Re: [gentoo-user] Strange partition on USB stick
On Tue, 4 Oct 2011 00:27:50 -0500 Paul Hartman paul.hartman+gen...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 12:18 AM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday 04 Oct 2011 04:39:45 Adam Carter wrote: If the data is important, I'd use ddrescue to create an image of the drive, then run testdisk over that image to see if it can untangle the partition table mess. Both are in portage. Well, that's the thing: I'm not sure that there is a mess. At least not as far as parted is concerned, which can read the partition table properly. I suspect that fdisk (unlike parted) is not capable of reading the device correctly. I forgot to say that when mounted the USB stick shows not partitions (i.e. there is no sdb1, sdb2, etc.) To access the fs I must do something like: pmount /dev/sdb and then all is lists under /media/sdb. It is like a big floppy. I think that's your answer. The partition table looks funny because it isn't one. :) It is somewhat common. I've had some myself that are like that. I have a 4G Sandisk that does that too. It does everything a regular USB stick does except a) create a proper partition table and b) be booted from -- Alan McKinnnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
[gentoo-user] gnubatch-1.4 make error [OT]
Hello, Maybe it is OT, but i am doing it on gentoo. I am trying to compile gnubatch-1.4 (http://www.gnu.org/s/gnubatch/). GCC-4.5.3, bison 2.4.3, flex 2.5.35. I get the following error message: cd build;make all make[1]: Entering directory `/home/gnubatch/build' gcc -O -g -Wall -fno-stack-protector -Ihdrs -I.. -c -o btcharge.o btcharge.c btcharge.c:35:13: warning: ‘Filename’ defined but not used cd lib;make make[2]: Entering directory `/home/gnubatch/build/lib' libtool --mode=compile gcc -O -g -Wall -fno-stack-protector -I../hdrs -I../.. -c -o advtime.o advtime.c libtool: compile: unable to infer tagged configuration libtool: compile: specify a tag with `--tag' make[2]: *** [advtime.o] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/gnubatch/build/lib' make[1]: *** [lib/libgnubatch_int.la] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/gnubatch/build' make: *** [build-src] Error 2 Anybody could explain, what should i do? Thank you in advance.
[gentoo-user] Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
Hi, Subject line says it pretty well. Is grub2 stable, who uses it and can you post your experience on the switching process? Was it difficult? Easy? Somewhere between? Thinking about switching. Get this over with before all the initramfs thingy kicks in. BTW, I still haven't got that initramfs thingy finished. :-( Thanks. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 04:49:56 -0500, Dale wrote: Subject line says it pretty well. Is grub2 stable, who uses it and can you post your experience on the switching process? Was it difficult? I use it on my netbook, which I admittedly don't boot more than a couple of times a month. It's stable, I can't comment on the switching process as I used GRUB2 from the start with this machine, it seemed a good time to get to grips with it. GRUB2 is neither complicated nor difficult, but it is different. If you try to think in terms of legacy GRUB, you will have more problems than if you approach is as learning a new system. -- Neil Bothwick In the 60's people took acid to make the world weird. Now the world is weird and people take Prozac to make it normal. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On Oct 4, 2011 5:10 PM, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 04:49:56 -0500, Dale wrote: Subject line says it pretty well. Is grub2 stable, who uses it and can you post your experience on the switching process? Was it difficult? I use it on my netbook, which I admittedly don't boot more than a couple of times a month. It's stable, I can't comment on the switching process as I used GRUB2 from the start with this machine, it seemed a good time to get to grips with it. GRUB2 is neither complicated nor difficult, but it is different. If you try to think in terms of legacy GRUB, you will have more problems than if you approach is as learning a new system. Kind of tangential... Why does Gentoo still 'standardize' on grub instead of going forward with grub2? Rgds,
Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} Computers and mental/emotional health
On Mon, 3 Oct 2011 15:15:54 -0700 Grant emailgr...@gmail.com wrote: Over the years I've found that the time I spend on the computer has a negative affect on my mental/emotional health. It seems to suck the life out of life and impair my ability to function in the real world. It's the opposite for me. If only I could have a scriptable interface for real life everything would be perfect -- just imagine... indi@real_life$ feed cat make tea --serve in_bed -- caveat utilitor
[gentoo-user] Problem build gconf
Hi Guys, i got a problem build gconf. The problem is somehow emake again o.O * Call stack: * ebuild.sh, line 56: Called src_compile * environment, line 3235: Called gnome2_src_compile * environment, line 2496: Called die * The specific snippet of code: * emake || die compile failure This is my Laptop, didn't updated it for a while. But i just check my libpng * media-libs/libpng Latest version available: 1.4.8-r1 Latest version installed: 1.4.8-r1 Size of files: 545 kB Homepage: http://www.libpng.org/ Description: Portable Network Graphics library License: as-is Also i check on my gcc-config, update to the 4.5.3, gcc-config -l [1] x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-4.5.3 * I'm currently out of ideas, again :/ Here is my makem.conf . CFLAGS=-O2 CXXFLAGS=-O2 changing. CHOST=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu USE= 64 mmx sse sse2 ssse3 pni X python threads acpi alsa cups dbus ffmpeg flac gnome gtk win32codecs -arts -kde -qt3 -qt4 hal sqlite -ipv6 nsplugin linguas_de -bluetooth smbclient -server gnutls bonjour wxwindows linguas_en latex static-libs fbcondecor xfs acpi imap java extensions pop theora avahi zeroconf mdnsresponder-compat gstreamer tcl tk bash-completion lzma v4l2 usb pidgini gpg sasl smtp qemu kvm virt-network smbsharemodes winbind apng -introspection fuse systemd xetex -pango MAKEOPTS='-j9' GENTOO_MIRRORS=http://distfiles.gentoo.org/ FEATURES=parallel-fetch SYNC=rsync://rsync.europe.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage ACCEPT_LICENSE=*+@EULA PUEL Oracle-BCLA-JavaSE VIDEO_CARDS=radeon INPUT_DEVICES='evdev synaptics' i put the build log into pastbin: http://pastebin.com/CXEFY342 so far Greeting's from German A.
[gentoo-user] gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Hi Guys, i got a problem build gconf. The problem is somehow emake again o.O * Call stack: * ebuild.sh, line 56: Called src_compile * environment, line 3235: Called gnome2_src_compile * environment, line 2496: Called die * The specific snippet of code: * emake || die compile failure This is my Laptop, didn't updated it for a while. But i just check my libpng * media-libs/libpng Latest version available: 1.4.8-r1 Latest version installed: 1.4.8-r1 Size of files: 545 kB Homepage: http://www.libpng.org/ Description: Portable Network Graphics library License: as-is Also i check on my gcc-config, update to the 4.5.3, gcc-config -l [1] x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-4.5.3 * I'm currently out of ideas, again :/ Here is my makem.conf . CFLAGS=-O2 CXXFLAGS=-O2 changing. CHOST=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu USE= 64 mmx sse sse2 ssse3 pni X python threads acpi alsa cups dbus ffmpeg flac gnome gtk win32codecs -arts -kde -qt3 -qt4 hal sqlite -ipv6 nsplugin linguas_de -bluetooth smbclient -server gnutls bonjour wxwindows linguas_en latex static-libs fbcondecor xfs acpi imap java extensions pop theora avahi zeroconf mdnsresponder-compat gstreamer tcl tk bash-completion lzma v4l2 usb pidgini gpg sasl smtp qemu kvm virt-network smbsharemodes winbind apng -introspection fuse systemd xetex -pango MAKEOPTS='-j9' GENTOO_MIRRORS=http://distfiles.gentoo.org/ FEATURES=parallel-fetch SYNC=rsync://rsync.europe.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage ACCEPT_LICENSE=*+@EULA PUEL Oracle-BCLA-JavaSE VIDEO_CARDS=radeon INPUT_DEVICES='evdev synaptics' i put the build log into pastbin: http://pastebin.com/CXEFY342 so far Greeting's from German A.
Re: [gentoo-user] Problem build gconf
On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 02:15:34PM +0200, 4k3nd0 wrote: i put the build log into pastbin: http://pastebin.com/CXEFY342 What is the version of pango you have installed? It may be related to this bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=384779 W -- Willie W. Wong ww...@math.princeton.edu Data aequatione quotcunque fluentes quantitae involvente fluxiones invenire et vice versa ~~~ I. Newton
Re: [gentoo-user] Problem build gconf
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Willie Wong ww...@math.princeton.eduwrote: On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 02:15:34PM +0200, 4k3nd0 wrote: i put the build log into pastbin: http://pastebin.com/CXEFY342 What is the version of pango you have installed? It may be related to this bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=384779 W -- Willie W. Wong ww...@math.princeton.edu Data aequatione quotcunque fluentes quantitae involvente fluxiones invenire et vice versa ~~~ I. Newton hm... got that Problem with some build before dev-perl/Pango Latest version available: 1.221 Latest version installed: 1.221 Size of files: 42 kB Homepage: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Pango/ Description: Layout and render international text License: LGPL-2.1
Re: [gentoo-user] Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On 10/04/2011 06:16 AM, Pandu Poluan wrote: On Oct 4, 2011 5:10 PM, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk mailto:n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 04:49:56 -0500, Dale wrote: Subject line says it pretty well. Is grub2 stable, who uses it and can you post your experience on the switching process? Was it difficult? I use it on my netbook, which I admittedly don't boot more than a couple of times a month. It's stable, I can't comment on the switching process as I used GRUB2 from the start with this machine, it seemed a good time to get to grips with it. GRUB2 is neither complicated nor difficult, but it is different. If you try to think in terms of legacy GRUB, you will have more problems than if you approach is as learning a new system. Kind of tangential... Why does Gentoo still 'standardize' on grub instead of going forward with grub2? Grub2 is weird (coming from anything that isn't grub2), and if you mess up the upgrade, you can't boot. It's a support nightmare.
