dec 2014 at 12:11:26 -0500, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>> I often give presentations with my notebook.  If I'm lucky, I get
>> 10-15 minutes to set up.  If I'm not, less than 5 minutes (i.e.
>> another presenter ahead of me).  I use Linux whenever possible,
>> but
>> since my time slot is limited, I can't wait for fsck to complete.
>
> Your type of situation is well understood and there is sympathy
> for it.

 I appreciate that - but unfortunately, sympathy doesn't solve the
 problem
 :)
>>>
>>> Someone may have suggested this, and I know it doesn't really
>>> solve the
>>> core problem, but perhaps consider suspending (to disk or ram)
>>> instead
>>> of shutting down when you have a presentation scheduled?
>>
>> Again, that is a way round the problem not a solution to it.
>>
>> A facility that was available no longer is.  Whether it should be,
>> is an
>> entirely different question.
>>
>> Lisi
>>
>>
>
> Lisi,
>
> While I agree it's only a way around a problem and not a solution, I do
> appreciate people trying to help out.
>
> And while I would prefer a solution, it looks like that's not going to
> happen.  So, unfortunately, after many years as a Debian user, I'm
> looking at other options.  My clients are looking, also, although not
> every one has made the decision to switch yet.

 What's wrong with sticking with Wheezy for the next couple of years?? I
 haven't had my ext4 file system want to fsck in eons. Several times I
 have MADE it do a check on the next boot, just to check, and a Tbyte of
 storage was fscked in about 10-15 seconds.

>>>
>>> Not as easy as you think.  I write device drivers; for instance, one of
>>> my customers manufacturers microprocessor-based systems.  Right now they
>>> are using Debian, but are now looking for another distro.  It's not
>>> something they do lightly or quickly; even now they may not have time
>>> before service is dropped for Wheezy.  And I need to be running the same
>>> software they are.
>>>
 Besides, I never did buy that bit about doing a complete dist-upgrade to
 Jessie (testing!) and then expecting to do a presentation to clients
 without a complete shakedown. I'd shoot myself first. I know you know
 better.

>>>
>>> Where did I ever say I wouldn't do a complete shakedown?  But this is
>>> the type of bug which can bite you weeks or months after the install.
>>> It doesn't occur minutes, hours or even days later.  And Murphy says it
>>> will happen at the worst possible time.
>>>
 Can we not let this pitiful excuse for a thread JUST DIE?? :/ Ric

>>>
>>> This is a Debian User list.  Why don't you want bugs which affect Debian
>>> users discussed here?  And that's what I have seen here - at least until
>>> you started complaining about the thread.
>> 
>> There we differ. You consider it a bug, and I consider it a feature.
>> When I googled on the topic there was a Hail Mary chorus shouting "DO
>> not interrupt fsck! It's BAD!". Ergo the consensus of opinion that if it
>> is critical enough, do not allow it to be interrupted. Tough titties, as
>> the process is for your own good.
>>
>
>I agree it's not a good idea to interrupt fsck WHEN IT IS FIXING A
>PROBLEM.  A routine test when there is no indication of a problem is a
>completely different story.
>
>> It's a small price to pay when you look back at the days when a Windows
>> server HAD to go down at 3AM "for maintenance" (defrag, which took quite
>> awhile) while we laughed and laughed at the stupid lamers who used it
>> and suffered. I know I did.
>> 
>
>It can be a HUGE problem.  For instance - maybe I'm getting ready to
>make a presentation to a VP of a client's company.  The success of this
>project depends on my presentation being more successful than another
>consultants.  fsck running right then can easily cost me tens of
>thousands of dollars over the course of the contract.
>
>Are YOU willing to reimburse me for that loss?
>
>> But, you sure as hell wouldn't interrupt a Windows full defrag process
>> half-way through, would you? We've had it easy, so I consider it a
>> feature. I'll take a 20 second inconvenience any day. :) Ric
>> 
>> 
>> 
>
>I can, and I have, when it runs at an inconvenient time.  Windows allows
>this, and terminates the defrag gracefully.  That's one thing Windows
>has on Debian.
>
>Just because it's OK f

Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?

