Re: Planned path - was [Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive]

[eben]

On 8/2/24 09:11, DdB wrote:


If all you have is swap space or outdated crap, then back it up and do
whatever you like. GPT is no must, if the disk is below 2TB in size and
UEFI no option.


If you have >4 partitions, then except for booting and recalcitrant OS
installers, GPT is easier to deal with.

Caveat: I know next to nothing about GPT vs non-i686 architectures.

--
  Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which can be
adequately explained by stupidity."  Derived from Robert Heinlein

Re: Planned path - was [Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive]

[DdB]

Am 02.08.2024 um 19:34 schrieb Łukasz Kalamłacki:
> If you need to boot initrd without iso you an try this:

Oops, i should read more carefully ...

idk, why complicate matters.
the boot files for i386 are located here:
http://http.us.debian.org/debian/dists/bookworm/main/installer-i386/20230607+deb12u6/images/hd-media/
boot them with proper arguments, and they will search for iso files on
any partition to install debian.

i was expecting you to have a i386 netinstall.iso by now.

i even mentionned the kernel commandline argument "priority=low".
 Yes, it is possible to boot into other iso images, but, makes it more
complicated, more arguments, more margin for error.

signing off for the week-end
DdB

Re: Planned path - was [Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive]

[DdB]

Am 02.08.2024 um 19:34 schrieb Łukasz Kalamłacki:
> If you need to boot initrd without iso you an try this:

Oops, i should read more carefully ...

idk, why complicate matters.
the boot files for i386 are located here:
http://http.us.debian.org/debian/dists/bookworm/main/installer-i386/20230607+deb12u6/images/hd-media/
boot them with proper arguments, and they will search for iso files on
any partition to install debian.

i was expecting you to have a i386 netinstall.iso by now.

i even mentionned the kernel commandline argument "priority=low".
 Yes, it is possible to boot into other iso images, but, makes it more
complicated, more arguments, more margin for error.

signing off for the week-end
DdB

Re: Planned path - was [Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive]

[Łukasz Kalamłacki]

If you need to boot initrd without iso you an try this:

https://deb.debian.org/debian/dists/bookworm/main/installer-i386/current/images/netboot/debian-installer/i386/initrd.gz

https://deb.debian.org/debian/dists/bookworm/main/installer-i386/current/images/netboot/debian-installer/i386/linux

On 2.08.2024 19:10, DdB wrote:

Am 02.08.2024 um 18:48 schrieb Anssi Saari:

Richard Owlett  writes:


I was hoping I could somehow tell grub to run an installer's ISO image.
I think the posted links will lead me adequately.

I have actually tried that. The ISO image needs a little special support
so that after the kernel has booted and initrd loaded, it needs to be
able to find the ISO again. Last time I tried this with Debian the
support wasn't there which is why I recommended the documented HD
install or using the GRML image which does support that.



yep, i know, same experience here, but ...
... with the most current files, it did work, repeated it several times
- albeit on x64, i have no i386 anymore, if i had more time, i'd check
in a vm. ;-)
btw: starting the installer in expert mode (priority=low), it even asks
for the drives to scan for iso files.

Re: Planned path - was [Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive]

[DdB]

Am 02.08.2024 um 18:48 schrieb Anssi Saari:
> Richard Owlett  writes:
> 
>> I was hoping I could somehow tell grub to run an installer's ISO image.
>> I think the posted links will lead me adequately.
> 
> I have actually tried that. The ISO image needs a little special support
> so that after the kernel has booted and initrd loaded, it needs to be
> able to find the ISO again. Last time I tried this with Debian the
> support wasn't there which is why I recommended the documented HD
> install or using the GRML image which does support that.
> 
> 
yep, i know, same experience here, but ...
... with the most current files, it did work, repeated it several times
- albeit on x64, i have no i386 anymore, if i had more time, i'd check
in a vm. ;-)
btw: starting the installer in expert mode (priority=low), it even asks
for the drives to scan for iso files.

Re: Planned path - was [Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive]

[Anssi Saari]

Richard Owlett  writes:

> I was hoping I could somehow tell grub to run an installer's ISO image.
> I think the posted links will lead me adequately.

I have actually tried that. The ISO image needs a little special support
so that after the kernel has booted and initrd loaded, it needs to be
able to find the ISO again. Last time I tried this with Debian the
support wasn't there which is why I recommended the documented HD
install or using the GRML image which does support that.

Re: OPERATOR ERROR ---- Re: Planned path - was [Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive]

[Łukasz Kalamłacki]

Hi,


Could you give as more information about these systems on which you wish 
to install Bookworm?


Newer distribution of Linux has a lot bigger resources consumption that 
old one.


I would like to get:

RAM size, CPU type, HDD size.

Bookworm requirements are available here:

https://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/Documentation/Bookworm/Requirements

It may be the problem with RAM size.

I am also curious about destination of these computers, I am asking 
because modern internet browsers take gigabytes of RAM.


Best regards,

Łukasz


On 2.08.2024 13:20, Richard Owlett wrote:

On 08/01/2024 02:11 PM, Richard Owlett wrote:

On 08/01/2024 01:56 PM, DdB wrote:

Am 01.08.2024 um 17:33 schrieb Richard Owlett:
[SNIP]


I've never had occasion to use Grub's command line. Good time to learn.
The existing install is so old it has Grub 1.??? rather than 2.??? .
Should that make any practical difference to manual install?


I should have turned on the machines in question.
They report "GNU GRUB version 2.02~beta3-5"
Seniors should "check first" before "opening mouth and ..." ;/



Not sure about gpt vs mbr. I have whatever Gparted defaults to when 
creating new partitions. I have no longer required partitions available.


Wont have time available until tomorrow or Saturday to do the install.

Thanks.

Re: Planned path - was [Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive]

[DdB]

Am 02.08.2024 um 14:34 schrieb Richard Owlett:
> During initial installation of Debian Squeeze (or later) would I have
> been explicitly asked to choose between MBR and GPT?
I can't say, at that time, i was a stranger to debian. But ... i saw the
installer deciding on its own, if not explicitly put in expert mode, if
it was allowed to use the whole disk, or such ...

And when i came to debian, i was already on gpt, just had to insist
keeping it that way. For you:

First question would be: is there an OS (like win or some other) already
on some partition? - Then do NOT change partitioning. It is possible
(did it once) but complicated and even risky.

If all you have is swap space or outdated crap, then back it up and do
whatever you like. GPT is no must, if the disk is below 2TB in size and
UEFI no option. Just because you seem interested in learning: it is
worth the hassle, as it comes with some benefits.

Wait, i have to keep in mind, what you say: i386, i left that behind me
more than 10 years ago, and my memory faded away concerning those days.

As i understand it, you want to boot from an netinst-iso-image using
hd-media, which will load everything in memory and make it possible to
reformat a drive, if need be. But there may not be a need.

instead of me phantasising about your options, it would be much more to
the point, if you were telling us, what you have now, and where you want
to go. Or just ask, when you feel like it (same as before)
:-)
GL, DdB

Re: Planned path - was [Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive]

[Richard Owlett]

On 08/01/2024 02:33 PM, DdB wrote:

Am 01.08.2024 um 21:11 schrieb Richard Owlett:

I've never had occasion to use Grub's command line. Good time to learn.
The existing install is so old it has Grub 1.??? rather than 2.??? .
Should that make any practical difference to manual install?

Not sure about gpt vs mbr. I have whatever Gparted defaults to when
creating new partitions. I have no longer required partitions available.


Oh, grub-pc (a.k.a. grub1)?
I gotta confess: when i did join linux, there was grub1.98 already
available and for reasons outside this scope, i went for it.
i mean: i really have no idea about grub 1. Better ask someone else to
fill in.

gpt is much more flexible compared to the old mbr partitioning, but i do
not think, it would be necessary for you to change at this point. Just
check your scheme and use it, as you like. The merits of grub2 come
handy for a) large disks and b) uefi booting, both of which wont bother
you this weekend, right?

btw: to check, i would use

sudo sgdisk -p /dev/sda # or whatever disk you want to see, this will only 
output information, not change anything.




It reports:> ***

Found invalid GPT and valid MBR; converting MBR to GPT format
in memory. 
***


All my machines, purchased new or used, came with some version of 
Windows installed.


During initial installation of Debian Squeeze (or later) would I have 
been explicitly asked to choose between MBR and GPT?







Maybe pxe is an option? i never used it, and do not plan to do so
anytime soon.

however, have fun! ... this weekend :-)

OPERATOR ERROR ---- Re: Planned path - was [Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive]

[Richard Owlett]

On 08/01/2024 02:11 PM, Richard Owlett wrote:

On 08/01/2024 01:56 PM, DdB wrote:

Am 01.08.2024 um 17:33 schrieb Richard Owlett:
[SNIP]


I've never had occasion to use Grub's command line. Good time to learn.
The existing install is so old it has Grub 1.??? rather than 2.??? .
Should that make any practical difference to manual install?


I should have turned on the machines in question.
They report "GNU GRUB version 2.02~beta3-5"
Seniors should "check first" before "opening mouth and ..." ;/



Not sure about gpt vs mbr. I have whatever Gparted defaults to when 
creating new partitions. I have no longer required partitions available.


Wont have time available until tomorrow or Saturday to do the install.

Thanks.

Re: Planned path - was [Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive]

[Richard Owlett]

On 08/01/2024 02:33 PM, DdB wrote:

Am 01.08.2024 um 21:11 schrieb Richard Owlett:

I've never had occasion to use Grub's command line. Good time to learn.
The existing install is so old it has Grub 1.??? rather than 2.??? .
Should that make any practical difference to manual install?

Not sure about gpt vs mbr. I have whatever Gparted defaults to when
creating new partitions. I have no longer required partitions available.


Oh, grub-pc (a.k.a. grub1)?
I gotta confess: when i did join linux, there was grub1.98 already
available and for reasons outside this scope, i went for it.
i mean: i really have no idea about grub 1. Better ask someone else to
fill in.

gpt is much more flexible compared to the old mbr partitioning, but i do
not think, it would be necessary for you to change at this point. Just
check your scheme and use it, as you like. The merits of grub2 come
handy for a) large disks and b) uefi booting, both of which wont bother
you this weekend, right?

btw: to check, i would use

sudo sgdisk -p /dev/sda # or whatever disk you want to see, this will only 
output information, not change anything.


Maybe pxe is an option? i never used it, and do not plan to do so
anytime soon.

however, have fun! ... this weekend :-)



I will *GRIN*
Part of why I'm involved in this is education.
The sgdisk man page links to some interesting looking material.
Someone had already raised pxe as a option which led to many links.
I suspect tomorrow will be a reading day ;}

Thanks all.

Re: Planned path - was [Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive]

[DdB]

Am 01.08.2024 um 21:11 schrieb Richard Owlett:
> I've never had occasion to use Grub's command line. Good time to learn.
> The existing install is so old it has Grub 1.??? rather than 2.??? .
> Should that make any practical difference to manual install?
> 
> Not sure about gpt vs mbr. I have whatever Gparted defaults to when
> creating new partitions. I have no longer required partitions available.

Oh, grub-pc (a.k.a. grub1)?
I gotta confess: when i did join linux, there was grub1.98 already
available and for reasons outside this scope, i went for it.
i mean: i really have no idea about grub 1. Better ask someone else to
fill in.

gpt is much more flexible compared to the old mbr partitioning, but i do
not think, it would be necessary for you to change at this point. Just
check your scheme and use it, as you like. The merits of grub2 come
handy for a) large disks and b) uefi booting, both of which wont bother
you this weekend, right?

btw: to check, i would use
> sudo sgdisk -p /dev/sda # or whatever disk you want to see, this will only 
> output information, not change anything.

Maybe pxe is an option? i never used it, and do not plan to do so
anytime soon.

however, have fun! ... this weekend :-)

Re: Planned path - was [Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive]

[Richard Owlett]

On 08/01/2024 01:56 PM, DdB wrote:

Am 01.08.2024 um 17:33 schrieb Richard Owlett:

In the phrase "to boot the installer using grub stanza (or manually)",
just what does "(or manually)" refer to?



I am using all of the options listed below depending on circumstances.
If you are clear about using your hd to store an installer iso, and you
are able to boot grub2, there are several choices:

1. use grub commandline (pressing c during grub menu) and enter all the
commands by hand. (possible to ask grub questions interactively,
autocomplete filemanes, aso, but needs some familiarity with its language)

2. compose the stanza manually (using the internet and your own knowing)
and introduce it temporarily into /boot/grub/grub.cfg (where it will be
overwritten by update-grub some day)

3 permanently teach grub to add the stanza, which may even be
dynamically coded, if you want, by creating/modifying a file in
/etc/grub.d (but who wants to install several times on the same
machine?). I did permanantly add a live iso for emergency booting a
whacky system.

manually refers to 1.
was that clear enough for you?
i would expect to use 32bit installer and image files, but it is
necessary to be certain about the partitioning format (gpt or mbr) in
order to give grub the correct hints.




I've never had occasion to use Grub's command line. Good time to learn.
The existing install is so old it has Grub 1.??? rather than 2.??? .
Should that make any practical difference to manual install?

Not sure about gpt vs mbr. I have whatever Gparted defaults to when 
creating new partitions. I have no longer required partitions available.


Wont have time available until tomorrow or Saturday to do the install.

Thanks.

Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive

[Łukasz Kalamłacki]

Hi,


This can be helpful :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEkb-GXz3sY


Best,

Łukasz

On 1.08.2024 14:41, Richard Owlett wrote:
I have an elderly Sony laptop and a more ancient desktop with unknown 
motherboard happily running i386 Debian 9.0. As far as I can tell the 
BIOS of neither machine supports booting from a flash drive. Neither 
has functional CD/DVD drive. Both hard drives have copious free space.


Both machines have internet access.
Though this machine is 64Bit capable and bootable from flash, it does 
not have adequate free space for an additional OS.


Are there documented install instructions covering machines described 
in first paragraph?


TIA

Re: Planned path - was [Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive]

[DdB]

Am 01.08.2024 um 17:33 schrieb Richard Owlett:
> In the phrase "to boot the installer using grub stanza (or manually)",
> just what does "(or manually)" refer to?


I am using all of the options listed below depending on circumstances.
If you are clear about using your hd to store an installer iso, and you
are able to boot grub2, there are several choices:

1. use grub commandline (pressing c during grub menu) and enter all the
commands by hand. (possible to ask grub questions interactively,
autocomplete filemanes, aso, but needs some familiarity with its language)

2. compose the stanza manually (using the internet and your own knowing)
and introduce it temporarily into /boot/grub/grub.cfg (where it will be
overwritten by update-grub some day)

3 permanently teach grub to add the stanza, which may even be
dynamically coded, if you want, by creating/modifying a file in
/etc/grub.d (but who wants to install several times on the same
machine?). I did permanantly add a live iso for emergency booting a
whacky system.

manually refers to 1.
was that clear enough for you?
i would expect to use 32bit installer and image files, but it is
necessary to be certain about the partitioning format (gpt or mbr) in
order to give grub the correct hints.

Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive

[Łukasz Kalamłacki]

Hi,


on tftp server you need to unpack this:

https://deb.debian.org/debian/dists/bookworm/main/installer-i386/current/images/netboot/netboot.tar.gz

to install i386 bookworm via PXEBoot.


Best regards,

Łukasz

On 1.08.2024 14:41, Richard Owlett wrote:
I have an elderly Sony laptop and a more ancient desktop with unknown 
motherboard happily running i386 Debian 9.0. As far as I can tell the 
BIOS of neither machine supports booting from a flash drive. Neither 
has functional CD/DVD drive. Both hard drives have copious free space.


Both machines have internet access.
Though this machine is 64Bit capable and bootable from flash, it does 
not have adequate free space for an additional OS.