Re: [gentoo-user] gnubatch-1.4 make error [OT]
On 10/04/2011 04:14 AM, Marius Vaitiekunas wrote: Hello, Maybe it is OT, but i am doing it on gentoo. I am trying to compile gnubatch-1.4 (http://www.gnu.org/s/gnubatch/). GCC-4.5.3, bison 2.4.3, flex 2.5.35. I get the following error message: cd build;make all make[1]: Entering directory `/home/gnubatch/build' gcc -O -g -Wall -fno-stack-protector -Ihdrs -I.. -c -o btcharge.o btcharge.c btcharge.c:35:13: warning: ‘Filename’ defined but not used cd lib;make make[2]: Entering directory `/home/gnubatch/build/lib' libtool --mode=compile gcc -O -g -Wall -fno-stack-protector -I../hdrs -I../.. -c -o advtime.o advtime.c libtool: compile: unable to infer tagged configuration libtool: compile: specify a tag with `--tag' make[2]: *** [advtime.o] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/gnubatch/build/lib' make[1]: *** [lib/libgnubatch_int.la] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/gnubatch/build' make: *** [build-src] Error 2 Anybody could explain, what should i do? Thank you in advance. You can try exporting LIBTOOL='/usr/bin/libtool --tag=CC' before you emerge it. This is usually a Makefile problem, I'd file a bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/
Re: [gentoo-user] Problem build gconf
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Alex Sla 4k3...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Willie Wong ww...@math.princeton.eduwrote:
On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 02:15:34PM +0200, 4k3nd0 wrote:
i put the build log into pastbin: http://pastebin.com/CXEFY342
What is the version of pango you have installed? It may be related to
this bug:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=384779
W
--
Willie W. Wong
ww...@math.princeton.edu
Data aequatione quotcunque fluentes quantitae involvente fluxiones
invenire
et vice versa ~~~ I. Newton
hm... got that Problem with some build before
dev-perl/Pango
Latest version available: 1.221
Latest version installed: 1.221
Size of files: 42 kB
Homepage: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Pango/
Description: Layout and render international text
License: LGPL-2.1
Hups... wrong one :)
eix -I x11-libs/pango
[I] x11-libs/pango
Available versions: 1.28.3-r1 1.28.4 {X debug doc +introspection test}
Installed versions: 1.28.4(20:19:19 10/03/11)(X -debug -doc
-introspection -test)
Homepage:http://www.pango.org/
Description: Internationalized text layout and rendering
library
Re: [gentoo-user] gnubatch-1.4 make error [OT]
On 10/04/2011 09:00 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: On 10/04/2011 04:14 AM, Marius Vaitiekunas wrote: You can try exporting LIBTOOL='/usr/bin/libtool --tag=CC' before you emerge it. This is usually a Makefile problem, I'd file a bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/ Oh, it isn't in portage. It's a bug in the Makefiles. The first one is in build/lib/Makefile, you can edit the CC line to read, CC = libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile gcc But, all other calls to libtool have the same problem, across multiple Makefiles. I was able to compile it eventually, but I had to edit them all.
[gentoo-user] NAS for Windows - does any Wiki solution 'just work'?
I've got a 2 year old Gentoo machine that got patched together using a lot of small hard drives which worked fine for what I used the machine for 2-3 years ago but the machine isn't getting used much anymore. The processor, memory MB are all reasonably good - i5-661 4GB - but my laptop VM compute server are both faster - so I was wondering what I might do with the box. I saw a Wired article last night about a guy building a NAS box using Debian which got me thinking. I've got a bunch of 1TB Green drives which would make a good base for storage so there's no cost in doing this, but I don't know anything about network attached storage that just works out of the box with Windows clients and I have NO desire (or time) to spend learning stuff that's very Windows specific. If there is a good solution for me it needs to support both Win XP and Win 7 machine and shouldn't require anything be added to the Windows VM. Years ago I tried this basic guide: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/quick-samba-howto.xml I don't remember why but I didn't have much luck with it. However it's been updated and cleaned up a lot so maybe it's OK. Thanks in advance for any ideas. Cheers, Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Hard drives not detected in repeatable order.
On Mon, 2011-10-03 at 15:03 -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-03, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: Just recently I've run in to problems because my hard drives are not detected in a predictable order, so my fstab that mount /dev/sdb1 and /dev/sdc1 sometimes result in directory trees in the wrong places (/dev/sda seems consistent, but I don't know why). I still don't know what changed to cause disks ordering to become non-deterministic. I recently upgraded from a single-core CPU to a dual-core CPU. Would that do it? What's the recommended way to fix this? After a bit more googling, it looks like this is what disk labels are for. Never used them before, but it looks like it's time to give them a go. They have the advantage over UUID's in that you can set them and therefore can be human readable. Also, if you use a desktop environment, they look nice in file managers. I have found that use of LABEL=FOO in /etc/fstab doesn't always solve the problem of disks being reassigned during boot. I use LABEL=/Whatever for all file systems mounted on my Dell D830. The main drive (most of the time) is /dev/sda. Sometimes I'll insert a second drive in the machine (in the side battery slot) then power up. This drive gets the /dev/sda assignment. I'm guessing since it doesn't have a /boot directory on it the system fails to start. If I power up w/o this second drive, and wait until the kernel start reading the s/u scripts, I can insert the drive (during bootup) and everything is mounted the way I intended. Mike
Re: [gentoo-user] Kernel source servers compromised?
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Nilesh Govindarajan cont...@nileshgr.com wrote: On Tue 04 Oct 2011 11:11:22 AM IST, Mick wrote: Fair enough, but chkrootkit is not the most maintained package. Last version was released in July 2009. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/04/linux_repository_res/ This is a quite old news and since then Linus has moved the kernel to github Actually git.kernel.org is back since yesterday. :)
[gentoo-user] Re: Hard drives not detected in repeatable order.
On 2011-10-04, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 12:03:47PM -0700, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s wrote They have the advantage over UUID's in that you can set them and therefore can be human readable. Also, if you use a desktop environment, they look nice in file managers. I assume that name clashes can be avoided by using hostname-label. My question is... are there any circumstances where you can use UUIDs but not labels, or visa versa? If so, I'd prefer to go with the more robust option from day 1, rather than switch later. The only thing I came across was a mention that some filesystems (e.g. VFAT) don't support labels. Though all the good ones appear to. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! Is this TERMINAL fun? at gmail.com
[gentoo-user] Re: Hard drives not detected in repeatable order.
On 2011-10-04, Adam Carter adamcart...@gmail.com wrote: You are right: for grub-legacy you need to use the old hd(x,y) thingy. Which i assume suffers from the same reassignment risk as the kernel's /dev/sdX naming that prompted this discussion. I don't know if that's true. I've never seen it happen. Looks I'll be moving to grub2. Yikes. What a monster... -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! Can you MAIL a BEAN at CAKE? gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Kernel source servers compromised?
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Paul Hartman paul.hartman+gen...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Nilesh Govindarajan cont...@nileshgr.com wrote: On Tue 04 Oct 2011 11:11:22 AM IST, Mick wrote: Fair enough, but chkrootkit is not the most maintained package. Last version was released in July 2009. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/04/linux_repository_res/ This is a quite old news and since then Linus has moved the kernel to github Actually git.kernel.org is back since yesterday. :) And considerable work was done to ensure that the source code trees weren't compromised which is good. I guess we're still waiting for an analysis to be released to the public on the root cause of this intrusion? - Mark
[gentoo-user] Re: Hard drives not detected in repeatable order.