[William Unruh]

Path: 
eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From: Ric Moore 
Newsgroups: linux.debian.user
Subject: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 19:50:02 +0100
Message-ID: 
References:   
  
  

X-Original-To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Old-Return-Path: 
X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.989 tagged_above=-1 required=5.3 
tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, 
FOURLA=0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL=0.01] 
autolearn=ham
X-Policyd-Weight: using cached result; rate: -7
Dkim-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;d=gmail.com; 
s=20120113;
h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to 
:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=Ct1vvY2fbx8jBh/Hc08uYClnwRaNmlKmpDbl26M7OqE=;
b=JAXOXJAZ3U/Bm+eIr4nIgh8hAWfLsYidoczlzuVR+Iyp/I+AO1G1JH39g/pQzpcT5z 
VXLthqUKXFlOrAgxz1EV1kUnYHrIZkM5Bbrfm7/eh+OvTCLoEVMwSuY0cqjksvsTqJzW 
5XKVw41ojQzZdxugMfZ9RBe8axd+qbXKoIlubdNIF8GSeRvMn2iWd9UfBdD3Bvmi3bkp 
QCVM+9qaftzjaHlM1wmX8mk3J34zO4IA6SCb8iReo+bkoPf8VI46cbrZ3zRNCjB9eVqW 
UAe3lCdSS4VOP88x0V7zZRqtb/tp1J47opwR9Ca460b0sioA1UkN4WMZ9q/mVKT5cP6V 
ecjw==
X-Received: by 10.67.3.100 with SMTP id bv4mr74736371pad.15.1419877803735;  
  Mon, 29 Dec 2014 10:30:03 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/685146
List-ID: 
List-URL: 
Approved: robo...@news.nic.it
Lines: 105
Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway
Sender: robo...@news.nic.it
X-Original-Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 13:27:59 -0500
X-Original-Message-ID: <54a19d2f.1040...@gmail.com>
X-Original-References: <20141205190650.09a44...@ron.cerrocora.org> 
<5489ea5c.9030...@gmail.com> 
<20141227192020.0c672b297977b244762d3...@gmail.com> 
<201412281054.24677.lisi.re...@gmail.com> <54a028b1.9020...@gmail.com> 
<54a0f323.5050...@gmail.com> <54a13e95.9060...@gmail.com>
Xref: mx02.eternal-september.org linux.debian.user:140641

>On 12/29/2014 06:44 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>> On 12/29/2014 1:22 AM, Ric Moore wrote:
>>> On 12/28/2014 10:58 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
 On 12/28/2014 5:54 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Sunday 28 December 2014 00:20:20 Celejar wrote:
>> On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 14:02:52 -0500
>>
>...
>

 Lisi,

 While I agree it's only a way around a problem and not a solution, I do
 appreciate people trying to help out.

 And while I would prefer a solution, it looks like that's not going to
 happen.  So, unfortunately, after many years as a Debian user, I'm
 looking at other options.  My clients are looking, also, although not
 every one has made the decision to switch yet.
>>>
>>> What's wrong with sticking with Wheezy for the next couple of years?? I
>>> haven't had my ext4 file system want to fsck in eons. Several times I
>>> have MADE it do a check on the next boot, just to check, and a Tbyte of
>>> storage was fscked in about 10-15 seconds.
>>>
>>
>> Not as easy as you think.  I write device drivers; for instance, one of
>> my customers manufacturers microprocessor-based systems.  Right now they
>> are using Debian, but are now looking for another distro.  It's not
>> something they do lightly or quickly; even now they may not have time
>> before service is dropped for Wheezy.  And I need to be running the same
>> software they are.
>>
>>> Besides, I never did buy that bit about doing a complete dist-upgrade to
>>> Jessie (testing!) and then expecting to do a presentation to clients
>>> without a complete shakedown. I'd shoot myself first. I know you know
>>> better.
>>>
>>
>> Where did I ever say I wouldn't do a complete shakedown?  But this is
>> the type of bug which can bite you weeks or months after the install.
>> It doesn't occur minutes, hours or even days later.  And Murphy says it
>> will happen at the worst possible time.
>>
>>> Can we not let this pitiful excuse for a thread JUST DIE?? :/ Ric
>>>
>>
>> This is a Debian User list.  Why don't you want bugs which affect Debian
>> users discussed here?  And that's what I have seen here - at least until
>> you started complaining about the thread.
>
>There we differ. You consider it a bug, and I consider it a feature. 
>When I googled on the topic there was a Hail Mary chorus shouting "DO 
>not interrupt fsck! It's BAD!". Ergo the consensus of opinion that if it 
>is critical enough, do not allow it to be interrupted. Tough titties, as 
>the process is for your own good.
>
>It's a small price to pay when you look back at the days when a Windows 
>server HAD to go down at 3AM "for maintenance" (defrag, which took quite 
>awhile) while we laughed and laughed at the stupid lamers who used it 
>and suffered. I know I did.
>
So, debian becoming more like W