Are there documented install instructions covering machines described 
in first paragraph?


TIA

Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive

[Łukasz Kalamłacki]

Hi,


15 years ago I had a laptop with broken CD drive but with integrated 
working ethernet NIC and bios supported PXE boot, so I configured 
isc-dhcp-server in my network which provides pxelinux.0 bootloader and 
address of tftp server.


On tftp server I uploaded pxeboot images from Debian. All I had to do 
was to unzip netinstaller from Debian repositories and that it


If in your computer NIC is integrated in motherboard I bet it supports 
PXE boot.


I installed also Debian on Pentium II machine without without NIC 
integrated bout I bought 3com nic for 1USD with PXE bootloader and was 
able to install Debian without CD or USB flash



You can have a look https://wiki.debian.org/PXEBootInstall


Best regards,

Łukasz

On 1.08.2024 14:41, Richard Owlett wrote:
I have an elderly Sony laptop and a more ancient desktop with unknown 
motherboard happily running i386 Debian 9.0. As far as I can tell the 
BIOS of neither machine supports booting from a flash drive. Neither 
has functional CD/DVD drive. Both hard drives have copious free space.


Both machines have internet access.
Though this machine is 64Bit capable and bootable from flash, it does 
not have adequate free space for an additional OS.


Are there documented install instructions covering machines described 
in first paragraph?


TIA

Planned path - was [Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive]

[Richard Owlett]

On 08/01/2024 08:38 AM, Andy Smith wrote:

Hi,

On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 03:35:38PM +0200, DdB wrote:

i recommend installing from netinstall iso image using the
hd-media files to boot the installer using grub stanza (or
manually). Description in the manual is a bit short, but you can
ask me, if you need.


Oh yes, great suggestion! I should have thought of just downloading
an installer and booting it from existing install's grub.



I was hoping I could somehow tell grub to run an installer's ISO image.
I think the posted links will lead me adequately.

In the phrase "to boot the installer using grub stanza (or manually)",
just what does "(or manually)" refer to?

Thanks.

Re: CLARIFICATIONS Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive

[Andy Smith]

Hi,

On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 10:22:13AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 08/01/2024 07:41 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
> > I have an elderly Sony laptop and a more ancient desktop with unknown
> > motherboard happily running i386 Debian 9.0. As far as I can tell the
> > BIOS of neither machine supports booting from a flash drive. Neither has
> > functional CD/DVD drive. Both hard drives have copious free space.
> 
> Both machines have 32bit only hardware.

Which part of the hardware is 32-bit only? You said the CPUs support
64-bit, and that's normally all that matters.

> > and bootable from flash, it does not have adequate free space for an 
> > additional OS.
> 
> No sane person messes with OPERABLE system unless ABSOLUTELY *REQUIRED*!

Why are you asking about upgrading it if you don't want to mess with
the currently-installed system?

Thanks,
Andy

-- 
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

CLARIFICATIONS Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive

[Richard Owlett]

On 08/01/2024 07:41 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
I have an elderly Sony laptop and a more ancient desktop with unknown 
motherboard happily running i386 Debian 9.0. As far as I can tell the 
BIOS of neither machine supports booting from a flash drive. Neither has 
functional CD/DVD drive. Both hard drives have copious free space.


Both machines have 32bit only hardware.



Both machines have internet access.
Though this machine is 64Bit capable


I.E. has a 64bit processor capable of running 32bit software.
It currently runs i386 Debian 9.13 .


and bootable from flash, it does not have adequate free space for an additional 
OS.


No sane person messes with OPERABLE system unless ABSOLUTELY *REQUIRED*!
I date from era of 12AX7s and routine IO devices were 026s and KSR35s.
Have been using Debian since Squeeze.
At 80+ I've learned to ask first when in doubt ;}!



Are there documented install instructions covering machines described in 
first paragraph?


TIA

Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive

[Andy Smith]

Hi,

On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 03:35:38PM +0200, DdB wrote:
> i recommend installing from netinstall iso image using the
> hd-media files to boot the installer using grub stanza (or
> manually). Description in the manual is a bit short, but you can
> ask me, if you need.

Oh yes, great suggestion! I should have thought of just downloading
an installer and booting it from existing install's grub.

Thanks,
Andy

-- 
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive

[Anssi Saari]

Richard Owlett  writes:

> I have an elderly Sony laptop and a more ancient desktop with unknown
> motherboard happily running i386 Debian 9.0. As far as I can tell the 
> BIOS of neither machine supports booting from a flash drive. Neither
> has functional CD/DVD drive. Both hard drives have copious free space.
>
> Both machines have internet access.
> Though this machine is 64Bit capable and bootable from flash, it does
> not have adequate free space for an additional OS.

Maybe fix that space issue then?

> Are there documented install instructions covering machines described
> in first paragraph?

See https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/ch04s04.en.html for booting
the installer from a hard disk. 

Come to think of it, grub supports booting ISO images and to make it
easy, you could install grml-rescueboot and boot a grml image and use
grml-debootstrap to install Debian.

Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive

[DdB]

Am 01.08.2024 um 14:41 schrieb Richard Owlett:
> I have an elderly Sony laptop and a more ancient desktop with unknown
> motherboard happily running i386 Debian 9.0. As far as I can tell the
> BIOS of neither machine supports booting from a flash drive. Neither has
> functional CD/DVD drive. Both hard drives have copious free space.
> 
> Both machines have internet access.
> Though this machine is 64Bit capable and bootable from flash, it does
> not have adequate free space for an additional OS.
> 
> Are there documented install instructions covering machines described in
> first paragraph?
> 
> TIA
i fail to understand, what you want to do with the machine, that has no
space. Conserning the other one: i recommend installing from netinstall
iso image using the hd-media files to boot the installer using grub
stanza (or manually). Description in the manual is a bit short, but you
can ask me, if you need.

Look up A 2.4 here:
https://d-i.debian.org/manual/en.amd64/apas02.html
best regards, DdB

Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive

[George at Clug]

Richard,

Are both of your computers (laptop and desktop) 64 bit capable?  Not
that this matters too much to my below suggestion.

 This might help you if you can remove the drives from the laptop
and/or desktop. 


I often take a drive out of a computer, then put the drive into a
computer that can boot from a installation DVD or can boot from a USB
install memory drive. 


Then I install a my Debian installation selecting to install "all
drivers" and not just drivers for this computer.


After the installation, using "apt install [package]", I also
install  most free and non-free firmware (particularly video and
networking), then I put the drive back into the original computer, and
boot up. 



(Note: Sometimes I have issues with Nvidia graphic's cards, and after
booting up I have to press Alt-F2 to log in as root and then run any
commands to specifically install or uninstall video drivers)


After booting up, I run:
# update-initramfs -u # update-grub
 And reboot again.


This process may not always work, but in most cases it has helped me
out.

George.







On Thursday, 01-08-2024 at 22:41 Richard Owlett wrote:
> I have an elderly Sony laptop and a more ancient desktop with
unknown 
> motherboard happily running i386 Debian 9.0. As far as I can tell
the 
> BIOS of neither machine supports booting from a flash drive. Neither
has 
> functional CD/DVD drive. Both hard drives have copious free space.
> 
> Both machines have internet access.
> Though this machine is 64Bit capable and bootable from flash, it
does 
> not have adequate free space for an additional OS.
> 
> Are there documented install instructions covering machines
described in 
> first paragraph?
> 
> TIA
> 
> 
> 
>

Re: Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive

[Andy Smith]

Hi,

On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 07:41:53AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> I have an elderly Sony laptop and a more ancient desktop with unknown
> motherboard happily running i386 Debian 9.0. As far as I can tell the BIOS
> of neither machine supports booting from a flash drive. Neither has
> functional CD/DVD drive. Both hard drives have copious free space.

I would shrink the partition and then use debootstrap to install
Debian in new partition in the available space, from the running
Debian 9.

Since you say it has a 64-bit capable CPU I'd make sure to install
amd64 though, as i686 Debian probably only has one more release
where it's available for booting, maybe not even that.

https://wiki.debian.org/Debootstrap

If the partition juggling here is too tricky, maybe you could:

- take a drive out of one of them and put it into the other

- debootstrap onto that new drive from the other's running Debian 9

- Remove the drive and put it back in the computer it came from,
  where it now boots Debian 12

- Once you're satisfied it's working, remove drive from the
  remaining old machine and do it all over again.

Even though you say your machines can't boot from USB and have no
optical drive, it seems likely that there would be a place inside
them to attach another SATA drive which the Debian 9 would then see
without any difficulty.

Thanks,
Andy

-- 
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

Installing current i386 Debian on OLD syst W/O CD/DVD drive

[Richard Owlett]

I have an elderly Sony laptop and a more ancient desktop with unknown 
motherboard happily running i386 Debian 9.0. As far as I can tell the 
BIOS of neither machine supports booting from a flash drive. Neither has 
functional CD/DVD drive. Both hard drives have copious free space.


Both machines have internet access.
Though this machine is 64Bit capable and bootable from flash, it does 
not have adequate free space for an additional OS.


Are there documented install instructions covering machines described in 
first paragraph?


TIA

Spotkanie w sprawie nowej aplikacji

[Monika Barnaś]

Dzień dobry,

chciałabym dotrzeć do osoby odpowiedzialnej lub decyzyjnej w obszarze 
zarządzania dokumentacją w Państwa firmie.

Zapewniamy możliwość innowacyjnego, elektronicznego obiegu dokumentacji 
opartego na wykorzystaniu nowoczesnej aplikacji no-code, która działa 
wielowymiarowo i automatyzuje procesy biznesowe oraz operacyjne. 

Wykorzystanie aplikacji wpływa na optymalizację procesów, m.in zarządzanie 
łańcuchem dostaw, kontrola sprzedaży i eksport faktur kosztowych. Dodatkowo 
umożliwia generowanie zamówień i błyskawiczne ich powiązanie z fakturami oraz 
dokumentami PZ.

Z powodzeniem realizowaliśmy wdrożenia dla wielu dużych przedsiębiorstw, takich 
jak: Carrefour, Lafarge, Medicover i CCC.
 
Czy możemy porozmawiać o obiegu dokumentacji w Państwa firmie?


Pozdrawiam
Monika Barnaś   

Re: W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/brand/yada*

[Felix Miata]

Sven Joachim composed on 2023-04-29 09:02 (UTC+0200):

> On 2023-04-28 21:30 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:

>> # inxi -Gxx
>> Graphics:
>>   Device-1: Intel 82Q963/Q965 Integrated Graphics vendor: Dell driver: i915
>> v: kernel arch: Gen-4 ports: active: DVI-D-1 empty: VGA-1 bus-ID: 00:02.0
>> chip-ID: 8086:2992   # aka ancient
>> # grep MODULES /etc/initramfs-tools/initramfs.conf
>> # MODULES: [ most | netboot | dep | list ]
>> MODULES=dep
>> #

>> These many per transaction $SUBJECT initrd construction messages have been 
>> routine
>> for a long time in Bullseye and Bookworm regardless of active GPU installed, 
>> and
>> whether or not a firmware-brand-graphics .deb exists and is installed
>> for it.

> It would be useful to give an example of these messages, as well as a
> list of firmware packages you have installed.

https://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?t=156340 shows same thing, and reports
problem is old and unfixable.

Apparently it must only happen with certain CPU/GPU families, which is why it 
took
a while for me to notice.

>> Is there something that can be done to avoid this screen and log
>> litter?

> Install the package that contains the firmware files.  For Intel and
> NVidia graphics that is firmware-misc-nonfree, for AMD it is
> firmware-amd-graphics.

>> Can anyone
>> point to an existing meta-bug report on the subject of stopping the litter?
>> Searching seems to find only reports pointing to particular GPUs, e.g.
>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1016286

> It's the same for any GPUs, as well as for other hardware.  The
> update-initramfs script runs modinfo(8) to find out which firmware files
> a loaded module might request and issues a warning for any such file
> which is not there.  You can check the code for yourself[1].

> 1. https://sources.debian.org/src/initramfs-tools/0.142/hook-functions/#L109
-- 
Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion,
based on faith, not based on science.

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata

Re: W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/brand/yada*

[bw]

>> Can anyone
>> point to an existing meta-bug report on the subject of stopping the litter?
>> Searching seems to find only reports pointing to particular GPUs,

I don't know about meta-bug, but try 989539? 981087? you can complain there, 
but without a patch I don't see it helping.
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=initramfs-tools-core;dist=unstable

The way I see it, it's not a bug.  Initramfs-tools is not responsible for 
deciding what firmware a specific device or machine needs.  It is only 
reporting that a module to be included lists a firmware file as loadable, and 
that firmware wasn't able to be included when building the initramfs.  It might 
be a decent idea to have a config option to turn the warning on and off.  Since 
I'm not annoyed by it, I'm not really interested in doing the work.

I think your real question is, "How can I make someone else do this with as 
little effort as possible on my part?"

good luck,
bw

Re: W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/brand/yada*

[Felix Miata]

bw composed on 2023-06-20 00:25 (UTC):

> in-reply-to=<11580298-c877-35c1-cf54-99e56af75...@earthlink.net>

>>> Is there something that can be done to avoid this screen and log
>>> litter?

> It's your machine, you could hack it out?  possibly just #comment out and put 
> a /bin/true under it?  Don't blame me if it all goes wrong.

Machines, my machineS = lots of installations.

> /usr/share/initramfs-tools/hook-functions 
> 4322/23580  18%
>  if grep -q "^$kmod_modname\\>" /proc/modules 
> "${CONFDIR}/modules"; then
>  echo "W: Possible missing firmware 
> /lib/firmware/${firmware} for module
>  fi

Mostly gibberish to this non-programmer. Comment out what, 3 lines? 1? 2? The 
one
I'm looking at in Bookworm is 24057 bytes, not 23580.
-- 
Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion,
based on faith, not based on science.

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata

Re: W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/brand/yada*

[bw]

in-reply-to=<11580298-c877-35c1-cf54-99e56af75...@earthlink.net>

>> Is there something that can be done to avoid this screen and log
>> litter?

It's your machine, you could hack it out?  possibly just #comment out and put a 
/bin/true under it?  Don't blame me if it all goes wrong.

/usr/share/initramfs-tools/hook-functions 
4322/23580  18%
 if grep -q "^$kmod_modname\\>" /proc/modules 
"${CONFDIR}/modules"; then
 echo "W: Possible missing firmware 
/lib/firmware/${firmware} for module
 fi

Re: W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/brand/yada*

[Felix Miata]

Sven Joachim composed on 2023-04-29 09:02 (UTC+0200):

> On 2023-04-28 21:30 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
 
>> # inxi -Gxx
>> Graphics:
>>   Device-1: Intel 82Q963/Q965 Integrated Graphics vendor: Dell driver: i915
>> v: kernel arch: Gen-4 ports: active: DVI-D-1 empty: VGA-1 bus-ID: 00:02.0
>> chip-ID: 8086:2992   # aka ancient
>> # grep MODULES /etc/initramfs-tools/initramfs.conf
>> # MODULES: [ most | netboot | dep | list ]
>> MODULES=dep
>> #

>> These many per transaction $SUBJECT initrd construction messages have been 
>> routine
>> for a long time in Bullseye and Bookworm regardless of active GPU installed, 
>> and
>> whether or not a firmware-brand-graphics .deb exists and is installed
>> for it.
 
> It would be useful to give an example of these messages, as well as a
> list of firmware packages you have installed.
 
>> Is there something that can be done to avoid this screen and log
>> litter?
 
> Install the package that contains the firmware files.  For Intel and
> NVidia graphics that is firmware-misc-nonfree, for AMD it is
> firmware-amd-graphics.
 