On 2011-10-04, Michael A. Koerber m...@ll.mit.edu wrote: I have found that use of LABEL=FOO in /etc/fstab doesn't always solve the problem of disks being reassigned during boot. That's because fstab isn't used during boot. What root= setting is passed to your kernel by your bootloader? Is that using /dev/sda1 or a label? In order to use a label, I _think_ you need some special magic in an initrd (at least that used to be the case according to what I've googled). -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! Where's th' DAFFY at DUCK EXHIBIT?? gmail.com
[gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On 2011-10-04, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 04:49:56 -0500, Dale wrote: Subject line says it pretty well. Is grub2 stable, who uses it and can you post your experience on the switching process? Was it difficult? I use it on my netbook, which I admittedly don't boot more than a couple of times a month. It's stable, I can't comment on the switching process as I used GRUB2 from the start with this machine, it seemed a good time to get to grips with it. GRUB2 is neither complicated nor difficult, but it is different. I've only used it on Ubuntu, and maybe it's just Ubuntu's implementation -- but it was both complicated and difficult. There are 10X as many files, and to change anything you edit a whole set of configuration files and run a utility that generates _another_ set of configuration files. Compared to vi /boot/grub/menu.lst; reboot, that's complicated. If you try to think in terms of legacy GRUB, you will have more problems than if you approach is as learning a new system. At first glace, grub2 looks like a minature Unix installation whose purpose is to boot a bigger Unix installation. It's got it's own init system and it's own set of init scripts. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! Could I have a drug at overdose? gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Hard drives not detected in repeatable order.
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 11:29, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.comwrote: On 2011-10-04, Michael A. Koerber m...@ll.mit.edu wrote: I have found that use of LABEL=FOO in /etc/fstab doesn't always solve the problem of disks being reassigned during boot. That's because fstab isn't used during boot. What root= setting is passed to your kernel by your bootloader? Is that using /dev/sda1 or a label? In order to use a label, I _think_ you need some special magic in an initrd (at least that used to be the case according to what I've googled). That's my doubt. Last time I've read about, you needed some script to load the labels. Claudio Roberto França Pereira (a.k.a. Spidey) hardMOB - HTForum - @spideybr Engenharia de Computação - UFES 2006/1
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Hard drives not detected in repeatable order.
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Michael A. Koerber m...@ll.mit.edu wrote: I have found that use of LABEL=FOO in /etc/fstab doesn't always solve the problem of disks being reassigned during boot. That's because fstab isn't used during boot. What root= setting is passed to your kernel by your bootloader? Is that using /dev/sda1 or a label? In order to use a label, I _think_ you need some special magic in an initrd (at least that used to be the case according to what I've googled). There is something on the gentoo wiki about doing it in an initramfs: http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/Initramfs#UUID.2FLABEL_Root_Mounting (I've never tried it)
Re: [gentoo-user] NAS for Windows - does any Wiki solution 'just work'?
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:38, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote: I've got a 2 year old Gentoo machine that got patched together using a lot of small hard drives which worked fine for what I used the machine for 2-3 years ago but the machine isn't getting used much anymore. The processor, memory MB are all reasonably good - i5-661 4GB - but my laptop VM compute server are both faster - so I was wondering what I might do with the box. I saw a Wired article last night about a guy building a NAS box using Debian which got me thinking. I've got a bunch of 1TB Green drives which would make a good base for storage so there's no cost in doing this, but I don't know anything about network attached storage that just works out of the box with Windows clients and I have NO desire (or time) to spend learning stuff that's very Windows specific. If there is a good solution for me it needs to support both Win XP and Win 7 machine and shouldn't require anything be added to the Windows VM. Years ago I tried this basic guide: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/quick-samba-howto.xml I don't remember why but I didn't have much luck with it. However it's been updated and cleaned up a lot so maybe it's OK. Thanks in advance for any ideas. Cheers, Mark The easiest solution, most used, is probably SAMBA. You should give it a chance again. Claudio Roberto França Pereira (a.k.a. Spidey) hardMOB - HTForum - @spideybr Engenharia de Computação - UFES 2006/1
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
Grant Edwards wrote: On 2011-10-04, Neil Bothwickn...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 04:49:56 -0500, Dale wrote: Subject line says it pretty well. Is grub2 stable, who uses it and can you post your experience on the switching process? Was it difficult? I use it on my netbook, which I admittedly don't boot more than a couple of times a month. It's stable, I can't comment on the switching process as I used GRUB2 from the start with this machine, it seemed a good time to get to grips with it. GRUB2 is neither complicated nor difficult, but it is different. I've only used it on Ubuntu, and maybe it's just Ubuntu's implementation -- but it was both complicated and difficult. There are 10X as many files, and to change anything you edit a whole set of configuration files and run a utility that generates _another_ set of configuration files. Compared to vi /boot/grub/menu.lst; reboot, that's complicated. If you try to think in terms of legacy GRUB, you will have more problems than if you approach is as learning a new system. At first glace, grub2 looks like a minature Unix installation whose purpose is to boot a bigger Unix installation. It's got it's own init system and it's own set of init scripts. Could this fix the mess with /usr and /var having to be on / or a initramfs? Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Hard drives not detected in repeatable order.
Paul Hartman wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Grant Edwardsgrant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Michael A. Koerberm...@ll.mit.edu wrote: I have found that use of LABEL=FOO in /etc/fstab doesn't always solve the problem of disks being reassigned during boot. That's because fstab isn't used during boot. What root= setting is passed to your kernel by your bootloader? Is that using /dev/sda1 or a label? In order to use a label, I _think_ you need some special magic in an initrd (at least that used to be the case according to what I've googled). There is something on the gentoo wiki about doing it in an initramfs: http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/Initramfs#UUID.2FLABEL_Root_Mounting (I've never tried it) I think grub2 can use labels. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 04:49:56 -0500, Dale wrote: Subject line says it pretty well. Is grub2 stable, who uses it and can you post your experience on the switching process? Was it difficult? I use it on my netbook, which I admittedly don't boot more than a couple of times a month. It's stable, I can't comment on the switching process as I used GRUB2 from the start with this machine, it seemed a good time to get to grips with it. GRUB2 is neither complicated nor difficult, but it is different. I've only used it on Ubuntu, and maybe it's just Ubuntu's implementation -- but it was both complicated and difficult. There are 10X as many files, and to change anything you edit a whole set of configuration files and run a utility that generates _another_ set of configuration files. Compared to vi /boot/grub/menu.lst; reboot, that's complicated. If you try to think in terms of legacy GRUB, you will have more problems than if you approach is as learning a new system. At first glace, grub2 looks like a minature Unix installation whose purpose is to boot a bigger Unix installation. It's got it's own init system and it's own set of init scripts. That it's not true. It connects to whatever init system do you have (OpenRC, SysV, systemd, Upstart), and it has scripts to *generate* the config file. The thing is that GRUB2 needs to understand several filesystems to grab the kernel image from. It also wants to be able to use a more interesting resolution than 640x480. This means that it has to reimplement all the code for any filesystem, and all the code for video handling. The scripts are for semi automatic generation of the config file, which is more complicated than the one from grub-legacy. On the other hand, you only need to configure once, and run it every time you compile and put a new kernel in /boot. But if you just change your current kernel (same image file), you don't have to do anything. Note that the version is 1.99, not 2.0. It is not finished: when 2.0 is reached, hopefully you will be able to disableat ./configure time what video drivers and filesystems do you want to use. Also, the scripts to generate the config file will be standardized by then. However, in the last LPC, it was suggested that replicating filesystem and video code on the kernel and grub was a terrible idea, and some developers have suggested to use a /firstboot partition with a simple filesystem, and populated with a kernel image and an initramfs. That will mean that to boot Linux, we would use Linux. You can read an article about it here: http://lwn.net/Articles/458789/ It was only a proposal: I don't know what will be the standard in the future. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Hard drives not detected in repeatable order.
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 7:18 AM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 12:03:47PM -0700, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s wrote They have the advantage over UUID's in that you can set them and therefore can be human readable. Also, if you use a desktop environment, they look nice in file managers. I assume that name clashes can be avoided by using hostname-label. My question is... are there any circumstances where you can use UUIDs but not labels, or visa versa? If so, I'd prefer to go with the more robust option from day 1, rather than switch later. The only thing I came across was a mention that some filesystems (e.g. VFAT) don't support labels. Though all the good ones appear to. VFAT supports labels. mkfs.vfat -n sets the label name at creation time: there must be a way to change it later. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] NAS for Windows - does any Wiki solution 'just work'?
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Spidey spide...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:38, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote: SNIP Years ago I tried this basic guide: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/quick-samba-howto.xml I don't remember why but I didn't have much luck with it. However it's been updated and cleaned up a lot so maybe it's OK. Thanks in advance for any ideas. Cheers, Mark The easiest solution, most used, is probably SAMBA. You should give it a chance again. Yes. Samba is the basis of the link above, and I figure it's going to be the underlying technology that does the work. I was just wondering if there was a more user oriented, possibly GUI based app that did all the dirty work sort of like the CUPS web interface does with CUPS configuration. Thanks, Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Hard drives not detected in repeatable order.
You can use whatever you want whenever you want. Exactly. Just start naming them different birds or your favorite genus and species. Just pick something and stick with it. I don't know if you have enough room for Anas_platyrhynchos, but you get my drift.
Re: [gentoo-user] NAS for Windows - does any Wiki solution 'just work'?