>> Can anyone
>> point to an existing meta-bug report on the subject of stopping the litter?
>> Searching seems to find only reports pointing to particular GPUs, e.g.
>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1016286
 
# inxi -CGS
System:
  Host: fi965 Kernel: 6.1.0-9-amd64 arch: x86_64 bits: 64 Console: pty pts/0
Distro: Debian GNU/Linux 12 (bookworm)
CPU:
  Info: dual core model: Intel Core2 6700 bits: 64 type: MCP cache: L2: 4 MiB
  Speed (MHz): avg: 1596 min/max: 1596/2660 cores: 1: 1596 2: 1596
Graphics:
  Device-1: AMD Oland [Radeon HD 8570 / R5 430 OEM R7 240/340 Radeon 520 OEM]
driver: amdgpu v: kernel chip-ID: 1002:6611
  Display: server: X.org v: 1.21.1.7 driver: X: loaded: modesetting
dri: radeonsi gpu: amdgpu resolution: 1: 2560x1440 2: 1680x1050
# dpkg-query -W | grep firmware
firmware-amd-graphics   20230210-5
firmware-linux-free 20200122-1
firmware-misc-nonfree   20230210-5
firmware-sof-signed 2.2.4-1
# update-initramfs -u -k 6.1.0-9-amd64
update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-6.1.0-9-amd64
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/ip_discovery.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/vega10_cap.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/sienna_cichlid_cap.bin for 
module amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/navi12_cap.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/psp_13_0_11_ta.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/psp_13_0_11_toc.bin for 
module amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/psp_13_0_10_ta.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/psp_13_0_10_sos.bin for 
module amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/aldebaran_cap.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/gc_11_0_3_imu.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/gc_11_0_4_rlc.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/gc_11_0_4_mec.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/gc_11_0_4_me.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/gc_11_0_4_pfp.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/gc_11_0_3_rlc.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/gc_11_0_3_mec.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/gc_11_0_3_me.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/gc_11_0_3_pfp.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/gc_11_0_0_toc.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/sdma_6_0_3.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/sienna_cichlid_mes1.bin for 
module amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/sienna_cichlid_mes.bin for 
module amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/navi10_mes.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/gc_11_0_3_mes1.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/gc_11_0_3_mes.bin for module 
amdgpu
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/amdgpu/smu_13_0_10.bin for module 
amdgpu
I: The initramfs will attempt to resume from /dev/sda5
I: (UUID=57a644a9-4f6a-41ea-b24a-8983806a)
I: Set the RESUME variable to override this.
#
-- 
Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion,
based on faith, not based on science.

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata

Re: W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/brand/yada*

[Felix Miata]

Sven Joachim composed on 2023-04-29 09:02 (UTC-+0200):

> On 2023-04-28 21:30 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
 
>> # inxi -Gxx
>> Graphics:
>>   Device-1: Intel 82Q963/Q965 Integrated Graphics vendor: Dell driver: i915
>> v: kernel arch: Gen-4 ports: active: DVI-D-1 empty: VGA-1 bus-ID: 00:02.0
>> chip-ID: 8086:2992   # aka ancient
>> # grep MODULES /etc/initramfs-tools/initramfs.conf
>> # MODULES: [ most | netboot | dep | list ]
>> MODULES=dep
>> #

>> These many per transaction $SUBJECT initrd construction messages have been 
>> routine
>> for a long time in Bullseye and Bookworm regardless of active GPU installed, 
>> and
>> whether or not a firmware-brand-graphics .deb exists and is installed
>> for it.
 
> It would be useful to give an example of these messages, as well as a
> list of firmware packages you have installed.
 
>> Is there something that can be done to avoid this screen and log
>> litter?
 
> Install the package that contains the firmware files.  For Intel and
> NVidia graphics that is firmware-misc-nonfree, for AMD it is
> firmware-amd-graphics.
 
>> Can anyone
>> point to an existing meta-bug report on the subject of stopping the litter?
>> Searching seems to find only reports pointing to particular GPUs, e.g.
>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1016286
 
> It's the same for any GPUs, as well as for other hardware.  The
> update-initramfs script runs modinfo(8) to find out which firmware files
> a loaded module might request and issues a warning for any such file
> which is not there.  You can check the code for yourself[1].

> 1. https://sources.debian.org/src/initramfs-tools/0.142/hook-functions/#L109
 
# time apt-get full-upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
Reading state information... Done
Calculating upgrade... Done
The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer required:
  linux-image-5.17.0-1-amd64 linux-image-5.19.0-2-amd64
Use 'apt autoremove' to remove them.
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  linux-image-6.1.0-8-amd64
The following packages will be upgraded:
  linux-image-amd64
1 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 77.2 MB of archives.
After this operation, 575 MB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n] y
Get:1 http://ftp.debian.org/debian bookworm/main amd64 
linux-image-6.1.0-8-amd64 amd64 6.1.25-1 [77.2 MB]
Get:2 http://ftp.debian.org/debian bookworm/main amd64 linux-image-amd64 amd64 
6.1.25-1 [1,480 B]
Fetched 77.2 MB in 7s (11.1 MB/s)
Reading changelogs... Done
Selecting previously unselected package linux-image-6.1.0-8-amd64.
(Reading database ... 95624 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../linux-image-6.1.0-8-amd64_6.1.25-1_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking linux-image-6.1.0-8-amd64 (6.1.25-1) ...
Preparing to unpack .../linux-image-amd64_6.1.25-1_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking linux-image-amd64 (6.1.25-1) over (6.1.20-1) ...
Setting up linux-image-6.1.0-8-amd64 (6.1.25-1) ...
I: /vmlinuz.old is now a symlink to boot/vmlinuz-6.1.0-7-amd64
I: /initrd.img.old is now a symlink to boot/initrd.img-6.1.0-7-amd64
I: /vmlinuz is now a symlink to boot/vmlinuz-6.1.0-8-amd64
I: /initrd.img is now a symlink to boot/initrd.img-6.1.0-8-amd64
/etc/kernel/postinst.d/initramfs-tools:
update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-6.1.0-8-amd64
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/skl_huc_2.0.0.bin for module 
i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/bxt_huc_2.0.0.bin for module 
i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/kbl_huc_4.0.0.bin for module 
i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/glk_huc_4.0.0.bin for module 
i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/kbl_huc_4.0.0.bin for module 
i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/kbl_huc_4.0.0.bin for module 
i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/cml_huc_4.0.0.bin for module 
i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/icl_huc_9.0.0.bin for module 
i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/ehl_huc_9.0.0.bin for module 
i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/ehl_huc_9.0.0.bin for module 
i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/tgl_huc_7.9.3.bin for module 
i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/tgl_huc_7.9.3.bin for module 
i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/dg1_huc.bin for module i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/tgl_huc_7.9.3.bin for module 
i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/tgl_huc.bin for module i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/tgl_huc_7.9.3.bin for module 
i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/i915/tgl_huc.bin for module i915
W: Possible missing firmware /lib/fi

Re: W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/brand/yada*

[Sven Joachim]

On 2023-04-28 21:30 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:

> # inxi -Gxx
> Graphics:
>   Device-1: Intel 82Q963/Q965 Integrated Graphics vendor: Dell driver: i915
> v: kernel arch: Gen-4 ports: active: DVI-D-1 empty: VGA-1 bus-ID: 00:02.0
> chip-ID: 8086:2992# aka ancient
> # grep MODULES /etc/initramfs-tools/initramfs.conf
> # MODULES: [ most | netboot | dep | list ]
> MODULES=dep
> #
>
> These many per transaction $SUBJECT initrd construction messages have been 
> routine
> for a long time in Bullseye and Bookworm regardless of active GPU installed, 
> and
> whether or not a firmware-brand-graphics .deb exists and is installed
> for it.

It would be useful to give an example of these messages, as well as a
list of firmware packages you have installed.

> Is there something that can be done to avoid this screen and log
> litter?

Install the package that contains the firmware files.  For Intel and
NVidia graphics that is firmware-misc-nonfree, for AMD it is
firmware-amd-graphics.

> Can anyone
> point to an existing meta-bug report on the subject of stopping the litter?
> Searching seems to find only reports pointing to particular GPUs, e.g.
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1016286

It's the same for any GPUs, as well as for other hardware.  The
update-initramfs script runs modinfo(8) to find out which firmware files
a loaded module might request and issues a warning for any such file
which is not there.  You can check the code for yourself[1].

Cheers,
   Sven


1. https://sources.debian.org/src/initramfs-tools/0.142/hook-functions/#L109

W: Possible missing firmware /lib/firmware/brand/yada*

[Felix Miata]

# inxi -Gxx
Graphics:
  Device-1: Intel 82Q963/Q965 Integrated Graphics vendor: Dell driver: i915
v: kernel arch: Gen-4 ports: active: DVI-D-1 empty: VGA-1 bus-ID: 00:02.0
chip-ID: 8086:2992  # aka ancient
# grep MODULES /etc/initramfs-tools/initramfs.conf
# MODULES: [ most | netboot | dep | list ]
MODULES=dep
#

These many per transaction $SUBJECT initrd construction messages have been 
routine
for a long time in Bullseye and Bookworm regardless of active GPU installed, and
whether or not a firmware-brand-graphics .deb exists and is installed for it. Is
there something that can be done to avoid this screen and log litter? Can anyone
point to an existing meta-bug report on the subject of stopping the litter?
Searching seems to find only reports pointing to particular GPUs, e.g.
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1016286
-- 
Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion,
based on faith, not based on science.

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata

Re: how disable apt downloads w/o sudo

[Tim Woodall]

On Mon, 12 Sep 2022, jindam, vani wrote:



i am concerned about *myself*



Is your concern the use of bandwidth?


yes


Is a disk being filled up and
running out of space?  Something else?


frankly, if the downloaded files cant
be used, its *definitely* wastage
of space


Are you *only* concerned about the "apt" command (and maybe apt-get), or
is the concern broader?


yes
i use only apt


Do you also want to place restrictions on other
commands that can download files and store them on the disk, like lynx,
curl, wget, ftp, w3m, firefox-esr, and so on?


no



Either alias apt to something harmless or ensure a directory in /home is
first in your path and put a script called apt there.

e.g. An alias will mean you cannot run apt directly but can bypass it
when you really want to. Stick this in your .bashrc or whereever is
approprate for your shell.

$ alias apt='echo No APT please'
$ apt
No APT please
$ \apt
ptapt 1.8.2.3 (amd64)
Usage: apt [options] command

apt is a commandline package manager and provides commands for
searching and managing as well as querying information about packages.
It provides the same functionality as the specialized APT tools,
like apt-get and apt-cache, but enables options more suitable for
interactive use by default.

Most used commands:
  list - list packages based on package names
  search - search in package descriptions
  show - show package details
  install - install packages
  reinstall - reinstall packages
  remove - remove packages
  autoremove - Remove automatically all unused packages
  update - update list of available packages
  upgrade - upgrade the system by installing/upgrading packages
  full-upgrade - upgrade the system by removing/installing/upgrading packages
  edit-sources - edit the source information file

See apt(8) for more information about the available commands.
Configuration options and syntax is detailed in apt.conf(5).
Information about how to configure sources can be found in sources.list(5).
Package and version choices can be expressed via apt_preferences(5).
Security details are available in apt-secure(8).
This APT has Super Cow Powers.
tim@dirac:~ (none)$

Re: how disable apt downloads w/o sudo

[Greg Wooledge]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 04:44:36PM +, jindam, vani wrote:
> On 12 September 2022 1:04:51 PM UTC, Greg Wooledge  wrote:
> >Well, *I* don't understand your issue yet.  Can you please explain it in
> >more detail?
> >
> >Are you trying to stop other users on your system from doing this, or are
> >you trying to stop *yourself* from doing this?
> 
> i am concerned about *myself*

OK.

> >Is your concern the use of bandwidth?  
> 
> yes
> 
> >Is a disk being filled up and
> >running out of space?  Something else?
> 
> frankly, if the downloaded files cant 
> be used, its *definitely* wastage 
> of space

A downloaded .deb file can be used.  Just become root and install it.  Or
move it to /var/cache/apt/archives, so that it'll be used next time you
do "apt install ..." as root.

Nothing is being wasted here, if you actually did want to download it.

> >Are you *only* concerned about the "apt" command (and maybe apt-get), or
> >is the concern broader? 
> 
> yes
> i use only apt

Since you're only trying to prevent personal accidents, you could also
just set up a shell function.

apt() {
  if [[ $1 = download ]]; then
echo "Do this as root instead." >&2
return 1
  fi
  command apt "$@"
}

Something along those lines would prevent you from accidentally running
"apt download ..." as yourself.

Having never used an "apt download" command in my entire life, I'm not
sure exactly what your work flow is, but anyway, here are two answers.

Re: how disable apt downloads w/o sudo

[jindam, vani]

On 12 September 2022 1:04:51 PM UTC, Greg Wooledge  wrote:
>On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 12:59:15PM +, jindam, vani wrote:
>> On 12 September 2022 11:23:49 AM UTC, Tim Woodall  
>> wrote:
>> >If the OP is complaining about:
>> >
>> >$ apt download reportbug
>> >Get:1 http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian buster/main i386 reportbug all
>> >7.5.3~deb10u1 [128 kB]
>> >Fetched 128 kB in 0s (642 kB/s)
>> >$
>> 
>> yes
>> 
>> >Then there's no way to stop this other than making apt executable only
>> >by root.
>> 
>> thats scary, i dont want to meddle with 
>> default permissions.
>> 
>> thanks for understanding my issue
>
>Well, *I* don't understand your issue yet.  Can you please explain it in
>more detail?
>
>Are you trying to stop other users on your system from doing this, or are
>you trying to stop *yourself* from doing this?

i am concerned about *myself*


>Is your concern the use of bandwidth?  

yes

>Is a disk being filled up and
>running out of space?  Something else?

frankly, if the downloaded files cant 
be used, its *definitely* wastage 
of space

>Are you *only* concerned about the "apt" command (and maybe apt-get), or
>is the concern broader? 

yes
i use only apt

>Do you also want to place restrictions on other
>commands that can download files and store them on the disk, like lynx,
>curl, wget, ftp, w3m, firefox-esr, and so on?

no

Re: how disable apt downloads w/o sudo

[Greg Wooledge]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 12:59:15PM +, jindam, vani wrote:
> On 12 September 2022 11:23:49 AM UTC, Tim Woodall  
> wrote:
> >If the OP is complaining about:
> >
> >$ apt download reportbug
> >Get:1 http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian buster/main i386 reportbug all
> >7.5.3~deb10u1 [128 kB]
> >Fetched 128 kB in 0s (642 kB/s)
> >$
> 
> yes
> 
> >Then there's no way to stop this other than making apt executable only
> >by root.
> 
> thats scary, i dont want to meddle with 
> default permissions.
> 
> thanks for understanding my issue

Well, *I* don't understand your issue yet.  Can you please explain it in
more detail?

Are you trying to stop other users on your system from doing this, or are
you trying to stop *yourself* from doing this?

Is your concern the use of bandwidth?  Is a disk being filled up and
running out of space?  Something else?

Are you *only* concerned about the "apt" command (and maybe apt-get), or
is the concern broader?  Do you also want to place restrictions on other
commands that can download files and store them on the disk, like lynx,
curl, wget, ftp, w3m, firefox-esr, and so on?

Re: how disable apt downloads w/o sudo

[jindam, vani]

On 12 September 2022 11:23:49 AM UTC, Tim Woodall  
wrote:
>On Mon, 12 Sep 2022, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 06:37:47AM +, jindam, vani wrote:
>>> how do i stop apt downloads if i dont
>>> use sudo. for ex:
>>> $ apt install reportbug
>> 
>> Since you posted your sample command with a $ as the shell prompt, we
>> assume that you are running the command as a non-root user.  That's what
>> the $ prompt traditionally means.
>> 
>> That command, run as a non-root user, will stop on its own, very quickly,
>> once it tries to do things it's not permitted to do.
>> 
>> unicorn:~$ time apt install reportbug
>> E: Could not open lock file /var/lib/dpkg/lock-frontend - open (13: 
>> Permission denied)
>> E: Unable to acquire the dpkg frontend lock (/var/lib/dpkg/lock-frontend), 
>> are you root?
>> real 0.053  user 0.020  sys 0.000
>> 
>> 
>If the OP is complaining about:
>
>$ apt download reportbug
>Get:1 http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian buster/main i386 reportbug all
>7.5.3~deb10u1 [128 kB]
>Fetched 128 kB in 0s (642 kB/s)
>$

yes

>Then there's no way to stop this other than making apt executable only
>by root.

thats scary, i dont want to meddle with 
default permissions.

thanks for understanding my issue

regards,
jindam, vani

 And even then wget will allow the same thing.
>
>Look into restricted shells or chroots if you want to restrict ordinary
>users from doing certain things. Or quotas if it's, for example, a user
>downloading lots of packages and not cleaning up.
>
>Tim
>

Re: how disable apt downloads w/o sudo

[Greg Wooledge]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 12:23:49PM +0100, Tim Woodall wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 06:37:47AM +, jindam, vani wrote:
> > > how do i stop apt downloads if i dont
> > > use sudo. for ex:
> > > $ apt install reportbug

> If the OP is complaining about:
> 
> $ apt download reportbug
> Get:1 http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian buster/main i386 reportbug all
> 7.5.3~deb10u1 [128 kB]
> Fetched 128 kB in 0s (642 kB/s)

... then they should have said that in their original message.
Second-guessing what people mean is sometimes useful, but more often
just leads to extremely wild goose chases.

On another note, the word "stop" in the original message is ambiguous.
You're interpreting it as "prevent", and that might be correct.  I was
reading it as "interrupt", in which case the standard "Ctrl-C" (or
whatever key has been mapped to stty intr) works just fine, with a
possible follow-up step of "and then remove whatever partial download
files were created".  Which of course only makes sense if we change
the user's command as you did.

Re: how disable apt downloads w/o sudo

[Tim Woodall]

On Mon, 12 Sep 2022, Greg Wooledge wrote:


On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 06:37:47AM +, jindam, vani wrote:

how do i stop apt downloads if i dont
use sudo. for ex:
$ apt install reportbug


Since you posted your sample command with a $ as the shell prompt, we
assume that you are running the command as a non-root user.  That's what
the $ prompt traditionally means.

That command, run as a non-root user, will stop on its own, very quickly,
once it tries to do things it's not permitted to do.

unicorn:~$ time apt install reportbug
E: Could not open lock file /var/lib/dpkg/lock-frontend - open (13: Permission 
denied)
E: Unable to acquire the dpkg frontend lock (/var/lib/dpkg/lock-frontend), are 
you root?
real 0.053  user 0.020  sys 0.000



If the OP is complaining about:

$ apt download reportbug
Get:1 http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian buster/main i386 reportbug all
7.5.3~deb10u1 [128 kB]
Fetched 128 kB in 0s (642 kB/s)
$

Then there's no way to stop this other than making apt executable only
by root. And even then wget will allow the same thing.

Look into restricted shells or chroots if you want to restrict ordinary
users from doing certain things. Or quotas if it's, for example, a user
downloading lots of packages and not cleaning up.

Tim

Re: how disable apt downloads w/o sudo

[Greg Wooledge]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 06:37:47AM +, jindam, vani wrote:
> how do i stop apt downloads if i dont 
> use sudo. for ex:
> $ apt install reportbug

Since you posted your sample command with a $ as the shell prompt, we
assume that you are running the command as a non-root user.  That's what
the $ prompt traditionally means.

That command, run as a non-root user, will stop on its own, very quickly,
once it tries to do things it's not permitted to do.

unicorn:~$ time apt install reportbug
E: Could not open lock file /var/lib/dpkg/lock-frontend - open (13: Permission 
denied)
E: Unable to acquire the dpkg frontend lock (/var/lib/dpkg/lock-frontend), are 
you root?
real 0.053  user 0.020  sys 0.000

Re: how disable apt downloads w/o sudo

[Dan Ritter]

jindam, vani wrote: 
> how do i stop apt downloads if i dont 
> use sudo. for ex:
> $ apt install reportbug

apt can't install things without root permissions. What is the
actual result of typing the above command as a non-root user?

-dsr-

how disable apt downloads w/o sudo

[jindam, vani]

how do i stop apt downloads if i dont 
use sudo. for ex:
$ apt install reportbug

regards,
jindam, vani

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Linux-Fan]

Emanuel Berg writes:


Linux-Fan wrote:

>>> CPU power doubled to account for short-time bursts.
>>
>> Double it, that something one should do?
>
> In Intel world, yes :) In AMD world it seems to be slightly
> better, cf.:
> https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph16220/119126.png
>
> The TDP is given in the labels whereas the actual max power
> consumption observed is in the diagram. It seems that for
> AMD systems, the most extreme factor observed there is
> 143.22/105 = 1.364 [...]

OK, included ...

> SSD highly depends on the model. No need to argue for one
> general figure over the other. I think my SSD is specified
> 14W, but it is large and not the "newest" :)

OK, it says the SSD and RAM are

  Corsair Vengeance LPX · DDR4 · 2*8GB=16GB · 3600Mhz

  250GB Kingston KC 2000 (SSD/NVMe/M.2)

if one can find exact digits, that's optimal, but what do you
search for to find out? I mean in general? The model name
and ... ?


... datasheet
... power consumption

This does not yield anything ineteresting for the RAM here, but for the SSD  
we get a useful datasheet this way:


[v] https://www.kingston.com/datasheets/SKC2000_us.pdf

Which indicates on page 2 that the max. power consumption is 7W under heavy  
write loads.


I get most of my estimates derived from the figures of a PC magazine I  
regularly read :)



Anyway, the computation now lands at 307 W.

  device  model/category max W   note
  -
  CPU AMD Ryzen 3, 4 cores89 exact plus extra   [i]
  fans 80 mm (3K RPM)  9 3*3W =  9W[ii]
  120 mm (2K RPM) 12 2*6W = 12W[ii]
  GPU geforce-gt-710  19 exact[iii]
  mb  Asus ROG Strix B450-F Gaming AM4   101 exact excl CPU[iv]
  RAM DDR3 (1.5V)  3 actually a DDR4   [ii]
  SSD  2.8 [ii]
  -


3W is for one module per [ii] but further above you write 2x8GB so why not  
at least compute it at 6W? Also, SSD could go up to 7W per datasheet [v].  
For actual PSU sizes this will end up at 350W min. which is OK I guess.



total, with +30% wiggle room:
(ceiling (* 1.3 (+ (* (/ 143.22 105) 65)
   (* 3 3) (* 2 6)
   19
   (- 166.2 65)
   3
   2.8) )) ; 307 W

  [i] https://www.amd.com/en/products/apu/amd-ryzen-3-3200g
  https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph16220/119126.png
 [ii] https://www.buildcomputers.net/power-consumption-of-pc-components.html
[iii] https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-gt-710.c1990
 [iv] https://www.techporn.ph/review-asus-rog-strix-b450-f-gaming-am4- 
motherboard/
  https://www.techporn.ph/wp-content/uploads/ASUS-ROG-Strix-B450-F- 
Gaming-Benchmark-1.jpg


[...]

HTH and YMMV
Linux-Fan

öö


pgp9ZR9Hn5YpT.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Linux-Fan]

Emanuel Berg writes:


Linux-Fan wrote:

> It does, see
> https://www.techporn.ph/wp-content/uploads/ASUS-ROG-Strix-B450-F-Gaming-
Benchmark-1.jpg
> which is from your reference iv and explicitly shows an AMD R5
> 2600X processor being used.

I'll subtract 65W from it then ...

> * CPU power doubled to account for short-time bursts.

Double it, that something one should do?


In Intel world, yes :) In AMD world it seems to be slightly better, cf.:
https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph16220/119126.png

The TDP is given in the labels whereas the actual max power consumption
observed is in the diagram. It seems that for AMD systems, the most extreme
factor observed there is 143.22/105 = 1.364, so you might take that or round
up to 1.5 rather than factor 2 for AMD systems.


  Default TDP
  65W
  AMD Configurable TDP (cTDP)
  45-65W
  <https://www.amd.com/en/products/apu/amd-ryzen-3-3200g>

> * RAM upped to 10W and SSD upped to 5W (depending on the
>   actual components, you might want to revert that but
>   computing an SSD with 3W makes your entire calculation
>   dependent on that specific model and if you upgrade that
>   later you'd have to take it into account).

I got these digits from
https://www.buildcomputers.net/power-consumption-of-pc-components.html
which is one of the first Google hits so I trust them for
now ...


The figures on that page for CPUs are misleading (they specify TDP range
which is not much related to actual power draw anymore, see linked figure
above).

The remainder of the figures seems sensible. Some GPUs are also known to
draw extreme peak loads (though usually that's only the "large" ones).

SSD highly depends on the model. No need to argue for one general figure
over the other. I think my SSD is specified 14W, but it is large and not the
"newest" :)

For RAM it seems that my figure is just a little too high and that your 3W
are more correct in modern times. Nice to know :)


As for upgrading that will be easy in this regard since I'll
read how many Watts on the box of whatever I get :)

device  model/category max W   note   ref
  -
  CPU AMD middle end, 4 cores 65 exact  [i]
  fans 80 mm (3K RPM)  9 3*3W =  9W[ii]
  120 mm (2K RPM) 12 2*6W = 12W[ii]
  GPU geforce-gt-710  19 exact[iii]
  mb  Asus ROG Strix B450-F Gaming AM4   166.2   exact, incl CPU   [iv]
  RAM DDR3 (1.5V)  3 actually, a DDR4  [ii]
  SSD  2.8 [ii]
  -

total:
  (ceiling (+ 65 (* 3 3) (* 2 6) 19 (- 166.2 65) 3 2.8))  ; 212 W

with +30% wiggle room:
  (ceiling (* 1.3 (+ 65 (* 3 3) (* 2 6) 19 (- 166.2 65) 3 2.8)))  ; 276 W


IMHO this is too low a figure for the system being planned. I am pretty sure
it _will_ run on a 300W PSU, BUT probably not stable for a long time and
under high loads.

HTH
Linux-Fan


  [i] https://www.amd.com/en/products/apu/amd-ryzen-3-3200g
 [ii] https://www.buildcomputers.net/power-consumption-of-pc-components.html
[iii] https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-gt-710.c1990
 [iv] 
https://www.techporn.ph/review-asus-rog-strix-b450-f-gaming-am4-motherboard/
  
https://www.techporn.ph/wp-content/uploads/ASUS-ROG-Strix-B450-F-Gaming-Benchmark-1.jpg


[...]


pgpJwCQrGCL_L.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Linux-Fan]

Emanuel Berg writes:


Unfortunately the motherboard was worst-case 166.2 W, not the
previous estimate/approximation at 80.

The 166.2 (motherboard W really doesn't include the CPU?)


It does, see
https://www.techporn.ph/wp-content/uploads/ASUS-ROG-Strix-B450-F-Gaming-Benchmark-1.jpg
which is from your reference iv and explicitly shows an AMD R5 2600X  
processor being used.



So no it says it is is worst-case 277 W, and with +30% wiggle
room it is 361 W :(

back to passive 400W I guess ...


  device  model/category max W   note   ref
  -
  CPU AMD middle end, 4 cores 65 exact  [i]
  fans 80 mm (3K RPM)  9 3*3W =  9W
  120 mm (2K RPM) 12 2*6W = 12W[ii]
  GPU geforce-gt-710  19 exact[iii]
  mb  Asus ROG Strix B450-F Gaming AM4   166.2   exact [iv]
  RAM ~DDR3 (1.5V) 3 actually, a DDR4
  SSD  2.8
  -

total:
  (ceiling (+ 19 65 (* 3 3) (* 2 6) 166.2 3 2.8))  ; 277 W

with +30% wiggle room:
  (ceiling (* 1.30 (+ 19 65 (* 3 3) (* 2 6) 166.2 3 2.8))) ; 361 W


[...]

 [iv] https://www.techporn.ph/review-asus-rog-strix-b450-f-gaming-am4- 
motherboard/


[...]

May I suggest you to compute it differently as follows?

   device  model/category max W   note   ref
   -
   CPU AMD middle end, 4 cores130 2*65W  [i]
   fans 80 mm (3K RPM)  9 3*3W =  9W
   120 mm (2K RPM) 12 2*6W = 12W[ii]
   GPU geforce-gt-710  19 exact[iii]
   mb  Asus ROG Strix B450-F Gaming AM480 previous estimate
   RAM ~DDR3 (1.5V)10 actually, a DDR4
   SSD  5
   -

What did I change:

* CPU power doubled to account for short-time bursts.
* Motherboard back to 80W which should still be a safe estimate.
* RAM upped to 10W and SSD upped to 5W (depending on the actual components,
  you might want to revert that but computing an SSD with 3W makes your
  entire calculation dependent on that specific model and if you upgrade
  that later you'd have to take it into account).

Sum = 130+9+12+19+80+10+5 = 265W.
With +30%: 265*1.3 = 344.5W

Hence it would be suggested to take at least a 350W PSU. Use a larger one if  
you ever plan to extend the system.


HTH and YMMV
Linux-Fan

öö


pgpl5untslDYm.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[songbird]

Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Unfortunately the motherboard was worst-case 166.2 W, not the
> previous estimate/approximation at 80.
>
> The 166.2 (motherboard W really doesn't include the CPU?)
>
> So no it says it is is worst-case 277 W, and with +30% wiggle
> room it is 361 W :(
>
> back to passive 400W I guess ...

  i tried to build my system to use as little energy as
possible but it can still play videos and compile programs.

  the idle watt use or when just sitting here typing text
in a terminal is 57-58watts.  if i turn off the speaker
system i can reduce that down to 46-47 watts.  if it goes
idle with the screen blanker it will go back to about 20 
watts.  booting up and loading will increase the load to
about 100 watts at times.  apt-get update will peak at
about 180 watts when it is unpacking the index files.  i
haven't yet done a kernel compile or big build but i think
it will be in that range.  i only have one tiny CPU fan
and i love that it is a such a quiet machine compared to
my last monster which sounded like an airplane taking off
when it ran.

  no matter what you end up getting i hope it makes you
happy with the results.  :)

  400 watt power fanless PSU.  all seems to be doing ok
so far other than some kind of lock up (keyboard or
compositor issue not sure yet) once in a while.


  songbird

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Linux-Fan]

Emanuel Berg writes:


Linux-Fan wrote:

>> Oh, the OP has the AMD4 x86_64 CPU that comes with/in the
>> Asus ROG Strix B450-F Gaming motherboard!
>
> By default, a motherboard is just that, a motherboard.
> Unless you have some specific "bundle" package, there is no
> CPU included with it. According to
> https://rog.asus.com/motherboards/rog-strix/rog-strix-b450-f-gaming-model/
> the board has "AM4 socket: Ready for AMD Ryzen(TM)
> processors". And according to
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socket_AM4 this socket can
> accomodate for a wide variety of different processors.

$ lscpu | grep "name"
Model name: AMD Ryzen 3 3200G with Radeon Vega Graphics


Now this is _not_ a 125W CPU but a 65W TDP one [1]. When you calculate that  
CPU with 125W you are already safe. No need to multiply that *2 what I would  
have suggested were it a 125W TDP CPU. In fact, by calculating with 125W you  
almost took twice the TDP already which would have been 2*65W = 130W.