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 12:43, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Spidey spide...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:38, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote: SNIP Years ago I tried this basic guide: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/quick-samba-howto.xml I don't remember why but I didn't have much luck with it. However it's been updated and cleaned up a lot so maybe it's OK. Thanks in advance for any ideas. Cheers, Mark The easiest solution, most used, is probably SAMBA. You should give it a chance again. Yes. Samba is the basis of the link above, and I figure it's going to be the underlying technology that does the work. I was just wondering if there was a more user oriented, possibly GUI based app that did all the dirty work sort of like the CUPS web interface does with CUPS configuration. SWAT? -- Daniel da Veiga
Re: [gentoo-user] Strange partition on USB stick
On Tuesday 04 Oct 2011 06:27:50 Paul Hartman wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 12:18 AM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday 04 Oct 2011 04:39:45 Adam Carter wrote: If the data is important, I'd use ddrescue to create an image of the drive, then run testdisk over that image to see if it can untangle the partition table mess. Both are in portage. Well, that's the thing: I'm not sure that there is a mess. At least not as far as parted is concerned, which can read the partition table properly. I suspect that fdisk (unlike parted) is not capable of reading the device correctly. I forgot to say that when mounted the USB stick shows not partitions (i.e. there is no sdb1, sdb2, etc.) To access the fs I must do something like: pmount /dev/sdb and then all is lists under /media/sdb. It is like a big floppy. I think that's your answer. The partition table looks funny because it isn't one. :) It is somewhat common. I've had some myself that are like that. If there isn't a partition table, then why fdisk sees /dev/sdb1-4 with somewhat strange ID types? -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} Computers and mental/emotional health
On Tuesday 04 Oct 2011 04:58:00 Michael Orlitzky wrote: On 10/03/2011 10:19 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote: If I may add: try a cup of normal (i.e. non-decaf) coffee about 1 hour after you start using the computer. Ok, but how do you survive the first hour? Coffee is a stimulant so it countenances depression, at some low level, which the latest research claims to have measured. On the other hand, coffee is also a chemical which generates toxins in the body which increase stress, accumulation of fat, loss of hair, etc. It seems to me that you can use coffee to publish any story in the papers that you happen to fancy ... There's truth about the claim that staying indoors will not generally get you enough sunlight (being outdoors on a cloudy day will get you 10s to 100s times more light). Sunlight is extremely important both for SAD (especially if you are a sufferer) and for strong bones (delaying osteoporosis). However, what comes with advancing age is a general decline in energy and sight. This means that staring at a screen causes more noticeable eye strain than in the past. This also means that trying to process information which requires any degree of concentration/intensity will cause tiredness. Hence, it sucks life out of life. It takes longer to do what you used to do when younger and there's less energy to do anything else if you spend hours in front of a computer. I think that the solution is to consciously try to take breaks away from sitting in front of a PC and engage in more physical activity - ideally outdoors. -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Strange partition on USB stick
On Tuesday 04 Oct 2011 07:53:47 Alan McKinnon wrote: On Tue, 4 Oct 2011 00:27:50 -0500 Paul Hartman paul.hartman+gen...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 12:18 AM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday 04 Oct 2011 04:39:45 Adam Carter wrote: If the data is important, I'd use ddrescue to create an image of the drive, then run testdisk over that image to see if it can untangle the partition table mess. Both are in portage. Well, that's the thing: I'm not sure that there is a mess. At least not as far as parted is concerned, which can read the partition table properly. I suspect that fdisk (unlike parted) is not capable of reading the device correctly. I forgot to say that when mounted the USB stick shows not partitions (i.e. there is no sdb1, sdb2, etc.) To access the fs I must do something like: pmount /dev/sdb and then all is lists under /media/sdb. It is like a big floppy. I think that's your answer. The partition table looks funny because it isn't one. :) It is somewhat common. I've had some myself that are like that. I have a 4G Sandisk that does that too. It does everything a regular USB stick does except a) create a proper partition table and b) be booted from I guess what I'm asking is: If there isn't a partition table, then why fdisk sees /dev/sdb1-4 with somewhat strange ID types? What is it that it interprets as 4 partitions? -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Hard drives not detected in repeatable order.
Am 04.10.2011 16:47, schrieb Spidey: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 11:29, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com mailto:grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Michael A. Koerber m...@ll.mit.edu mailto:m...@ll.mit.edu wrote: I have found that use of LABEL=FOO in /etc/fstab doesn't always solve the problem of disks being reassigned during boot. That's because fstab isn't used during boot. What root= setting is passed to your kernel by your bootloader? Is that using /dev/sda1 or a label? In order to use a label, I _think_ you need some special magic in an initrd (at least that used to be the case according to what I've googled). That's my doubt. Last time I've read about, you needed some script to load the labels. Claudio Roberto França Pereira (a.k.a. Spidey) You cannot use labels with the root= parameters. That was provided as some kind of hack a few years ago but has been removed since. You either need to use an initramfs for labels or resort to UUIDs. See http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=b5af921ec02333e943efb59aca4f56b78fc0e100 Regards, Florian Philipp signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Strange partition on USB stick
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday 04 Oct 2011 06:27:50 Paul Hartman wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 12:18 AM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday 04 Oct 2011 04:39:45 Adam Carter wrote: If the data is important, I'd use ddrescue to create an image of the drive, then run testdisk over that image to see if it can untangle the partition table mess. Both are in portage. Well, that's the thing: I'm not sure that there is a mess. At least not as far as parted is concerned, which can read the partition table properly. I suspect that fdisk (unlike parted) is not capable of reading the device correctly. I forgot to say that when mounted the USB stick shows not partitions (i.e. there is no sdb1, sdb2, etc.) To access the fs I must do something like: pmount /dev/sdb and then all is lists under /media/sdb. It is like a big floppy. I think that's your answer. The partition table looks funny because it isn't one. :) It is somewhat common. I've had some myself that are like that. If there isn't a partition table, then why fdisk sees /dev/sdb1-4 with somewhat strange ID types? It's misinterpreting the data that happens to be there because it makes the assumption that it's a partition table even though it's not. You can create a real partition table on that device and reformat, if you want. (Note that some flash-based devices suffer degraded performance if you repartition or reformat them because they come with specially-aligned FAT tables from the factory)
Re: [gentoo-user] NAS for Windows - does any Wiki solution 'just work'?
On Oct 4, 2011 8:41 PM, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote: I've got a 2 year old Gentoo machine that got patched together using a lot of small hard drives which worked fine for what I used the machine for 2-3 years ago but the machine isn't getting used much anymore. The processor, memory MB are all reasonably good - i5-661 4GB - but my laptop VM compute server are both faster - so I was wondering what I might do with the box. I saw a Wired article last night about a guy building a NAS box using Debian which got me thinking. I've got a bunch of 1TB Green drives which would make a good base for storage so there's no cost in doing this, but I don't know anything about network attached storage that just works out of the box with Windows clients and I have NO desire (or time) to spend learning stuff that's very Windows specific. If there is a good solution for me it needs to support both Win XP and Win 7 machine and shouldn't require anything be added to the Windows VM. Years ago I tried this basic guide: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/quick-samba-howto.xml I don't remember why but I didn't have much luck with it. However it's been updated and cleaned up a lot so maybe it's OK. Thanks in advance for any ideas. If you want to rebuild it totally, why not go the simpler route of installing 'soft appliances' like FreeNAS, OpenFiler, or Nexenta? Rgds,
Re: [gentoo-user] NAS for Windows - does any Wiki solution 'just work'?
On 10/4/2011 8:43 AM, Mark Knecht wrote: Yes. Samba is the basis of the link above, and I figure it's going to be the underlying technology that does the work. I was just wondering if there was a more user oriented, possibly GUI based app that did all the dirty work sort of like the CUPS web interface does with CUPS configuration. In Samba's case the config is pretty simple if you ignore printing which you should. Just add the IP range, setup a share, and add some accounts or leave it public. Probably take longer to setup a gui. kashani
Re: [gentoo-user] NAS for Windows - does any Wiki solution 'just work'?
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: SNIP If you want to rebuild it totally, why not go the simpler route of installing 'soft appliances' like FreeNAS, OpenFiler, or Nexenta? Rgds, Thanks for the suggestions. I didn't know about any of these. Some comments: 1) The machine is already running Gentoo and is reasonably up to date. (Within 30 days or so) I didn't want to start from scratch but rather just wanted to remove a couple of drives which don't support system needs, throw a couple of 1TB hard drives and hopefully I'm up and running. 2) As for the three suggestions, and at a glance they all look very capable of supporting my limited needs, I really don't want to learn to maintain a server running different tools. (I.e. - anything not portage) I sure like the look of the FreeNAS pages though. Thanks! Cheers, Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] NAS for Windows - does any Wiki solution 'just work'?