[1] https://www.amd.com/en/products/apu/amd-ryzen-3-3200g


> (a) PSU with 450W will have specified 87% at 90W i.e.
> draw 90W/0.87 = 103W
>
> (b) PSU with 600W will have specified 90% at 120W i.e.
> draw 120W/0.9 = 133W

Okay, so with everything and +25% wiggle room, i.e.

  (ceiling (* 1.25 (+ 19 125 (* 3 3) (* 2 6) 80 3 2.8))) ; 314 W


Use that figure, see above :)


it is 314 W, and then the worst efficiency is 87%, the digit
lands at

  (ceiling (/ 314 0.87 1.0)) ; 361

361 W.

?


You do not need to take efficiency into account this way. Reason is: The  
efficiency is the factor between the wall power draw and the PSU's output  
power. To size a PSU for a new computer you _only_ take into account the  
output power and this is also the figure that the manufacturer advertises  
(i.e. 300W PSU means 300W output power, not input power draw).


The efficiency only comes into play when you want to consider the wall power  
draw e.g. to find out how much it will cost to run the systmem 24/7 in terms  
of electricity. If you take an "overly large" PSU, efficiency will possibly  
degrade compared to a one that is "just right" in size.


I hope that clarifies it a little.

HTH
Linux-Fan

öö

[...]


pgpJCzDitOFKs.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Tixy]

On Fri, 2022-03-04 at 23:33 +0100, Linux-Fan wrote:
[...]
> Please keep the following points in mind when doing PSU wattage sizing for  
> modern PCs:
> 
>  - Judging a CPU by its thermal design power is no longer feasible due
>    to some CPUs permanently overclocking while the actually available
>    cooling power permits it. On some Intel CPUs this can mean about twice
>    the power than you would have expected.

I concur, my CPU has a TDP of 65W but getting all threads spinning in a
loop jumps the power to more than 120W, and CPU quickly rising to max
junction temperature (95C) for a minute or two until the the system
resets :-(

I installed thermald to manage temperatures, but it seems crap
firmware/Linux design that lets system run at unreliable and life
shortening temperatures without some user-side daemon running and
throttle CPU speed to keep things from overheating.

-- 
Tixy

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Tixy]

On Sat, 2022-03-05 at 14:07 +1300, Ash Joubert wrote:
> On 05/03/2022 14:00, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> > So I should get a passive 400W then.
> 
> My last attempt to build a completely silent PC with a standard desktop 
> case and PSU failed because the passively-cooled PSU buzzed at very low 
> loads (idle), *exactly* when I wanted it to be silent.

I had a similar problem with a new PC I got a year ago but I bought it
ready made, so I replaced the PSU and got a refund from the original PC
supplier. Thing is, I replaced the PSU with the identical model [1] as
the reviews on Amazon didn't complain about noise, sure enough, the new
one was silent so the old one was duff (possibly some inductor not
wound rigidly or touching another component).

[1] SilverStone NJ450-SXL

-- 
Tixy

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Ash Joubert]

On 05/03/2022 14:24, Emanuel Berg wrote:

Ash Joubert wrote:

My last attempt to build a completely silent PC with
a standard desktop case and PSU failed because the
passively-cooled PSU buzzed at very low loads (idle),
*exactly* when I wanted it to be silent.

What about your attempt before that?


I built several quiet PCs with various Antec cases and Noctua CPU and 
case fans. I am pretty sure that each used the PSU included with the 
Antec cases. The last build was 2009 I think, before I went fanless. 
Back in those days it was usual to have a PSU included with the case.


Kind regards,

--
Ash Joubert 
Director
Transient Software Limited 
New Zealand

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Ash Joubert]

On 05/03/2022 14:23, Emanuel Berg wrote:

Not nearly as amazing as what will run on my three-year-old
mid-range SDM660 Android phone: Firefox, YouTube, 3D games,
Termux with Python 3.10, ssh/sftp, bash, nano, and more.
If a mobile device can handle all of this, desktops have no
excuse for wasting power.


You have a projector and keyboard as well?


No, it is just a phone. 😀

My desktop just has a single BenQ LED monitor on HDMI, and I use a 
Logitech MK270R wireless keyboard/mouse combo. I think the monitor, 
which has its own external adaptor, uses about 30 W. I measured the AC 
power consumption of all my devices with a Belkin plug meter.


Kind regards,

--
Ash Joubert 
Director
Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/>
New Zealand

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Ash Joubert]

On 05/03/2022 14:00, Emanuel Berg wrote:

So I should get a passive 400W then.


My last attempt to build a completely silent PC with a standard desktop 
case and PSU failed because the passively-cooled PSU buzzed at very low 
loads (idle), *exactly* when I wanted it to be silent.


Kind regards,

--
Ash Joubert 
Director
Transient Software Limited 
New Zealand

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Ash Joubert]

On 05/03/2022 13:35, Emanuel Berg wrote:

Ash Joubert wrote:

My PSU is a mere 120 W, and I am a game developer, albeit
targetting low poly games that will run on mobile.

Amazing!


Not nearly as amazing as what will run on my three-year-old mid-range 
SDM660 Android phone: Firefox, YouTube, 3D games, Termux with Python 
3.10, ssh/sftp, bash, nano, and more. If a mobile device can handle all 
of this, desktops have no excuse for wasting power.


Kind regards,

--
Ash Joubert 
Director
Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/>
New Zealand

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Ash Joubert]

On 05/03/2022 13:17, Stefan Monnier wrote:

- Streacom FC8WS Alpha fanless case

[...]

- Intel i7-7700 65W CPU (Kaby Lake, HD 630 iGPU)

I can only concur,
 Stefan "typing this on an older Streacom FC8 with a 35W CPU and
 an external 90W AC/DC power brick"


Ooh, that sounds a lot like my previous (2012) build:

- Asus P8H77-I
- Intel Core i3-3220 3.3GHz 55W (Ivy Bridge, HD Graphics 2500 iGPU)
- 8GB RAM
- Streacom FC8 WS Evo Mini-ITX case
- picoPSU-90+80W kit

But I did not dare use it for 3D. More recent HD 630 iGPU is a massive 
improvement.


Kind regards,

--
Ash Joubert 
Director
Transient Software Limited 
New Zealand

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Ash Joubert]

On 05/03/2022 04:24, Emanuel Berg wrote:

I've heard that for gaming you would want a 600~800W PSU [1]
but how do I know how many W I need for my computer use?
I think the most resource-intense I do would be compiling and
watching multimedia on mpv. [2]


Not sure this is going to help you, because mine is a low-power Intel 
build and you have a lot of AMD stuff, but, for the record, it is 
possible to get a lot done with very little power consumption, if you 
use a mid-range TDP CPU with an integrated GPU and stick to one SSD. 
Gaming PCs are a poor comparison for your use-cases because they focus 
on maximum GPU power and peak single-thread performance, whereas you 
need little GPU and compilation often benefits most from multi-threaded 
throughput. Any modern mainstream CPU should handle multimedia with ease 
using hardware acceleration; even smart phones can do this without 
breaking a sweat.


My PSU is a mere 120 W, and I am a game developer, albeit targetting low 
poly games that will run on mobile. My 2017 build is still going strong. 
I am typing on it right now:


- Streacom FC8WS Alpha fanless case
- Streacom Nano120 fanless PSU with external AC/DC adapter
- Asus H110I-Plus Mini-ITX motherboard
- Intel i7-7700 65W CPU (Kaby Lake, HD 630 iGPU)
- Corsair Value Select 2x8GB DDR4-2133 RAM
- Samsung 850 Evo 250GB 2.5" SATA SSD
- PCI-E WiFi card
- Logitech MK270R wireless keyboard/mouse combo
- Single monitor via HDMI
- Headphones via analogue 3.5mm jack
- External SSD via USB 3

Going fanless saves power. The aluminium case is expensive. Streacom 
cases are high-quality aluminium cases designed for HTPC applications. 
Heat pipe installation makes this the fiddliest build ever, equal with 
its FC8 Evo predecessor, but the cooling design works very well. The 
latest revision has more passive ventilation. This build is silent 
except for a slight buzz heard only during mprime torture testing with 
AVX enabled.


I configured thermald to cap CPU temperature to 80C because paranoia. 
The only time I ever experienced stability problems was after an 
ill-advised RAM overclocking. Now I just Leave Well Enough Alone. This 
machine has compiled and tested massive amounts of Java (former 
business) and native code including many Linux kernels (git bisect).


The HD 630 iGPU has met all my low poly needs, including development and 
testing in Godot, and modelling in Blender. The only time I ever 
experienced frame-rate drops testing a 3D game was when I forgot I had 
an eight-thread compilation job running on another workspace!


Kind regards,

--
Ash Joubert 
Director
Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/>
New Zealand

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Linux-Fan]

Emanuel Berg writes:


Linux-Fan wrote:

> Please keep the following points in mind when doing PSU
> wattage sizing for modern PCs:
>
> - Judging a CPU by its thermal design power is no longer
>   feasible due to some CPUs permanently overclocking while
>   the actually available cooling power permits it. On some
>   Intel CPUs this can mean about twice the power than you
>   would have expected. If we were to apply this logic
>   directly to the unspecified (?) AMD CPU from the OP's
>   config

Oh, the OP has the AMD4 x86_64 CPU that comes with/in the Asus
ROG Strix B450-F Gaming motherboard!


By default, a motherboard is just that, a motherboard. Unless you have some  
specific "bundle" package, there is no CPU included with it. According to

https://rog.asus.com/motherboards/rog-strix/rog-strix-b450-f-gaming-model/
the board has "AM4 socket: Ready for AMD Ryzen(TM) processors". And  
according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socket_AM4 this socket can  
accomodate for a wide variety of different processors.



> - 80+ certified PSUs are rated in terms of their performance
>   at certain load percentages. If you choose a high-power
>   PSU (e.g. 600W) then even if it has a high efficiency
>   according to 80+ it will not necessarily be more efficient
>   than a less highly rated 300W model.

Not following?


You've snipped the part by Andy Cater:

| A larger PSU in wattage terms may have better capacitors, more capacity to
| withstand dips and spikes in mains voltage and may have a better power factor
| so be more effective overall.
 ^
|
| the cost differential between 300 and 600W should be relatively small.
|
| Easier to overspecify: the other thing is that larger PSU wattages may have
| quieter / better quality fans. I love almost silent PCs.

I just wanted to point out that larger PSU can be more efficient, but  
smaller PSU can also be more efficient. Even when energy efficiency labels  
are compared (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/80_Plus), a better rating  
(e.g. gold over silver or such) may not always indicate better efficiency.


Say, for example, you have two PSUs under consideration:

(a) PSU with 450W and 80+ silver rating
(b) PSU with 600W and 80+ gold rating.

Then at 20% load, 80+ specifies (a) to have efficiency 87% and (b) to have  
efficiency 90%. In absolute numbers:


(a) PSU with 450W will have specified 87% at 90W i.e. draw 90W/0.87 = 103W
(b) PSU with 600W will have specified 90% at 120W i.e. draw 120W/0.9 = 133W

As 20% is the lowest load specified for the rating (silver, gold etc.) we  
cannot tell how the respective PSUs operate if less than 20% load is  
requested. From the rating we only know that (a) will take at most 103W in  
idle loads and (b) at most 133W, hence the power consumption of (b) could  
potentially be higher in very-low-load idle scenarios which are not uncommon  
to be the dominating factor for typical PC worksloads.


HTH
Linux-Fan

öö


pgpTY2xmqwiwR.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Linux-Fan]

Henning Follmann writes:


On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 06:36:35PM +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 06:47:14PM +0100, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> > Alexis Grigoriou wrote:
> >
> > >> I've heard that for gaming you would want a 600~800W PSU


[...]


> > motherboard, RAM and SSD are at most 232W.
> >
> > CPU  AMD mid end (4 cores)  125
> > fans  80 mm (3K RPM)  9   (3*3W =  9W)
> >  120 mm (2K RPM) 12   (2*6W = 12W)
> > motherboard  high end80
> > RAM  ~DDR3 (1.5V) 3   (actually it is a DDR4)
> > SSD   2.8
> >
> > (+ 125 (* 3 3) (* 2 6) 80 3 2.8) ; 231.8W
> >
> > The only thing left is the GPU, I take it even in that PSU


[...]

> If your draw is a max of 230W and you use a 300W power supply, you've  
> still got to account for inrush current to capacitors as the machine is  
> switched on.

>
> A larger PSU in wattage terms may have better capacitors, more capacity to
> withstand dips and spikes in mains voltage and may have a better power  
> factor so be more effective overall.

>
> the cost differential between 300 and 600W should be relatively small.
>
> Easier to overspecify: the other thing is that larger PSU wattages may have
> quieter / better quality fans. I love almost silent PCs.


[...]


And to add to that,
most recent PSUs are very good in terms of efficiency. They are switched
and drag much less power when the computer doesn't demand it.
I would also go with a 600 W PSU.


[...]

Please keep the following points in mind when doing PSU wattage sizing for  
modern PCs:


- Judging a CPU by its thermal design power is no longer feasible due
  to some CPUs permanently overclocking while the actually available
  cooling power permits it. On some Intel CPUs this can mean about twice
  the power than you would have expected. If we were to apply this logic
  directly to the unspecified (?) AMD CPU from the OP's config, it would
  mean adding 250W for the CPU rather than the 125W from its TDP.

- 80+ certified PSUs are rated in terms of their performance at certain
  load percentages. If you choose a high-power PSU (e.g. 600W) then even
  if it has a high efficiency according to 80+ it will not necessarily be
  more efficient than a less highly rated 300W model.

To summarize: For the use case, one might want to add the CPU's TDP  
"another time", i.e. 231.8W + 125W = 356W. Then choose either the next  
fitting PSU size (400W) or go slightly larger for extra safety e.g. 450W,  
500W or even 550W would all be sensible choices.


HTH and YMMV
Linux-Fan

öö


pgp0I0qlAv8Hu.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Henning Follmann]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 06:36:35PM +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 06:47:14PM +0100, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> > Alexis Grigoriou wrote:
> > 
> > >> I've heard that for gaming you would want a 600~800W PSU
> > >> [1] but how do I know how many W I need for my computer
> > >> use? I think the most resource-intense I do would be
> > >> compiling and watching multimedia on mpv. [2]
> > >
> > > Cooler Master has a PSU calculator.
> > > https://www.coolermaster.com/power-supply-calculator/
> > >
> > > You have to enter CPU, GPU (make and model), HDD, SDD and so
> > > on, and it calculates how much wattage is required.
> > > Add another 25% as stated above and you're good to go.
> > 
> > Thanks!
> > 
> > I did compute it manually from [1] and the CPU, fans,
> > motherboard, RAM and SSD are at most 232W.
> > 
> > CPU  AMD mid end (4 cores)  125
> > fans  80 mm (3K RPM)  9   (3*3W =  9W)
> >  120 mm (2K RPM) 12   (2*6W = 12W)
> > motherboard  high end80
> > RAM  ~DDR3 (1.5V) 3   (actually it is a DDR4)
> > SSD   2.8
> > 
> > (+ 125 (* 3 3) (* 2 6) 80 3 2.8) ; 231.8W
> > 
> > The only thing left is the GPU, I take it even in that PSU
> > calculator if you input the msi Nvidia Geforce GT 710 it is
> > the maximum use (gaming) you get as output.
> > 
> > [1] https://www.buildcomputers.net/power-consumption-of-pc-components.html
> > 
> > -- 
> > underground experts united
> > https://dataswamp.org/~incal
> >
> 
> If your draw is a max of 230W and you use a 300W power supply, you've still 
> got to account for inrush current to capacitors as the machine is switched on.
> 
> A larger PSU in wattage terms may have better capacitors, more capacity to
> withstand dips and spikes in mains voltage and may have a better power factor
> so be more effective overall.
> 
> the cost differential between 300 and 600W should be relatively small.
> 
> Easier to overspecify: the other thing is that larger PSU wattages may have
> quieter / better quality fans. I love almost silent PCs.
> 
> All the very best, as ever,
> 
> Andy Cater 
> 



And to add to that,
most recent PSUs are very good in terms of efficiency. They are switched
and drag much less power when the computer doesn't demand it.
I would also go with a 600 W PSU.


-H

-- 
Henning Follmann   | hfollm...@itcfollmann.com

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Felix Miata]

Emanuel Berg composed on 2022-03-04 19:04 (UTC+0100):

> OK, final word on this, "case" closed LOL :)

> Thanks a lot for the help ...

> Conclusion: a 300W PSU should do it!

It might be just right. I've read 30% headroom is a good idea if you're starting
afresh. The largest I own is a 700W, used only for bench testing & burn-ins. The
largest I have installed, of which I own only one, is a 550W. I also have
installed multiple 500s, 450s, 380s, 350s, 430s, 400s. Most that are smaller are
OEM, mostly Dell, one HP, and old. I've needed to recap most of the older ones.
About half my PCs only have IGP, no discrete graphics. Most of this is to say 
it's
/easy/ to think you need more than necessary when the sale ads feature mostly
those above 500W, many of which have triple digit price tags. Using the online
calculators is smart. :)

None of my PCs have dual cards except for this one, which is using a 500W:

# inxi -SMCmyz
System:
  Kernel: 5.15.12-1-default x86_64 bits: 64 Desktop: KDE Plasma 5.24.2
Distro: openSUSE Tumbleweed 20220302
Machine:
  Type: Desktop Mobo: Gigabyte model: GA-970A-D3 serial: N/A BIOS: Award
v: F10 date: 05/30/2012
Memory:
  RAM: total: 15.55 GiB used: 938.8 MiB (5.9%)
  Array-1: capacity: 32 GiB note: est. slots: 4 EC: None
  Device-1: A0 size: 8 GiB speed: 1600 MT/s
  Device-2: A1 size: 8 GiB speed: 1600 MT/s
  Device-3: A2 size: No Module Installed
  Device-4: A3 size: No Module Installed
CPU:
  Info: quad core model: AMD Phenom II X4 965 bits: 64 type: MCP cache:
L2: 2 MiB
  Speed (MHz): avg: 3423 min/max: N/A cores: 1: 3423 2: 3423 3: 3423 4: 3423
# inxi -Gayz
Graphics:
  Device-1: NVIDIA GF108 [GeForce GT 630] vendor: Gigabyte driver: nouveau
v: kernel pcie: gen: 1 speed: 2.5 GT/s lanes: 16 ports:
active: DVI-I-1,VGA-1 empty: HDMI-A-1 bus-ID: 01:00.0 chip-ID: 10de:0f00
class-ID: 0300
  Device-2: NVIDIA G84 [GeForce 8600 GT] vendor: XFX Pine driver: nouveau
v: kernel pcie: gen: 1 speed: 2.5 GT/s lanes: 4 link-max: lanes: 16 ports:
active: DVI-I-2,DVI-I-3 empty: none bus-ID: 05:00.0 chip-ID: 10de:0402
class-ID: 0300
  Display: x11 server: X.Org v: 1.21.1.3 compositor: kwin_x11 driver: X:
loaded: modesetting unloaded: fbdev,vesa alternate: nouveau,nv,nvidia
gpu: nouveau display-ID: :0 screens: 1
  Screen-1: 0 s-res: 7760x1440 s-dpi: 120 s-size: 1642x304mm (64.6x12.0")
s-diag: 1670mm (65.7")
  Monitor-1: DVI-I-1 pos: primary,left model: NEC EA243WM serial: 
built: 2011 res: 1920x1200 hz: 60 dpi: 94 gamma: 1.2
size: 519x324mm (20.4x12.8") diag: 612mm (24.1") ratio: 16:10 modes:
max: 1920x1200 min: 640x480
  Monitor-2: DVI-I-1-2 mapped: DVI-I-2 pos: center-r model: Acer K272HUL
serial:  built: 2018 res: 2560x1440 hz: 60 dpi: 109 gamma: 1.2
size: 598x336mm (23.5x13.2") diag: 686mm (27") ratio: 16:9 modes:
max: 2560x1440 min: 720x400
  Monitor-3: DVI-I-1-3 mapped: DVI-I-3 pos: right model: Dell P2012H
serial:  built: 2012 res: 1600x900 hz: 60 dpi: 92 gamma: 1.2
size: 443x249mm (17.4x9.8") diag: 508mm (20") ratio: 16:9 modes:
max: 1600x900 min: 720x400
  Monitor-4: VGA-1 pos: center-l model: Lenovo L2251x Wide serial: 
built: 2011 res: 1680x1050 hz: 60 dpi: 90 gamma: 1.2
size: 474x296mm (18.7x11.7") diag: 559mm (22") ratio: 16:10 modes:
max: 1680x1050 min: 720x400
  OpenGL: renderer: NVC1 v: 4.3 Mesa 21.3.7 direct render: Yes
#

The NVidia cards are old and lower tier, and their heat sinks aren't very big, 
so
each fits in one slot, and doesn't require gobs of power.

You may notice the above inxi output is not from Debian. Neither Buster nor
Bullseye are able to find outputs on Device-2. On TW, all four are found and 
used
automagically.
-- 
Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion,
based on faith, not based on science.

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[tomas]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 02:39:12PM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 08:32:24PM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:

[...]

> > Besides, as soon as you boot your browser [...]

> Unless you're also running GNOME, in which case it started sweating
> as soon as the display manager booted up, and then got worse when you
> logged in.

:-)

What about systemd-gpud?

(OK, OK, I'm back hiding under my pebble ;-)

Cheers
-- 
t


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Greg Wooledge]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 08:32:24PM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 06:46:50PM +0100, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> > Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > 
> > >> But again, the GPU - if I don't play games, do I still need
> > >> the W for that, as high?
> > >
> > > What happens if your PSU doesn't have a high enough wattage
> > > is that things will work fine as long as your actual
> > > consumption is below the PSU's limit but if for some reason
> > > you push the system beyond the limit, then funny things
> > > can/will happen, including immediate shutdown, crash, ...
> > 
> > Yeah, understood.
> > 
> > Since "how many W are needed for a gaming card if you don't
> > play games?" isn't going to answer itself anytime soon I'm
> > gonna pull it and see if I can do mail, programming and mpv
> > just fine with the CPU only ...
> 
> Besides, as soon as you boot your browser, the GPU will be
> sweating like five Dooms.

Unless you're also running GNOME, in which case it started sweating
as soon as the display manager booted up, and then got worse when you
logged in.

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[tomas]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 06:46:50PM +0100, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Stefan Monnier wrote:
> 
> >> But again, the GPU - if I don't play games, do I still need
> >> the W for that, as high?
> >
> > What happens if your PSU doesn't have a high enough wattage
> > is that things will work fine as long as your actual
> > consumption is below the PSU's limit but if for some reason
> > you push the system beyond the limit, then funny things
> > can/will happen, including immediate shutdown, crash, ...
> 
> Yeah, understood.
> 
> Since "how many W are needed for a gaming card if you don't
> play games?" isn't going to answer itself anytime soon I'm
> gonna pull it and see if I can do mail, programming and mpv
> just fine with the CPU only ...

Besides, as soon as you boot your browser, the GPU will be
sweating like five Dooms.

;-)

Cheers
-- 
t


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Eike Lantzsch ZP6CGE]

On Freitag, 4. März 2022 15:04:26 -03 Emanuel Berg wrote:
> OK, final word on this, "case" closed LOL :)
> 
> Thanks a lot for the help ...
> 
> Conclusion: a 300W PSU should do it!
"might do it"

If (= provided that) you can trust the manufacturer for that statement 
"300W PS".
I tend to be wary of such statements. The maximum current provided for 
each voltage output would be more significant than the wholesale 
advertisement of "300W PS". Your calculation might be well within the 
limits in general but what if the load for e.g. 3.3V goes up to 12A but 
the PS is only able to deliver 10A? It might be well able to deliver 20A 
for 5V and 8A for 12V but your load does not need 5V or so much at 12V 
but more on 3.3V or even 1.8V. So be careful and have a look at each 
needed supply voltage and its power rating.

> 
> GPU  geforce-gt-710  19 [on which voltages?]
> CPU  AMD mid end (4 cores)  125  [on which voltages?]
> fans  80 mm (3K RPM)  9   (3*3W =  9W) [12V]
>  120 mm (2K RPM) 12   (2*6W = 12W) [12V]
> motherboard  high end80 [that is on several diiferent 
voltages]
> RAM  ~DDR3 (1.5V) 3   (actually it is a DDR4) [on 
which voltages?]
> SSD   2.8 [5V and maybe 12V]
> 
> Total:
> 
>   (+ 19 125 (* 3 3) (* 2 6) 80 3 2.8)  ; 250 W
> 
> Total, with the GPU removed:
> 
>   (+ 125 (* 3 3) (* 2 6) 80 3 2.8)     ; 231 W
> 
> Total, with 25% wiggle room:
> 
>   (* 1.25 (+ 19 125 (* 3 3) (* 2 6) 80 3 2.8)) ; 314 W
> 
> Total, w/o the GPU, w/ wiggle room:
> 
>   (* 1.25 (+ 125 (* 3 3) (* 2 6) 80 3 2.8)); 290 W
> 
> https://www.buildcomputers.net/power-consumption-of-pc-components.html
> https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-gt-710.c1990

all by rule of thumb - and it's a very thick thumb with carpal tunnel 
syndrome I reckon.
-- 
Eike Lantzsch ZP6CGE

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Andrew M.A. Cater]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 06:47:14PM +0100, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Alexis Grigoriou wrote:
> 
> >> I've heard that for gaming you would want a 600~800W PSU
> >> [1] but how do I know how many W I need for my computer
> >> use? I think the most resource-intense I do would be
> >> compiling and watching multimedia on mpv. [2]
> >
> > Cooler Master has a PSU calculator.
> > https://www.coolermaster.com/power-supply-calculator/
> >
> > You have to enter CPU, GPU (make and model), HDD, SDD and so
> > on, and it calculates how much wattage is required.
> > Add another 25% as stated above and you're good to go.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> I did compute it manually from [1] and the CPU, fans,
> motherboard, RAM and SSD are at most 232W.
> 
> CPU  AMD mid end (4 cores)  125
> fans  80 mm (3K RPM)  9   (3*3W =  9W)
>  120 mm (2K RPM) 12   (2*6W = 12W)
> motherboard  high end80
> RAM  ~DDR3 (1.5V) 3   (actually it is a DDR4)
> SSD   2.8
> 
> (+ 125 (* 3 3) (* 2 6) 80 3 2.8) ; 231.8W
> 
> The only thing left is the GPU, I take it even in that PSU
> calculator if you input the msi Nvidia Geforce GT 710 it is
> the maximum use (gaming) you get as output.
> 
> [1] https://www.buildcomputers.net/power-consumption-of-pc-components.html
> 
> -- 
> underground experts united
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal
>

If your draw is a max of 230W and you use a 300W power supply, you've still got 
to account for inrush current to capacitors as the machine is switched on.

A larger PSU in wattage terms may have better capacitors, more capacity to
withstand dips and spikes in mains voltage and may have a better power factor
so be more effective overall.

the cost differential between 300 and 600W should be relatively small.

Easier to overspecify: the other thing is that larger PSU wattages may have
quieter / better quality fans. I love almost silent PCs.

All the very best, as ever,

Andy Cater 

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[rhkramer]

On Friday, March 04, 2022 11:48:41 AM Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > But again, the GPU - if I don't play games, do I still need
> > the W for that, as high?
> 
> What happens if your PSU doesn't have a high enough wattage is that
> things will work fine as long as your actual consumption is below the
> PSU's limit but if for some reason you push the system beyond the limit,
> then funny things can/will happen, including immediate shutdown, crash,

Back in the old days, when I sometimes had something that needed a little more 
umpf on an intermittent basis, I would sometimes add a big capacitor on the 
output(s) of the power supply (for some value of big -- I don't remember 
mfds., but I'd get something rated at least a few volts above the nominal 
voltage and sometimes capacitors that were maybe 3" in diameter and 5 or 6" 
tall (just going by memory).

In some cases I could use something much smaller, maybe 1.5" by 3" or so.

(Those are all technical electrical engineering specs ;-)

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[tomas]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 04:55:33PM +0100, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Henning Follmann wrote:
> 
> >> I've heard that for gaming you would want a 600~800W PSU
> >> [1] but how do I know how many W I need for my computer
> >> use? I think the most resource-intense I do would be
> >> compiling and watching multimedia on mpv. [2]
> >
> > That depends on the components in the computer. The reason
> > why gaming configuration often require a more powerful power
> > supply, because these use parts which consume in general
> > more power (gpu mainly).
> 
> Okay, but if I don't play games will the GPU still require
> that much?

You want to plan your PSU's maximum output according to your
hardware's maximum input. Everything else will entertain you
debugging obscure problems.

Or rather: we want you to... (se above). Otherwise you'll be
coming here to debug obscure problems ;-)

> The GPU is a
> 
>   msi Nvidia Geforce GT 710, 2GB DDR3, PCI-E2.0, HDMI+DL-DVI-D

The Internets [1] say this one will take 19W maximum. But never
trust the Internets :-)

> I think the other components are
> 
>   case
>   fans
>   keyboard
>   motherboard
>   RAM
>   SSD
> 
> are any of those negligeable?

The case, I guess.  Most important is the motherboard /with/ CPU.
Look those up.

I think you can lump RAM, SSD and the rest into a handful of watts,
say 5 to 10. As others have said, add some headroom.

Cheers

[1] https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-gt-710.c1990

-- 
t


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Alexis Grigoriou]

On Fri, 2022-03-04 at 16:24 +0100, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> I've heard that for gaming you would want a 600~800W PSU [1]
> but how do I know how many W I need for my computer use?
> I think the most resource-intense I do would be compiling and
> watching multimedia on mpv. [2]
> 

Cooler Master has a PSU calculator.
https://www.coolermaster.com/power-supply-calculator/

You have to enter CPU, GPU (make and model), HDD, SDD and so on, and it
calculates how much wattage is required. Add another 25% as stated
above and you're good to go.

Re: how many W a PSU for non-gaming Debian?

[Henning Follmann]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 04:24:40PM +0100, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> I've heard that for gaming you would want a 600~800W PSU [1]
> but how do I know how many W I need for my computer use?
> I think the most resource-intense I do would be compiling and
> watching multimedia on mpv. [2]
>

That depends on the components in the computer.
The reason why gaming configuration often require a more
powerful power supply, because these use parts which consume
in general more power (gpu mainly).
 
> Can you use powertop(1) for this or some other tool or can it
> not be measured at the software level? And if it can't, can
> you estimate it somehow?

just sum up the thermal max load of the parts (you need the spec sheets).
and add 25% for general inefficiency. 

> 
> TIA
> 
> [1] https://www.windowscentral.com/be-quiet-pure-power-11-fm-review
> 
> [2] https://dataswamp.org/~incal/ebchw/COMPUTER
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal/SOFTWARE
> 
> -- 
> underground experts united
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal
> 

-- 
Henning Follmann   | hfollm...@itcfollmann.com

Re: Instalacja Debian8 błąd w Release

[piorunz]

On 15/01/2022 16:50, Andrei POPESCU wrote:

On Sb, 15 ian 22, 13:48:39, piorunz wrote:


And lastly, Debian archive nowhere says and/or guarantees that files
will be kept there forever.


"forever" is a very, very, very long time ;)

Who can guarantee something like this, and if anyone would, why would
you believe them?