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:01 AM, kashani kashani-l...@badapple.net wrote: On 10/4/2011 8:43 AM, Mark Knecht wrote: Yes. Samba is the basis of the link above, and I figure it's going to be the underlying technology that does the work. I was just wondering if there was a more user oriented, possibly GUI based app that did all the dirty work sort of like the CUPS web interface does with CUPS configuration. In Samba's case the config is pretty simple if you ignore printing which you should. Just add the IP range, setup a share, and add some accounts or leave it public. Probably take longer to setup a gui. kashani I suspect you are right, but Alan's recommendation of wicd was so easy to set up and use I'm hoping someone did something similar for NAS solutions. Also, my VMs are both Win XP and Win 7, and my understanding of those is that remote support is different, so I'm concerned I'll end up going down some rabbit hole trying to get the new setup to support everything, but maybe I'm wrong about that? - Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] NAS for Windows - does any Wiki solution 'just work'?
On Oct 5, 2011 12:10 AM, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: SNIP If you want to rebuild it totally, why not go the simpler route of installing 'soft appliances' like FreeNAS, OpenFiler, or Nexenta? Rgds, Thanks for the suggestions. I didn't know about any of these. Some comments: 1) The machine is already running Gentoo and is reasonably up to date. (Within 30 days or so) I didn't want to start from scratch but rather just wanted to remove a couple of drives which don't support system needs, throw a couple of 1TB hard drives and hopefully I'm up and running. 2) As for the three suggestions, and at a glance they all look very capable of supporting my limited needs, I really don't want to learn to maintain a server running different tools. (I.e. - anything not portage) I sure like the look of the FreeNAS pages though. TBH, I have no experience with either FreeNAS or Nexenta, but people I know in other fora swear by them. As to OpenFiler, I've deployed it several times in my office, twice for production. It's quite easy to manage, especially since it's update-able from the webGUI. There *is* a learning curve, though. Exposing OpenFiler to act as a NAS box that's accessible from Windows has a few gotchas, but after reading some wikis, I got it up and running beautifully. Rgds,
Re: [gentoo-user] NAS for Windows - does any Wiki solution 'just work'?
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: On Oct 5, 2011 12:10 AM, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: SNIP If you want to rebuild it totally, why not go the simpler route of installing 'soft appliances' like FreeNAS, OpenFiler, or Nexenta? Rgds, Thanks for the suggestions. I didn't know about any of these. Some comments: 1) The machine is already running Gentoo and is reasonably up to date. (Within 30 days or so) I didn't want to start from scratch but rather just wanted to remove a couple of drives which don't support system needs, throw a couple of 1TB hard drives and hopefully I'm up and running. 2) As for the three suggestions, and at a glance they all look very capable of supporting my limited needs, I really don't want to learn to maintain a server running different tools. (I.e. - anything not portage) I sure like the look of the FreeNAS pages though. TBH, I have no experience with either FreeNAS or Nexenta, but people I know in other fora swear by them. As to OpenFiler, I've deployed it several times in my office, twice for production. It's quite easy to manage, especially since it's update-able from the webGUI. There *is* a learning curve, though. Exposing OpenFiler to act as a NAS box that's accessible from Windows has a few gotchas, but after reading some wikis, I got it up and running beautifully. Rgds, I wonder if VMWare monitors this list? I just a couple a minutes ago received an email offering me VMware vSphere Storage Appliance at the low, low cost of $10,180. And that's 40% off list price! :-) - Mark
[gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 04:49:56 -0500, Dale wrote: Subject line says it pretty well. ??Is grub2 stable, who uses it and can you post your experience on the switching process? ??Was it difficult? I use it on my netbook, which I admittedly don't boot more than a couple of times a month. It's stable, I can't comment on the switching process as I used GRUB2 from the start with this machine, it seemed a good time to get to grips with it. GRUB2 is neither complicated nor difficult, but it is different. I've only used it on Ubuntu, and maybe it's just Ubuntu's implementation -- but it was both complicated and difficult. ??There are 10X as many files, and to change anything you edit a whole set of configuration files and run a utility that generates _another_ set of configuration files. Compared to vi /boot/grub/menu.lst; reboot, that's complicated. If you try to think in terms of legacy GRUB, you will have more problems than if you approach is as learning a new system. At first glace, grub2 looks like a minature Unix installation whose purpose is to boot a bigger Unix installation. ??It's got it's own init system and it's own set of init scripts. That it's not true. It connects to whatever init system do you have (OpenRC, SysV, systemd, Upstart), I'm curious: what if you don't have one? I use grub-legacy to boot stuff other than Unix. and it has scripts to *generate* the config file. The thing is that GRUB2 needs to understand several filesystems to grab the kernel image from. I understand why GRUB2 is complicated. It's the statement that it's not complicated that I was disagreeing with. It also wants to be able to use a more interesting resolution than 640x480. That I don't understand. It's a bootloader. It needs to allow you to pick one of a handfull of choices and boot that choice. This means that it has to reimplement all the code for any filesystem, That part I understand. and all the code for video handling. I don't really understand the need for that, but I'm somebody who still regularly uses a serial console. [Insert the usual I remember when grumbling here.] [...] However, in the last LPC, it was suggested that replicating filesystem and video code on the kernel and grub was a terrible idea, and some developers have suggested to use a /firstboot partition with a simple filesystem, and populated with a kernel image and an initramfs. That will mean that to boot Linux, we would use Linux. Yea, I've read about that. The mind wobbles. I suppose it's no worse than VAXes having a PDP-11 inside to help it start up. [I'm not really sure that's true, but I heard it from several people who should have known.] -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! A dwarf is passing out at somewhere in Detroit! gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Strange partition on USB stick
On Tuesday 04 Oct 2011 17:18:18 Paul Hartman wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday 04 Oct 2011 06:27:50 Paul Hartman wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 12:18 AM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday 04 Oct 2011 04:39:45 Adam Carter wrote: If the data is important, I'd use ddrescue to create an image of the drive, then run testdisk over that image to see if it can untangle the partition table mess. Both are in portage. Well, that's the thing: I'm not sure that there is a mess. At least not as far as parted is concerned, which can read the partition table properly. I suspect that fdisk (unlike parted) is not capable of reading the device correctly. I forgot to say that when mounted the USB stick shows not partitions (i.e. there is no sdb1, sdb2, etc.) To access the fs I must do something like: pmount /dev/sdb and then all is lists under /media/sdb. It is like a big floppy. I think that's your answer. The partition table looks funny because it isn't one. :) It is somewhat common. I've had some myself that are like that. If there isn't a partition table, then why fdisk sees /dev/sdb1-4 with somewhat strange ID types? It's misinterpreting the data that happens to be there because it makes the assumption that it's a partition table even though it's not. You can create a real partition table on that device and reformat, if you want. (Note that some flash-based devices suffer degraded performance if you repartition or reformat them because they come with specially-aligned FAT tables from the factory) Interesting! I didn't know that. I have repartitioned USB sticks in the past, but did not notice any change in performance - to be honest I didn't measure it. I assume then that if I were to re-partition for any reason I would need to stick to exactly the same start finish shown by parted. Re-formatting it ought to be OK though, as long as the fat16 shown by parted is correct. -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 04:49:56 -0500, Dale wrote: Subject line says it pretty well. ??Is grub2 stable, who uses it and can you post your experience on the switching process? ??Was it difficult? I use it on my netbook, which I admittedly don't boot more than a couple of times a month. It's stable, I can't comment on the switching process as I used GRUB2 from the start with this machine, it seemed a good time to get to grips with it. GRUB2 is neither complicated nor difficult, but it is different. I've only used it on Ubuntu, and maybe it's just Ubuntu's implementation -- but it was both complicated and difficult. ??There are 10X as many files, and to change anything you edit a whole set of configuration files and run a utility that generates _another_ set of configuration files. Compared to vi /boot/grub/menu.lst; reboot, that's complicated. If you try to think in terms of legacy GRUB, you will have more problems than if you approach is as learning a new system. At first glace, grub2 looks like a minature Unix installation whose purpose is to boot a bigger Unix installation. ??It's got it's own init system and it's own set of init scripts. That it's not true. It connects to whatever init system do you have (OpenRC, SysV, systemd, Upstart), I'm curious: what if you don't have one? I use grub-legacy to boot stuff other than Unix. When I said it connects, I mean calls. The same way it calls whatever thingy Window uses. and it has scripts to *generate* the config file. The thing is that GRUB2 needs to understand several filesystems to grab the kernel image from. I understand why GRUB2 is complicated. It's the statement that it's not complicated that I was disagreeing with. It also wants to be able to use a more interesting resolution than 640x480. That I don't understand. It's a bootloader. It needs to allow you to pick one of a handfull of choices and boot that choice. I agree. That's why GRUB2 now is really 1.99, because it's not finished. This means that it has to reimplement all the code for any filesystem, That part I understand. and all the code for video handling. I don't really understand the need for that, but I'm somebody who still regularly uses a serial console. [Insert the usual I remember when grumbling here.] Then stick with LILO or grub-legacy and root=UUID in your kernel command line. [...] However, in the last LPC, it was suggested that replicating filesystem and video code on the kernel and grub was a terrible idea, and some developers have suggested to use a /firstboot partition with a simple filesystem, and populated with a kernel image and an initramfs. That will mean that to boot Linux, we would use Linux. Yea, I've read about that. The mind wobbles. I suppose it's no worse than VAXes having a PDP-11 inside to help it start up. [I'm not really sure that's true, but I heard it from several people who should have known.] I actually think is a good idea. I also think is not for everybody. As I said, if the root=UUID kernel command line works, then nobody has nothing to worry about anything: we would be able to use whatever boot loader we want to, even LILO (if it still works). Me, I want my laptop/desktop computers to have the best resolution available from moment zero, even before loading the kernel, and not a single flicker in my screen until my GNOME 3 is fully loaded. So I'm gonna play with grub2 (or /firstboot, if it materializes) until it's able to do that. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] gnubatch-1.4 make error [OT]