Kind regards,
Andrei


Of course, it's just a play of words. That being said, we all know older
releases aren't supported in any way, and it's just Debian's courtesy
that files are kept online and available.

--
With kindest regards, Piotr.

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
⠈⠳⣄

Re: Instalacja Debian8 błąd w Release

[Andrei POPESCU]

On Sb, 15 ian 22, 13:48:39, piorunz wrote:
> 
> And lastly, Debian archive nowhere says and/or guarantees that files
> will be kept there forever.

"forever" is a very, very, very long time ;)

Who can guarantee something like this, and if anyone would, why would 
you believe them?

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Instalacja Debian8 błąd w Release

[didier gaumet]

Le samedi 15 janvier 2022 à 13:48 +, piorunz a écrit :

[...]
> Also, in the archive you have only Debian releases from 3 onwards.
> Older releases are not available.
[...]

True, there are no ISOs to be downloaded, because at the time of
release, floppy drives still were more ubiquitous than optical drives,
but I think all is there to install 0.93R6
http://archive.debian.org/debian/dists/buzz/main/disks-i386/1996_6_16/install.txt

Re: Instalacja Debian8 błąd w Release

[Andrew M.A. Cater]

On Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 01:48:39PM +, piorunz wrote:
> On 15/01/2022 13:32, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 01:28:16PM +, piorunz wrote:
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > But IMHO, burden of keeping all archaeological versions of Debian
> > > shouldn't be on Debian Project. There are many volunteers with server
> > > storage and bandwidth, they could keep it online, as torrents, etc.
> > 
> > I don't understand: are you arguing for Debian to close its archive [1]?
> > 
> > Because Debian /is/ providing access to its historical releases. Do you
> > think it should not?
> > 
> > Cheers
> > 
> > [1] http://archive.debian.org/debian/dists/
> 
> I didn't say that Debian should close the archive. But maybe people
> should help with seeding ISO files. I entered random release on archive
> page, and I can see that torrents are not available. I don't know why,
> that would help reduce costs to Debian. Unless Archive is already hosted
> by contributor/volunteer company? That would be great.
> 
> Also, in the archive you have only Debian releases from 3 onwards. Older
> releases are not available.
> 
> And lastly, Debian archive nowhere says and/or guarantees that files
> will be kept there forever.
> 
> --
> With kindest regards, Piotr.
> 
> ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
> ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
> ⠈⠳⣄
>

Somewhere around there exist CD releases for 1.2 and 1.3 but they're on 
physical media and no-one has uploaded them yet .. :(

There's also the problem that the oldest media may now be unstable
and there may not be that many copies around.

Debian 1.3, for example is one CD of source, one of i386 binaries - I think.

Debian 1.2 was similar but smaller in numbers of packages.

I've had all of these at one point or another but passed physical copies
to someone else - I can ask if they can upload them :)

All the very best, as ever,

Andy Cater 

Re: Instalacja Debian8 błąd w Release

[piorunz]

On 15/01/2022 13:32, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:

On Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 01:28:16PM +, piorunz wrote:

[...]


But IMHO, burden of keeping all archaeological versions of Debian
shouldn't be on Debian Project. There are many volunteers with server
storage and bandwidth, they could keep it online, as torrents, etc.


I don't understand: are you arguing for Debian to close its archive [1]?

Because Debian /is/ providing access to its historical releases. Do you
think it should not?

Cheers

[1] http://archive.debian.org/debian/dists/


I didn't say that Debian should close the archive. But maybe people
should help with seeding ISO files. I entered random release on archive
page, and I can see that torrents are not available. I don't know why,
that would help reduce costs to Debian. Unless Archive is already hosted
by contributor/volunteer company? That would be great.

Also, in the archive you have only Debian releases from 3 onwards. Older
releases are not available.

And lastly, Debian archive nowhere says and/or guarantees that files
will be kept there forever.

--
With kindest regards, Piotr.

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
⠈⠳⣄

Re: Instalacja Debian8 błąd w Release

[tomas]

On Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 01:28:16PM +, piorunz wrote:

[...]

> But IMHO, burden of keeping all archaeological versions of Debian
> shouldn't be on Debian Project. There are many volunteers with server
> storage and bandwidth, they could keep it online, as torrents, etc.

I don't understand: are you arguing for Debian to close its archive [1]?

Because Debian /is/ providing access to its historical releases. Do you
think it should not?

Cheers

[1] http://archive.debian.org/debian/dists/

-- 
t


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Instalacja Debian8 błąd w Release

[piorunz]

On 15/01/2022 06:49, Anders Andersson wrote:


I would be more surprised if the packages were *not* available
somewhere, and I hope they are "guaranteed" the same way as the new
packages (that is, no guarantee other than the benevolence of the
community members). These things are very important for current and
future "software archeology" and for preserving the history and
evolution of computing.

Heck, I even had to install Debian Sarge a few years ago to try to
figure out how a very old piece of software was supposed to be built.
It was neat to have the whole ecosystem as a 2005 developer expected
and I'm very happy that the old versions were still downloadable!


Generally speaking, I agree. Software archaeology is cool and nice thing
to have. People still use DOS, and install Windows 95. With Linux not so
much, but I understand that even you found personal use for old Linux
OS. Sarge actually finished in 2008, that's not that long ago.

But IMHO, burden of keeping all archaeological versions of Debian
shouldn't be on Debian Project. There are many volunteers with server
storage and bandwidth, they could keep it online, as torrents, etc.

--
With kindest regards, Piotr.

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
⠈⠳⣄

Re: Instalacja Debian8 błąd w Release

[Anders Andersson]

On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 3:13 PM piorunz  wrote:
>
> Witaj Wojciech,
>
> On 13/01/2022 11:02, Wojciech wrote:
> >
> > Kiedy mogę się spodziewać naprawienia ?
>
> Never. Jessie end of life was in June 2018, and LTS support has ended in
> June 2020, one and half years ago. It's a surprise that some Jessie
> packages are even available online somewhere. This is not guaranteed.

I would be more surprised if the packages were *not* available
somewhere, and I hope they are "guaranteed" the same way as the new
packages (that is, no guarantee other than the benevolence of the
community members). These things are very important for current and
future "software archeology" and for preserving the history and
evolution of computing.

Heck, I even had to install Debian Sarge a few years ago to try to
figure out how a very old piece of software was supposed to be built.
It was neat to have the whole ecosystem as a 2005 developer expected
and I'm very happy that the old versions were still downloadable!

Re: Instalacja Debian8 błąd w Release

[Georgi Naplatanov]

On 1/14/22 18:56, Wojciech wrote:
> Thanks Georgi.
> 
> Guys, Don't solve it. I solved it myself.
> I have a feeling you don't quite understand what I'm writing about.
> 
> choose-mirror pointing to the branch
> http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dists/jessie/
> The Release found there points (redirects) to
> http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dists/oldoldstable/
> At that location lies another distribution/different version, not Jessie.
> This pointing is wrong regardless of whether Jessie is oldoldstable or
> should be archive.
> Jessie is not in the indicated/redirected
> http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dists/oldoldstable/. There is a
> different version there.
> 
> Of course i soo https://www.debian.org/distrib/archive, but in this
> pleaces isn't Jessie (Debian 8). The latest version is squeeze (Debian 6).
> Of course i don't why. In my opinion Debian 8 should be moved to
> archive, but it is not

Hi Wojciech,

on that page are listed all Debian archive mirrors.

https://www.debian.org/distrib/archive

If you pickup the first mirror you'll see that Debian Jessie is there

http://archive.debian.org/debian-archive/debian/dists/

Kind regards
Georgi

Re: Instalacja Debian8 błąd w Release

[Greg Wooledge]

On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 05:56:19PM +0100, Wojciech wrote:
> choose-mirror pointing to the branch
> http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dists/jessie/
> The Release found there points (redirects) to
> http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dists/oldoldstable/
> At that location lies another distribution/different version, not Jessie.

So, this mirror is broken?  Then use a different mirror.

Unless there's a need to use a very specific mirror, it's recommended
to use the deb.debian.org infrastructure.  For jessie, according to the
wiki, the last known good sources.list entries are:

deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ jessie main
deb http://security.debian.org/ jessie/updates main

Re: Instalacja Debian8 błąd w Release

[Wojciech]

Thanks Georgi.

Guys, Don't solve it. I solved it myself.
I have a feeling you don't quite understand what I'm writing about.

choose-mirror pointing to the branch 
http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dists/jessie/
The Release found there points (redirects) to 
http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dists/oldoldstable/

At that location lies another distribution/different version, not Jessie.
This pointing is wrong regardless of whether Jessie is oldoldstable or 
should be archive.
Jessie is not in the indicated/redirected 
http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dists/oldoldstable/. There is a 
different version there.


Of course i soo https://www.debian.org/distrib/archive, but in this 
pleaces isn't Jessie (Debian 8). The latest version is squeeze (Debian 6).
Of course i don't why. In my opinion Debian 8 should be moved to 
archive, but it is not


Regards and nice to day.
Wojciech

In Polish- Georgi, Perhaps my English isn't very well , it isn't 
understandable. Please, if it is necessary, correct translate.


Chłopaki, nie rozwiązujcie tego. Sam to rozwiązałem.
Mam wrażenie, że nie do końca rozumiecie o czym piszę.
choose-mirror wskazujący na gałąź 
http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dists/jessie/
Znaleziony tam Release wskazuje (przekierowuje) na 
http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dists/oldoldstable/

W tej lokalizacji leży inna dystrybucja/wersja, nie Jessie.
Takie wskazanie jest błędne niezależnie od tego, czy Jessie jest 
oldoldstable, czy powinna być archiwalna.
Jessie nie znajduje się we wskazanym/przekierowanym 
http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dists/oldoldstable/. Jest tam inna wersja.


Oczywiście widziałem https://www.debian.org/distrib/archive, ale w tym 
miejscu/stronie nie ma Jessie (Debian 8). Najnowsza wersja to squeeze 
(Debian 6).
Oczywiście nie wiem czemu. W mojej opini Debian 8 winien być 
przeniesiony do archiwum, ale tak nie jest.


Pozdrawiam i życzę miłego dnia.
Wojciech

Przetłumaczono z www.DeepL.com/Translator (wersja darmowa)

W dniu 14.01.2022 o 11:51, piorunz pisze:

Tu masz rozwiazanko :)

Hi Wojciech,

for old unsupported versions of Debian you should not use regular Debian
mirrors, you should use "archive" mirrors.

https://www.debian.org/distrib/archive

Kind regards
Georgi

Re: Instalacja Debian8 blad w Release

[Thomas Schmitt]

Hi,

Wojciech wrote:
> Suite: oldoldstable
> Codename: stretch
> Attention: not jessie

As stated by others without Cc-ing you:
Jessie is not supported any more.

See the "Follow-Ups" link list of your archived post at
  https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2022/01/msg00391.html


> Correct destination link is oldoldoldstable (3xold and stable)
> Realease from http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dists/oldoldoldstable/Release

It is somewhat astounding that "oldoldoldstable" exists.
All Debian info resources which i knew only list "oldoldstable".

But "oldoldoldstable", "jessie", and "Debian8.11" are indeed available on
the central server:
  https://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/
  https://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/README

I expect them to vanish in the future. But the snapshot links which i
proposed will stay hopefully much longer.
So depending on your plans how long to run Jessie it might be worth to
check already now whether the snapshots can substitute for the current
"oldoldoldstable".
(An alternative would be to copy the current "oldoldoldstable" repository
to a local filesystem.)


Have a nice day :)

Thomas

Re: Instalacja Debian8 błąd w Release

[piorunz]

On 13/01/2022 15:58, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:


The latest normal support release is Debian 11 - Bullseye.

The previous version is Debian 10 - Buster - which will move to
long term support later in 2022.

It would be a very good idea to update to Debian 11 if you can.


Oh, I'm sorry, yes, of course. Debian 11 Bullseye is the current one.
Although 10 is still supported.

OP has a choice of:
Debian 9 Stretch (normal support ended, LTS running out),
Debian 10 Buster (normal support and running out),
Debian 11 Bullseye (normal support, current release).

I only mentioned older releases because OP was trying to resolve very
old release problem, meaning he for some reasons wants to stick with
older releases or is otherwise reluctant to upgrade, maybe for
compatibility reasons.

--
With kindest regards, Piotr.

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
⠈⠳⣄

Re: Instalacja Debian8 błąd w Release

[Andrew M.A. Cater]

On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 02:12:42PM +, piorunz wrote:
> Witaj Wojciech,
> 
> On 13/01/2022 11:02, Wojciech wrote:
> > 
> > Kiedy mogę się spodziewać naprawienia ?
> 
> Never. Jessie end of life was in June 2018, and LTS support has ended in
> June 2020, one and half years ago. It's a surprise that some Jessie
> packages are even available online somewhere. This is not guaranteed.
> 
> > Jak jest metoda obejściowa w tym momencie.
> 
> Move on to Debian 9, current LTS support release, or Debian 10, current
> normal support release.
> 

The latest normal support release is Debian 11 - Bullseye.

The previous version is Debian 10 - Buster - which will move to
long term support later in 2022.

It would be a very good idea to update to Debian 11 if you can.

With every good wish,

Andy Cater


> Full list and their EOL dates:
> https://wiki.debian.org/DebianReleases
> 
> 
> --
> With kindest regards, Piotr.
> 
> ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
> ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
> ⠈⠳⣄
> 

Re: Instalacja Debian8 błąd w Release

[piorunz]

Witaj Wojciech,

On 13/01/2022 11:02, Wojciech wrote:


Kiedy mogę się spodziewać naprawienia ?


Never. Jessie end of life was in June 2018, and LTS support has ended in
June 2020, one and half years ago. It's a surprise that some Jessie
packages are even available online somewhere. This is not guaranteed.


Jak jest metoda obejściowa w tym momencie.


Move on to Debian 9, current LTS support release, or Debian 10, current
normal support release.

Full list and their EOL dates:
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianReleases


--
With kindest regards, Piotr.

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
⠈⠳⣄

Re: Instalacja Debian8 blad w Release

[Thomas Schmitt]

Hi,

Google translation says that Wojciech wrote:
> During the installation, when you choose a mirror server, packages is
> mistake.

Maybe the fallback servers listed in debian-8.11.1-amd64-DVD-1.jigdo
can be used.
I understand that this one is quite time specific:

  http://snapshot.debian.org/archive/debian/20190212T020859Z/

(But its libburn versions date back to 2012.)

This one seems to be the last resort for everything ever released:

  http://us.cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/snapshot/Debian/


> Is this email enough if I have to write to a world group?

It would be better in english language.
Google translations tend to become riddling or ridiculous.


Have a nice day :)

Thomas

Re: Instalacja Debian8 błąd w Release

[Georgi Naplatanov]

On 1/13/22 13:02, Wojciech wrote:
> W trakcie instalacji w momencie wyboru serwera lustrzanego pakietów jest
> błąd.
> choose-mirror: wget -q
> http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dist/jessie/Release -O - | grep -E 
> '^(Suite|Codename):'
> Ta komenda zwraca:
> Suite:  oldoldstable
> Codename: jessie
> W następnym kroku jest:
> choose-mirror: wget -q
> http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dist/oldoldstable/Release -O - | grep -E
> '^(Suite|Codename):'
> I tu instalator staje.
> Wskazana komenda zwraca:
> Suite: oldoldstable
> Codename: stretch
> Czyli Debian 9.11
> 
> Właściwa wersja jest w
> wget -q http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dist/oldoldoldstable/Release -O
> - | grep -E '^(Suite|Codename):'
> Suit: oldoldoldstable
> Codename: jessie
> 
> Czyli w Release z jessie jest wskazanie na oldoldstable (2xold) a
> powinno być na oldoldoldstable(3xold).
> 
> Problem dotyczy wielu serwerów i dystrybucji.
> Sprawdzałem amd64,i386 i arm64.
> Serwery Polska (jak pokazuje) też icm, Szwecja, Holandia, Szwajcaria, USA.
> 
> Kiedy mogę się spodziewać naprawienia ?
> Jak jest metoda obejściowa w tym momencie.
> 
> Czy wystarczy ten mail czy muszę pisać na grupę światową ?
> 
> Pozdrawiam
> Wojciech.

Hi Wojciech,

Debian 8 (Jessie) is unsupported even as LTS.

https://wiki.debian.org/LTS

It has "died" as oldoldstable - this is my guess.

Kind regards
Georgi

Instalacja Debian8 błąd w Release

[Wojciech]

W trakcie instalacji w momencie wyboru serwera lustrzanego pakietów jest 
błąd.
choose-mirror: wget -q 
http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dist/jessie/Release -O - | grep -E  
'^(Suite|Codename):'

Ta komenda zwraca:
Suite:  oldoldstable
Codename: jessie
W następnym kroku jest:
choose-mirror: wget -q 
http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dist/oldoldstable/Release -O - | grep -E 
'^(Suite|Codename):'

I tu instalator staje.
Wskazana komenda zwraca:
Suite: oldoldstable
Codename: stretch
Czyli Debian 9.11

Właściwa wersja jest w
wget -q http://ftp.pl.debian.org/debian/dist/oldoldoldstable/Release -O 
- | grep -E '^(Suite|Codename):'

Suit: oldoldoldstable
Codename: jessie

Czyli w Release z jessie jest wskazanie na oldoldstable (2xold) a 
powinno być na oldoldoldstable(3xold).


Problem dotyczy wielu serwerów i dystrybucji.
Sprawdzałem amd64,i386 i arm64.
Serwery Polska (jak pokazuje) też icm, Szwecja, Holandia, Szwajcaria, USA.

Kiedy mogę się spodziewać naprawienia ?
Jak jest metoda obejściowa w tym momencie.

Czy wystarczy ten mail czy muszę pisać na grupę światową ?

Pozdrawiam
Wojciech.

Re: Trackpad freezing in Bullseye on HP Laptop w/Celeron N4020 CPU

[John Kerr Anderson]

Hi guys,

Under tweaks 'disable keyboard while typing is checked.'

I noticed last night that it's a very severe problem as if I try typing a
document the machine locks up and I must press the power button. If I type
in a console screen in textmode I can type without a problem.

Here is the output of :
 xinput
⎡ Virtual core pointer id=2 [master pointer  (3)]
⎜   ↳ Virtual core XTEST pointer   id=4 [slave  pointer  (2)]
⎜   ↳ SYNA3296:00 06CB:CD50 Mouse id=9 [slave  pointer  (2)]
⎜   ↳ SYNA3296:00 06CB:CD50 Touchpad   id=10 [slave  pointer  (2)]
⎣ Virtual core keyboard   id=3 [master keyboard (2)]
↳ Virtual core XTEST keyboard id=5 [slave  keyboard (3)]
↳ Video Bus   id=6 [slave  keyboard (3)]
↳ Power Button id=7 [slave  keyboard (3)]
↳ HP TrueVision HD Camera: HP Tru id=8 [slave  keyboard (3)]
↳ AT Translated Set 2 keyboard id=11 [slave  keyboard (3)]
↳ HP Wireless hotkeys id=12 [slave  keyboard (3)]
↳ HP WMI hotkeys   id=13 [slave  keyboard (3)]

Errors in system log when it totally freezes up:

Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868513] [Hardware Error]: event
severity: fatal
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868515] [Hardware Error]:  Error 0,
type: fatal
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868517] [Hardware Error]:
section_type: Firmware Error Record Reference
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868517] [Hardware Error]:   Firmware
Error Record Type: SOC Firmware Error Record Type1 (Legacy CrashLog Support)
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868518] [Hardware Error]:   Revision: 0
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868519] [Hardware Error]:   Record
Identifier: 30001
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868523] [Hardware Error]:   :
00030001 0001 0608   
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868524] [Hardware Error]:   0010:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868525] [Hardware Error]:   0020:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868527] [Hardware Error]:   0030:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868528] [Hardware Error]:   0040:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868529] [Hardware Error]:   0050:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868530] [Hardware Error]:   0060:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868531] [Hardware Error]:   0070:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868533] [Hardware Error]:   0080:
001a2fbb  0002 0001  ./..
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868534] [Hardware Error]:   0090:
0608  0008 0008  
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868535] [Hardware Error]:   00a0:
14a8 0880 0880   
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868537] [Hardware Error]:   00b0:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868538] [Hardware Error]:   00c0:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868539] [Hardware Error]:   00d0:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868540] [Hardware Error]:   00e0:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868541] [Hardware Error]:   00f0:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868543] [Hardware Error]:   0100:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868544] [Hardware Error]:   0110:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868545] [Hardware Error]:   0120:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868546] [Hardware Error]:   0130:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868548] [Hardware Error]:   0140:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868549] [Hardware Error]:   0150:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868550] [Hardware Error]:   0160:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868551] [Hardware Error]:   0170:
     
Oct  9 20:02:07 hp14 kernel: [2.868552] [Hardware Error]:   0180:
 

Re: Trackpad freezing in Bullseye on HP Laptop w/Celeron N4020 CPU

[yixuan lin]

> 在 2021年10月9日，下午9:49，John Kerr Anderson  写道：
> 
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> I've got an HP laptop that is having a problem of the trackpad freezing 
> randomly when using the machine.  If I plug an external mouse via USB or I do 
> a  I can log back in and get the mouse working again.  
> 
> It's annoying as it happens when you are working and is completely random 
> when it does this.
> 
> One message that comes up in the logs is :
> 
> i8042: PNP: PS/2 appears to have AUX port disabled, if this is incorrect 
> please boot with i8042.nopnp
> 
> cat /proc/bus/input/devices | grep -i touchpad
> N: Name="SYNA3296:00 06CB:CD50 Touchpad"
> 
> Any suggestions on how I could get the mouse to not freeze randomly?
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> John

Try search your model in Debian wiki. Like info for Debian on Lenovo thinkpad 
T410 can be found at https://wiki.debian.org/InstallingDebianOn/Thinkpad/T410.

Regards
Yixuan

Re: Trackpad freezing in Bullseye on HP Laptop w/Celeron N4020 CPU

[Keith Bainbridge]

On 10/10/21 00:49, John Kerr Anderson wrote:

Hi Everyone,

I've got an HP laptop that is having a problem of the trackpad freezing 
randomly when using the machine.  If I plug an external mouse via USB or 
I do a  I can log back in and get the mouse working again.


It's annoying as it happens when you are working and is completely 
random when it does this.


One message that comes up in the logs is :

i8042: PNP: PS/2 appears to have AUX port disabled, if this is incorrect 
please boot with i8042.nopnp


cat /proc/bus/input/devices | grep -i touchpad
N: Name="SYNA3296:00 06CB:CD50 Touchpad"

Any suggestions on how I could get the mouse to not freeze randomly?

Thanks in advance,

John


Good mrning

Have you activated the facility that the trackpad is disabled while typing?
--
All the best

Keith Bainbridge

keithrbaugro...@gmail.com

Trackpad freezing in Bullseye on HP Laptop w/Celeron N4020 CPU

[John Kerr Anderson]

Hi Everyone,

I've got an HP laptop that is having a problem of the trackpad freezing
randomly when using the machine.  If I plug an external mouse via USB or I
do a  I can log back in and get the mouse working again.

It's annoying as it happens when you are working and is completely random
when it does this.

One message that comes up in the logs is :

i8042: PNP: PS/2 appears to have AUX port disabled, if this is incorrect
please boot with i8042.nopnp

cat /proc/bus/input/devices | grep -i touchpad
N: Name="SYNA3296:00 06CB:CD50 Touchpad"

Any suggestions on how I could get the mouse to not freeze randomly?

Thanks in advance,

John

Re: Music players that save (different) volume settings for each song (was: Re: mplayer with -loop 0 but w/o volume reset?

[David Wright]

On Tue 03 Mar 2020 at 07:22:49 (-0500), rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 03, 2020 05:57:27 AM Curt wrote:
> > On 2020-03-02, David Wright  wrote:
> > > $ mplayer -volume 50 -fs -loop 0 -softvol Youtube/Come\ Live\ With\
> > > Me-_bVNd_sRlMk.mkv
> 
> (I'm not the OP.)  I wonder if there are any music players that can save a 
> (play)list along with a selected volume for each song on the playlist?  (Or 
> use a database of songs with volume setting, and then access the database as 
> the playlist calls for a song?)
> 
> (I'm aware of things (not sure that any are implemented in LInux music 
> players) that try to "normalize" the audio by either reviewing the content of 
> the entire song or some portion of it and and adjust the volume to be similar 
>  
> to the volume of other songs on the playlist, but those don't always work as 
> well as I would like.  Something that allowed you to set a volume for each 
> song (and maybe even store a list of volume changes for songs that had large 
> changes in volume) would be nice.)

The easiest way, with mpv, is to use the per-file options, just over
300 lines through the man page. For example, and using foo.mkv to
stand for the file above:

$ mpv --fs --\{ --volume=100 foo.mkv --\} --\{ --volume=50 foo.mkv --\} --\{ 
--volume=100 foo.mkv --\}

It might seem futile to triplicate one file for the playlist, but it
demonstrates that the volume changes are genuine.

Cheers,
David.

Re: Music players that save (different) volume settings for each song (was: Re: mplayer with -loop 0 but w/o volume reset?

[Jonas Smedegaard]

Quoting rhkra...@gmail.com (2020-03-03 13:22:49)
> (I'm not the OP.)  I wonder if there are any music players that can 
> save a (play)list along with a selected volume for each song on the 
> playlist?  (Or use a database of songs with volume setting, and then 
> access the database as the playlist calls for a song?)
> 
> (I'm aware of things (not sure that any are implemented in LInux music 
> players) that try to "normalize" the audio by either reviewing the 
> content of the entire song or some portion of it and and adjust the 
> volume to be similar to the volume of other songs on the playlist, but 
> those don't always work as well as I would like.  Something that 
> allowed you to set a volume for each song (and maybe even store a list 
> of volume changes for songs that had large changes in volume) would be 
> nice.)

I would use ID3 tags as "database", like this:

 2. Load all tunes into Picard, compute ReplayGain, and apply tags
 3. Use a player which respects ReplayGain tags to normalize volume
 4. Where some ReplayGain values are "wrong", manually adjust tags

Personally I would use Picard for tagging and ReplayGain computing 
(hint: configure it to enable module "ReplayGain"), and I would use MPD 
+ mpd-sima + ncmpcpp as player, but there are many many many options and 
most of them follows same general flow described above.


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

signature.asc
Description: signature

Music players that save (different) volume settings for each song (was: Re: mplayer with -loop 0 but w/o volume reset?

[rhkramer]

(I'm not the OP.)  I wonder if there are any music players that can save a 
(play)list along with a selected volume for each song on the playlist?  (Or 
use a database of songs with volume setting, and then access the database as 
the playlist calls for a song?)

(I'm aware of things (not sure that any are implemented in LInux music 
players) that try to "normalize" the audio by either reviewing the content of 
the entire song or some portion of it and and adjust the volume to be similar  
to the volume of other songs on the playlist, but those don't always work as 
well as I would like.  Something that allowed you to set a volume for each 
song (and maybe even store a list of volume changes for songs that had large 
changes in volume) would be nice.)


On Tuesday, March 03, 2020 05:57:27 AM Curt wrote:
> On 2020-03-02, David Wright  wrote:
> > $ mplayer -volume 50 -fs -loop 0 -softvol Youtube/Come\ Live\ With\
> > Me-_bVNd_sRlMk.mkv

Re: mplayer with -loop 0 but w/o volume reset?

[Curt]

On 2020-03-02, David Wright  wrote:
>
> $ mplayer -volume 50 -fs -loop 0 -softvol Youtube/Come\ Live\ With\ 
> Me-_bVNd_sRlMk.mkv
>
> which sets the volume at 50%, and changed it with / and * whilst
> playing. The volume resets to 50% with each loop.
>

That's what I would expect and believed was what the OP was asking for,
failing somehow in miraculous fashion to derive the obvious inference
that he's changing the volume during play.

IOW, I misread his post.

I guess it's too much to ask that Emmanuel decide upon a commodious
volume before inducing the loop in order that I might save a little
face.


-- 
"J'ai pour me guérir du jugement des autres toute la distance qui me sépare de
moi." Antonin Artaud

Re: mplayer with -loop 0 but w/o volume reset?

[Nicolas George]

David Wright (12020-03-02):
> which sets the volume at 50%, and changed it with / and * whilst
> playing. The volume resets to 50% with each loop.

The reinit of the audio chain and the reset of the volume is hardcoded
in the source code, and there is no option similar to -fixed-vo to
disable it.

But you can go to the users mailing-list: if Alexander is around, he
might be able to patch something quickly.

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: mplayer with -loop 0 but w/o volume reset?

[David Wright]

On Mon 02 Mar 2020 at 09:01:56 (-), Curt wrote:
> On 2020-03-02, Emanuel Berg  wrote:
> > Can I use mplayer with -loop 0 _but_ with the
> > volume not resetting when the file ends and
> > begins again?
> 
> It would seem a flabbergasting thing that a soft with a thousand flags 
> wouldn't
> have one or two to set the volume. What have you tried so far?
> 
>  mplayer RainyMood.mp3 -loop 0 -volume 55 &
> 
> ? 
> 
> I can't test this loopy hypothesis as I don't have mplayer installed on
> this machine. 
> 
> >From the man:
> 
>  -volume <-1-100> (also see -af volume)
> 
>  Set the startup volume in the mixer, either hardware or software (if
>  used with -softvol). A value of -1 (the default) will not change the
>  volume.

On my system, that doesn't work either. I used as an example:

$ mplayer -volume 50 -fs -loop 0 -softvol Youtube/Come\ Live\ With\ 
Me-_bVNd_sRlMk.mkv

which sets the volume at 50%, and changed it with / and * whilst
playing. The volume resets to 50% with each loop.

$ mplayer -volume -1 -fs -loop 0 -softvol Youtube/Come\ Live\ With\ 
Me-_bVNd_sRlMk.mkv

The volume starts at 100% with each loop, regardless of how it was
changed during playing.

$ mplayer -volume '-1' -fs -loop 0 -softvol Youtube/Come\ Live\ With\ 
Me-_bVNd_sRlMk.mkv

Ditto.

Actually, the -softvol is redundant here, as mplayer doesn't have
any effect on my ALSA mixer settings. (Which would it choose?)

> Maybe there ain't no way and you'll be obliged to switch to vlc or
> something.

I'm not sure I'd install vlc just for looping when mpv can handle it
satisfactorily already. What else would it buy me? (for 40 extra
packages including Recommends).

Cheers,
David.

Re: mplayer with -loop 0 but w/o volume reset?

[Curt]

On 2020-03-02, Emanuel Berg  wrote:
> Can I use mplayer with -loop 0 _but_ with the
> volume not resetting when the file ends and
> begins again?
>

It would seem a flabbergasting thing that a soft with a thousand flags wouldn't
have one or two to set the volume. What have you tried so far?

 mplayer RainyMood.mp3 -loop 0 -volume 55 &

? 

I can't test this loopy hypothesis as I don't have mplayer installed on
this machine. 

>From the man:

 -volume <-1-100> (also see -af volume)

 Set the startup volume in the mixer, either hardware or software (if
 used with -softvol). A value of -1 (the default) will not change the
 volume.

Maybe there ain't no way and you'll be obliged to switch to vlc or
something.


-- 
"J'ai pour me guérir du jugement des autres toute la distance qui me sépare de
moi." Antonin Artaud