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 4:18 PM, Michael Orlitzky mich...@orlitzky.com wrote: On 10/04/2011 09:00 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: On 10/04/2011 04:14 AM, Marius Vaitiekunas wrote: You can try exporting LIBTOOL='/usr/bin/libtool --tag=CC' before you emerge it. This is usually a Makefile problem, I'd file a bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/ Oh, it isn't in portage. It's a bug in the Makefiles. The first one is in build/lib/Makefile, you can edit the CC line to read, CC = libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile gcc But, all other calls to libtool have the same problem, across multiple Makefiles. I was able to compile it eventually, but I had to edit them all. Yes, it isn't in portage.. I have compiled it by putting --tag=CXX. There were some other errors also. Not so easy job to build packages without portage :)
Re: [gentoo-user] Strange partition on USB stick
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday 04 Oct 2011 17:18:18 Paul Hartman wrote: You can create a real partition table on that device and reformat, if you want. (Note that some flash-based devices suffer degraded performance if you repartition or reformat them because they come with specially-aligned FAT tables from the factory) Interesting! I didn't know that. I have repartitioned USB sticks in the past, but did not notice any change in performance - to be honest I didn't measure it. I assume then that if I were to re-partition for any reason I would need to stick to exactly the same start finish shown by parted. Re-formatting it ought to be OK though, as long as the fat16 shown by parted is correct. I think filesystems other than FAT are aligned well already, assuming your partitions are aligned, but with FAT there are some hoops you must jump through. There is a tool called flashbench that can test your drive (destructively!) and figure out the most optimal block sizes. Here's a great article about it and optimizing USB flash drives in general: https://lwn.net/Articles/428584/ And here is a forum thread about figuring out the FAT alignment: http://www.patriotmemory.com/forums/showthread.php?3696 The SD council makes a tool for MS Windows that optimally formats and securely erases SD cards. Might be interesting to compare the results of its format to a standard fdisk and mkfs.vfat in linux. One thing I'm going to do next time I get a new SD card or flash drive is take a snapshot of the boot sector/partition tables/FAT tables so if I ever want to reformat it to FAT, I can restore the -- presumably optimal -- factory layout.
[gentoo-user] GTK+ HTML5 broadway
Hello, I would like to run my gtk applications over web-browser using Alexander Larsson's gtk+ broadway option http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2010/11/23/gtk3-vs-html5/ http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2010/11/23/gtk3-vs-html5/ 1 Have you got any experience with this on gentoo? 2 How can I specify, if to run my application (e.g. gnome-calculator) over gtk+ 3 or my stable gtk+ version? 3 I can't see any enable-broadway option in gtk+ portage install options. Do I have to compile gtk+ 3 from source? Thank you for any help. Regards, Michal
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On Tue, 4 Oct 2011 08:08:16 -0700 Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: At first glace, grub2 looks like a minature Unix installation whose purpose is to boot a bigger Unix installation. It's got it's own init system and it's own set of init scripts. That it's not true. It connects to whatever init system do you have (OpenRC, SysV, systemd, Upstart), and it has scripts to *generate* the config file. The thing is that GRUB2 needs to understand several filesystems to grab the kernel image from. It also wants to be able to use a more interesting resolution than 640x480. This means that it has to reimplement all the code for any filesystem, and all the code for video handling. Personally, I can't agree with this stance from the grub2 devs. It's a bootloader. It is visible for 3 seconds at boot time. For driving the screen it should just use whatever facilities the firmware one layer below it provides. -- Alan McKinnnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 09:53:07 -0500 Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: Grant Edwards wrote: On 2011-10-04, Neil Bothwickn...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 04:49:56 -0500, Dale wrote: Subject line says it pretty well. Is grub2 stable, who uses it and can you post your experience on the switching process? Was it difficult? I use it on my netbook, which I admittedly don't boot more than a couple of times a month. It's stable, I can't comment on the switching process as I used GRUB2 from the start with this machine, it seemed a good time to get to grips with it. GRUB2 is neither complicated nor difficult, but it is different. I've only used it on Ubuntu, and maybe it's just Ubuntu's implementation -- but it was both complicated and difficult. There are 10X as many files, and to change anything you edit a whole set of configuration files and run a utility that generates _another_ set of configuration files. Compared to vi /boot/grub/menu.lst; reboot, that's complicated. If you try to think in terms of legacy GRUB, you will have more problems than if you approach is as learning a new system. At first glace, grub2 looks like a minature Unix installation whose purpose is to boot a bigger Unix installation. It's got it's own init system and it's own set of init scripts. Could this fix the mess with /usr and /var having to be on / or a initramfs? No that's a completely different issue. But the warped thinking that produces it is exactly the same. -- Alan McKinnnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On 2011-10-04 20:56, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: Replying two mails in one... Dale: Is grub2 stable, who uses it and can you post your experience on the switching process? I use it (1.99-rc1, which is gone from Portage) for booting my UEFI (with GPT partition table) motherboard until I can get coreboot running on it... :-) Experience wise it's, well, not much difference than old grub, with the exception of the change in paradigm: you don't edit the config file directly but instead edit pre-config files in order to get a working solution. For me the default settings work fine (well, I haven't been able to change the resolution); it finds my installed kernels in /boot and put's them in the boot list (the boot screen list) together with a single user version for rescue operations. IMO, it's over-complicated (I agree with Grant) but if the default settings works (with tweaks) for you... Was it difficult? Easy? Somewhere between? Hm... Well, see above... Canek: Me, I want my laptop/desktop computers to have the best resolution available from moment zero, even before loading the kernel, and not a I agree with this sentiment although I think that the video firmware (or motherboard firmware) should handle this... single flicker in my screen until my GNOME 3 is fully loaded. So I'm Yes, agree again, although I think Gnome (2,3+) is a festering piece of #%!... :-) gonna play with grub2 (or /firstboot, if it materializes) until it's Ok, cool. Please share your experiences. I'll try playing (when I can find the time) with coreboot and FILO: http://www.coreboot.org/Payloads#FILO Best regards Peter K
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, 4 Oct 2011 08:08:16 -0700 Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: At first glace, grub2 looks like a minature Unix installation whose purpose is to boot a bigger Unix installation. It's got it's own init system and it's own set of init scripts. That it's not true. It connects to whatever init system do you have (OpenRC, SysV, systemd, Upstart), and it has scripts to *generate* the config file. The thing is that GRUB2 needs to understand several filesystems to grab the kernel image from. It also wants to be able to use a more interesting resolution than 640x480. This means that it has to reimplement all the code for any filesystem, and all the code for video handling. Personally, I can't agree with this stance from the grub2 devs. It's a bootloader. It is visible for 3 seconds at boot time. Some of us care about those 3 seconds, and the flickering of the screen when going from bootloader to init splash to X. If you don't care about those 3 seconds or the flickering, then simply don't use grub2: keep using grub-legacy or lilo. For driving the screen it should just use whatever facilities the firmware one layer below it provides. That's your opinion, and a respectable one. I agree not everybody will (nor should) care about a pretty boot menu. However, many of us do. I'm pretty sure when grub2 hits the 2.0 version it will be optional at ./configure time wether to use or not pretty graphics and a lot of filesystems, or only VGA and ext2, and everything in between. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] GTK+ HTML5 broadway
On Tue, 2011-10-04 at 21:39 +0200, Michal Sroka wrote: Hello, I would like to run my gtk applications over web-browser using Alexander Larsson's gtk+ broadway option http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2010/11/23/gtk3-vs-html5/ http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2010/11/23/gtk3-vs-html5/ 1 Have you got any experience with this on gentast Currently it doesn't work, at least not with libcanberra. There is a but in canberra that causes the app to segfault when using the broadway backend. 2 How can I specify, if to run my application (e.g. gnome-calculator) over gtk+ 3 or my stable gtk+ version? If I understand you correctly, it doesn't work that way. You can't, just magically turn a gtk2 app into a gtk3 app. The APIs are different so the app has to be writen for the gtk3 API. 3 I can't see any enable-broadway option in gtk+ portage install options. Do I have to compile gtk+ 3 from source? You can use EXTRA_ECONF but, again, it doesn't currently work anyway.
[gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: That it's not true. It connects to whatever init system do you have (OpenRC, SysV, systemd, Upstart), I'm curious: what if you don't have one? ??I use grub-legacy to boot stuff other than Unix. When I said it connects, I mean calls. The same way it calls whatever thingy Window uses. Right. And what about non-windows, non-Unix systems that don't have any thingy to call? and it has scripts to *generate* the config file. The thing is that GRUB2 needs to understand several filesystems to grab the kernel image from. I understand why GRUB2 is complicated. ??It's the statement that it's not complicated that I was disagreeing with. It also wants to be able to use a more interesting resolution than 640x480. That I don't understand. It's a bootloader. ??It needs to allow you to pick one of a handfull of choices and boot that choice. I agree. That's why GRUB2 now is really 1.99, because it's not finished. This means that it has to reimplement all the code for any filesystem, That part I understand. and all the code for video handling. I don't really understand the need for that, but I'm somebody who still regularly uses a serial console. ??[Insert the usual I remember when grumbling here.] Then stick with LILO or grub-legacy and root=UUID in your kernel command line. That's the plan for now, but if things go the way they usually do, grub-legacy will get pulled out from under us before too long and we'll be forced to either use grub2 or stop whinging and voluteer to maintain grub-legacy. :) -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! Didn't I buy a 1951 at Packard from you last March gmail.comin Cairo?
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: That it's not true. It connects to whatever init system do you have (OpenRC, SysV, systemd, Upstart), I'm curious: what if you don't have one? ??I use grub-legacy to boot stuff other than Unix. When I said it connects, I mean calls. The same way it calls whatever thingy Window uses. Right. And what about non-windows, non-Unix systems that don't have any thingy to call? Then you don't have an operating system. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
[gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On 2011-10-04, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: No that's a completely different issue. But the warped thinking that produces it is exactly the same. QOTW! -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! I need to discuss at BUY-BACK PROVISIONS gmail.comwith at least six studio SLEAZEBALLS!!
[gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: That it's not true. It connects to whatever init system do you have (OpenRC, SysV, systemd, Upstart), I'm curious: what if you don't have one? ??I use grub-legacy to boot stuff other than Unix. When I said it connects, I mean calls. The same way it calls whatever thingy Window uses. Right. ??And what about non-windows, non-Unix systems that don't have any thingy to call? Then you don't have an operating system. Yes, I do. It just doesn't have any sort of init system that's visible from a bootloader. Right now I use grub-legacy to boot embedded applications written using the eCos RTOS via the el torito state2. I take it that won't be something grub2 is capable of doing? Grub2 can only boot Windows or Unix? -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! ! Up ahead! It's a at DONUT HUT!! gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: That it's not true. It connects to whatever init system do you have (OpenRC, SysV, systemd, Upstart), I'm curious: what if you don't have one? ??I use grub-legacy to boot stuff other than Unix. When I said it connects, I mean calls. The same way it calls whatever thingy Window uses. Right. ??And what about non-windows, non-Unix systems that don't have any thingy to call? Then you don't have an operating system. Yes, I do. Then any boot loader will need to call something to start it. Understand this: any Linux/Unix init system (systemd, SysV, Upstart, OpenRC) is simply a program... that the Linux kernel itself executes. That's the init= command line in the kernel. The bootloader calls an operating system. The init system (if at all) that the OS uses doesn't matter: so if you have an operating system, any bootloader should be able to boot it (bearing things like being able to understand the filesystem etc.) Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
[gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On 10/04/2011 07:53 AM, Dale wrote: Could this fix the mess with /usr and /var having to be on / or a initramfs? I'm using grub2 because it fixes a different problem that has always needed an initramfs--but not the recently lamented separate /var problem. I have an outboard ESATA disk that I can plug into various machines for making backups. If the outboard disk is powered on during boot/reboot, the BIOS will detect the disks in a different order so that old grub tries to load the boot sector from the outboard disk instead of the internal one, and fails. The answer is to let grub2 find the correct disk by checking the UUID of the *partition table* on each disk, and then load the boot sector from only that disk without even knowing the /dev/sd* name or the BIOS disk number. I'm assuming/hoping that the new EFI mechanism will make all of this garbage obsolete fairly soon. Anyone here understand the basics of EFI and how it might relate to these problems?
[gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: Then any boot loader will need to call something to start it. Understand this: any Linux/Unix init system (systemd, SysV, Upstart, OpenRC) is simply a program... that the Linux kernel itself executes. I know. What I don't understand is the statement that grub2 calls (or connects to) the init system. That's the init= command line in the kernel. The bootloader calls an operating system. The init system (if at all) that the OS uses doesn't matter: so if you have an operating system, any bootloader should be able to boot it (bearing things like being able to understand the filesystem etc.) I know how bootloaders like LILO and grub-legacy work. What I don't understand is the statement that grub2 is somehow aware of the booted OS's init system. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! FROZEN ENTREES may at be flung by members of gmail.comopposing SWANSON SECTS ...
[gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On 2011-10-04, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote: The answer is to let grub2 find the correct disk by checking the UUID of the *partition table* on each disk, and then load the boot sector from only that disk without even knowing the /dev/sd* name or the BIOS disk number. I'm assuming/hoping that the new EFI mechanism will make all of this garbage obsolete fairly soon. If Microsoft gets their way, EFI will indeed make all of this obsolete, since it will (for all practical purposes) prohibit booting anything except pre-configured factory-certified installations of MS-Windows. Anyone here understand the basics of EFI and how it might relate to these problems? -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! Didn't I buy a 1951 at Packard from you last March gmail.comin Cairo?
Re: [gentoo-user] Strange partition on USB stick
On Tuesday 04 Oct 2011 20:36:06 Paul Hartman wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday 04 Oct 2011 17:18:18 Paul Hartman wrote: You can create a real partition table on that device and reformat, if you want. (Note that some flash-based devices suffer degraded performance if you repartition or reformat them because they come with specially-aligned FAT tables from the factory) Interesting! I didn't know that. I have repartitioned USB sticks in the past, but did not notice any change in performance - to be honest I didn't measure it. I assume then that if I were to re-partition for any reason I would need to stick to exactly the same start finish shown by parted. Re-formatting it ought to be OK though, as long as the fat16 shown by parted is correct. I think filesystems other than FAT are aligned well already, assuming your partitions are aligned, but with FAT there are some hoops you must jump through. There is a tool called flashbench that can test your drive (destructively!) and figure out the most optimal block sizes. Here's a great article about it and optimizing USB flash drives in general: https://lwn.net/Articles/428584/ And here is a forum thread about figuring out the FAT alignment: http://www.patriotmemory.com/forums/showthread.php?3696 The SD council makes a tool for MS Windows that optimally formats and securely erases SD cards. Might be interesting to compare the results of its format to a standard fdisk and mkfs.vfat in linux. One thing I'm going to do next time I get a new SD card or flash drive is take a snapshot of the boot sector/partition tables/FAT tables so if I ever want to reformat it to FAT, I can restore the -- presumably optimal -- factory layout. Excellent find! I've got some studying to do. Thanks for sharing. :-) -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: Then any boot loader will need to call something to start it. Understand this: any Linux/Unix init system (systemd, SysV, Upstart, OpenRC) is simply a program... that the Linux kernel itself executes. I know. What I don't understand is the statement that grub2 calls (or connects to) the init system. That's the init= command line in the kernel. The bootloader calls an operating system. The init system (if at all) that the OS uses doesn't matter: so if you have an operating system, any bootloader should be able to boot it (bearing things like being able to understand the filesystem etc.) I know how bootloaders like LILO and grub-legacy work. What I don't understand is the statement that grub2 is somehow aware of the booted OS's init system. Oh. The configuration file of GRUB2 is autogenerated, and this means that the init=systemd has to be passed to the kernel line. In that sense, GRUB2 is aware of it. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On Tuesday, 4. October 2011 14:14:24 Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: That it's not true. It connects to whatever init system do you have (OpenRC, SysV, systemd, Upstart), I'm curious: what if you don't have one? ??I use grub-legacy to boot stuff other than Unix. When I said it connects, I mean calls. The same way it calls whatever thingy Window uses. Right. ??And what about non-windows, non-Unix systems that don't have any thingy to call? Then you don't have an operating system. Yes, I do. Then any boot loader will need to call something to start it. Understand this: any Linux/Unix init system (systemd, SysV, Upstart, OpenRC) is simply a program... that the Linux kernel itself executes. That's the init= command line in the kernel. Correct, the *kernel* executes it. Quoted from an earlier mail in this thread: That it's not true. It connects to whatever init system do you have (OpenRC, SysV, systemd, Upstart) The kernel executes the initsystem, the initsystem takes care of the rest. Care to explain, why grub2 needs to connect to (or call) the initsystem? Regards. Best, Michael
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Michael Schreckenbauer grim...@gmx.de wrote: On Tuesday, 4. October 2011 14:14:24 Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: That it's not true. It connects to whatever init system do you have (OpenRC, SysV, systemd, Upstart), I'm curious: what if you don't have one? ??I use grub-legacy to boot stuff other than Unix. When I said it connects, I mean calls. The same way it calls whatever thingy Window uses. Right. ??And what about non-windows, non-Unix systems that don't have any thingy to call? Then you don't have an operating system. Yes, I do. Then any boot loader will need to call something to start it. Understand this: any Linux/Unix init system (systemd, SysV, Upstart, OpenRC) is simply a program... that the Linux kernel itself executes. That's the init= command line in the kernel. Correct, the *kernel* executes it. Quoted from an earlier mail in this thread: That it's not true. It connects to whatever init system do you have (OpenRC, SysV, systemd, Upstart) The kernel executes the initsystem, the initsystem takes care of the rest. Care to explain, why grub2 needs to connect to (or call) the initsystem? It connects via the kernel via init=, as always. Maybe not the best choice of words, but the important thing is that the statement about GRUB2 having its own init system and it's own set of init scripts is false. I noted the connection between the bootloader and the init system (via the init= command line) to emphasize that GRUB2 has not its own init system. Nor init scripts. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On Tuesday, 4. October 2011 14:46:07 Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Michael Schreckenbauer grim...@gmx.de wrote: On Tuesday, 4. October 2011 14:14:24 Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: That it's not true. It connects to whatever init system do you have (OpenRC, SysV, systemd, Upstart), I'm curious: what if you don't have one? ??I use grub-legacy to boot stuff other than Unix. When I said it connects, I mean calls. The same way it calls whatever thingy Window uses. Right. ??And what about non-windows, non-Unix systems that don't have any thingy to call? Then you don't have an operating system. Yes, I do. Then any boot loader will need to call something to start it. Understand this: any Linux/Unix init system (systemd, SysV, Upstart, OpenRC) is simply a program... that the Linux kernel itself executes. That's the init= command line in the kernel. Correct, the *kernel* executes it. Quoted from an earlier mail in this thread: That it's not true. It connects to whatever init system do you have (OpenRC, SysV, systemd, Upstart) The kernel executes the initsystem, the initsystem takes care of the rest. Care to explain, why grub2 needs to connect to (or call) the initsystem? It connects via the kernel via init=, as always. Maybe not the best choice of words, but the important thing is that the statement about GRUB2 having its own init system and it's own set of init scripts is false. I noted the connection between the bootloader and the init system (via the init= command line) to emphasize that GRUB2 has not its own init system. Nor init scripts. Ah, so no connection or call at all :) Thanks for clarifying Regards. Best, Michael
[gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: Then any boot loader will need to call something to start it. Understand this: any Linux/Unix init system (systemd, SysV, Upstart, OpenRC) is simply a program... that the Linux kernel itself executes. I know. ??What I don't understand is the statement that grub2 calls (or connects to) the init system. That's the init= command line in the kernel. The bootloader calls an operating system. The init system (if at all) that the OS uses doesn't matter: so if you have an operating system, any bootloader should be able to boot it (bearing things like being able to understand the filesystem etc.) I know how bootloaders like LILO and grub-legacy work. ??What I don't understand is the statement that grub2 is somehow aware of the booted OS's init system. Oh. The configuration file of GRUB2 is autogenerated, and this means that the init=systemd has to be passed to the kernel line. In that sense, GRUB2 is aware of it. So to use grub2 you have to replace the normal init program that's started by the kernle as PID#1 with something else? -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! Where does it go when at you flush? gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-04, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: Then any boot loader will need to call something to start it. Understand this: any Linux/Unix init system (systemd, SysV, Upstart, OpenRC) is simply a program... that the Linux kernel itself executes. I know. ??What I don't understand is the statement that grub2 calls (or connects to) the init system. That's the init= command line in the kernel. The bootloader calls an operating system. The init system (if at all) that the OS uses doesn't matter: so if you have an operating system, any bootloader should be able to boot it (bearing things like being able to understand the filesystem etc.) I know how bootloaders like LILO and grub-legacy work. ??What I don't understand is the statement that grub2 is somehow aware of the booted OS's init system. Oh. The configuration file of GRUB2 is autogenerated, and this means that the init=systemd has to be passed to the kernel line. In that sense, GRUB2 is aware of it. So to use grub2 you have to replace the normal init program that's started by the kernle as PID#1 with something else? No. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
On Tue, 4 Oct 2011 14:35:42 + (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote: I've only used it on Ubuntu, and maybe it's just Ubuntu's implementation -- but it was both complicated and difficult. There are 10X as many files, and to change anything you edit a whole set of configuration files and run a utility that generates _another_ set of configuration files. That's not strictly true. GRUB2 uses only one config file when booting, grub.cfg, which is analogous to menu.lst. If you want you can edit this directly. The rest of the files do not live on /boot and are used to automatically generate grub.cfg if you want them too. This makes life easy for distro installer writers as they don't need to worry about scanning the hard disk to see what is installed and creating suitable menu entries, they just run grub-install. That's why distros now tend to play nicely with one another, instead of only setting up dual booting for themselves and Windows. The reason there are so many more files is because GRUB2 uses modules to be able to boot from many more devices, such as RAID or LVM. They don't all end up in /boot. So it is bigger and more capable/automatable, but you can use it just like legacy GRUB if you really want to. For most distros, GRUB2 makes a lot of sense, but many of its capabilities have little relevance to Gentoo. -- Neil Bothwick Criminal Lawyer is a redundancy. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Michael Schreckenbauergrim...@gmx.de wrote: Correct, the *kernel* executes it. Quoted from an earlier mail in this thread: That it's not true. It connects to whatever init system do you have (OpenRC, SysV, systemd, Upstart) The kernel executes the initsystem, the initsystem takes care of the rest. Care to explain, why grub2 needs to connect to (or call) the initsystem? It connects via the kernel via init=, as always. Maybe not the best choice of words, but the important thing is that the statement about GRUB2 having its own init system and it's own set of init scripts is false. I noted the connection between the bootloader and the init system (via the init= command line) to emphasize that GRUB2 has not its own init system. Nor init scripts. Regards. I don't have that on mine. title Gentoo kernel (hd0,0)/bzImage-3.0.4-1 root=/dev/sda3 So I guess my grub is ignorant. lol Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is grub2 stable and who uses it?
El 04/10/2011 17:09, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com escribió: Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Michael Schreckenbauergrim...@gmx.de wrote: Correct, the *kernel* executes it. Quoted from an earlier mail in this thread: That it's not true. It connects to whatever init system do you have (OpenRC, SysV, systemd, Upstart) The kernel executes the initsystem, the initsystem takes care of the rest. Care to explain, why grub2 needs to connect to (or call) the initsystem? It connects via the kernel via init=, as always. Maybe not the best choice of words, but the important thing is that the statement about GRUB2 having its own init system and it's own set of init scripts is false. I noted the connection between the bootloader and the init system (via the init= command line) to emphasize that GRUB2 has not its own init system. Nor init scripts. Regards. I don't have that on mine. title Gentoo kernel (hd0,0)/bzImage-3.0.4-1 root=/dev/sda3 So I guess my grub is ignorant. lol If there is no init= command line argument, /sbin/init is the default. It has been this way from the very beginning; systemd uses /sbin/systemd to be able to be installed in parallel with SysV. Regards.
[gentoo-user] Help!
Hi, everybody! I installed gentoo according to Gentoo Handbook , then I login gentoo . But I found that I couldn't use wpa_supplicant for scanning netcard device failed . I think that means the netcard module not loaded, so I type lsmod and the output have only one line-Modules , according to the Handbook I have written many modules to the file /etc/modules.autoload.d/kernel2.6 though I don't know those modules respond for what. Now the question is that I don't know whether gentoo loaded those modules that in file kernel2.6 which I created. Handbook said that modules in /etc/modules.autoload.d/kernel2.6 will be loaded automatically, but why there is only one line in output when I use command lsmod? I’m going to be crazy! When I use gentoo I really realize that the knowlege needed is far more than I just have, I have to acknowledge that I'm a freshman.So please help me.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Hard drives not detected in repeatable order.
On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 05:59:57PM +0200, Florian Philipp wrote You cannot use labels with the root= parameters. That was provided as some kind of hack a few years ago but has been removed since. You either need to use an initramfs for labels or resort to UUIDs. See http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=b5af921ec02333e943efb59aca4f56b78fc0e100 Thanks. I had asked earlier in the thread if there are situations where I can use one, but not the other. Given your answer, I'll go with UUID for future installs. That answers the question for fstab. BTW, I did some Google research and found that LILO can boot with UUID. See... https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Persistent_block_device_naming The important thing to note is... - do *NOT* use root configuration option; e.g. root=blah_blah_blah - instead, specify root in the append line; e.g... append = video=640x480 root=blah_blah_blah -- Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org
