Re: [gentoo-user] less file.html
On 13 May 2012, at 06:57, Paul Colquhoun wrote: … You can set LESSIGNORE='*.htm*'. This environment variable is used by the lesspipe command, which is invoked by less and filters the input file before giving it to less itself. … I have here now: $ env | grep -i less PAGER=/usr/bin/less LESS=-R -M --shift 5 LESSOPEN=|lesspipe %s LESSIGNORE=*.htm* $ … I would interpret the don't do anything fancy caveat on LESSIGNORE to mean that wildcards may not work. Some experimenting on my system shows me that this version seems to do what you want: LESSIGNORE=htm html I don't normally have LESSOPEN set, so I havn't seen this situation before. Blimey! Thank you! That's wonderful! :D Stroller.
Re: [gentoo-user] I want to play movies without hangs [SOLVED, sort of]
On Sat, 12 May 2012 11:41:33 -0400 Norman Invasion invasivenor...@gmail.com wrote: On 12 May 2012 11:05, Alex Schuster wo...@wonkology.org wrote: Norman Invasion writes: On 11 May 2012 21:40, Alex Schuster wo...@wonkology.org wrote: Finally, I found something. It's Dolphin! [...] Apologies: I haven't followed this thread from the beginning, Which was quite long ago :) but do you have any advanced power management features enabled (especially hard drive related)? My drives spin down after 30 minutes of idle time, but this never happens for the system drive. The CPU is set to throttle down from 3600 MHz to 1400 MHz with the ondemand governor, but changing to performance governor makes no change. When I pull the power cord on my lap-top, it goes into all kinds of nutty power-saving and mplayer has long pauses while the drive spins back up. Yeah, but those pauses are much longer than the small interruptions that are a fraction of a second mostly, and do not happen 15 times per minute. And it only happens when MPlayer is started from Dolphin. Well, mainly, when there is much system load, I also had small interruptions when I run mplayer from the command line, but they are much much less frequent, and do not happen under normal circumstances, like when doing emerges while playing videos. I'm just recalling that I get stuttering audio in freebsd, which is caused by what-I-don't-know, but only happens when the CPU load is low. Firing up burncpu or doing useless recompiles ameliorates it. I was getting stuttering audio from a sizeable % of my .avi files served from a FreeBSD NAS. The likely cause became obvious when I noticed that it was only on .avi files - all real containers were fine[1]. mencoder -ovc copy -oac copy -of avi -o new_file old_file fixed it permanently. I'm won't go so far as to say this might apply to your issue, but sometimes the simplest things are the actual causes :-) [1] .avi files are notorious for this shit. It's what happens when you are Microsoft and you release any old crappy format without consulting the other experts out there (who will always outnumber you) -- Alan McKinnnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] fsck separate /usr
Canek Peláez Valdés writes: On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 7:43 PM, Alex Schuster wo...@wonkology.org wrote: I'm using the new udev with a separate /usr partition. How do you create your initramfs? The new udev (= 182, I believe) requires the use of an initramfs if you have a separated /usr. I'm using gekernel. It was encrypted, and it seems there is no solution yet for this. dracut has two modules, crypt and crypt-gpg, that maybe do what you are needing. Maybe, I did not (yet?) try dracut. so I moved it over to an unencrypted volume - no problem, /usr is one partition where encryption does not make that much sense anyway. Works, but after an unclean shutdown (reading files in /proc/pid/ was not a good idea) /usr wants to be fsck'ed. But it is already mounted at that stage. That's the reason you need an initramfs. The boot process just continues, but I wonder what one should do to make the fsck run. Except for using a live cd. With an initramfs. Not with mine :) Maybe I'll give dracut a try. It seems to be a nice utility, and I was about to try it, but then I read about Dale's problems and decided to stay with genkernel for a while. Maybe I should just enlarge my root partition and move /usr there, at least this would avoid all the trouble. But I'm used to many separate partitions, and like it that way. You can have every directory under / on a different partition (even /etc), if you use an initramfs. Which I do, every partition (including /) is on LVM, and except for /usr, /usr/src and portage stuff, all is encrypted. But maybe it's time to drop some partitions, and maybe include at least /usr and /tmp in the root partition. /usr would be encrypted again then, but the overhead seems to be small, so why not. Wonko
Re: [gentoo-user] What to use for Flash?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10.05.2012 13:47, Dale wrote: Hi, There was a thread a while back that talked about flash. Well, I let mine upgrade and now it crashes, badly. I unmerged adobe-flash then tried lightspark and gnash. Neither of those work on sites I tried, which is sites I go to a good bit. Since Adobe is dropping Linux flash, that's what I read anyway, what is everyone using for flash now? Things I tried so far: www-plugins/adobe-flash-10.3.183.18 www-plugins/adobe-flash-11.2.202.233 www-plugins/adobe-flash-11.2.202.235 gnash-0.8.10-r2 lightspark-0.5.6 The version that worked last is: www-plugins/adobe-flash-11.1.102.55 It's no longer in the tree of course. sighs Ideas? Dale P. S. I'm working on a overlay. Any guesses on how well this is working out. lol You should be able to install an old version via a custom overlay. The ebuild should be here: http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/www-plugins/adobe-flash/adobe-flash-11.1.102.55.ebuild?hideattic=0view=log I would warn you to use it with caution since flash has a long history of vulnerabilities and normally it should be one of the last packages to keep a version from the stoneage (for flash it translates to older that 2-26 weeks, normally). -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPr6WeAAoJEJwwOFaNFkYce4sIAMDsHdMGOPL7rgchZDLLlrQ8 gTir67fawcPWZAwSc+0gN4wBBximmXYqdWyoZhGt8FJT70TDxy8hKR4leojkAS6k MtA87A7zCAW3AiW/sP+WeLt6wpjf+4lD3+iFwAclLGfvSg+4llNV0n08QaD3dCRL DSbQF1nUHw7uWsRa+YWFGbU8/v5TO5SsF+LGV7lx9henf3hWOKfpAGGvGqWIUsVm 1N6sj+09bLYdl9pfjYM+0OEiVUTih/eR9k2blhk3Gi5o4+p2d4DzRziV5n+DwD+r 1r0gwK//gf+EF5CnXvcjSztgw3pE2QWPTPJvmVPdf27jWdX2YIWo3FeWckl5aOI= =GSok -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-user] fsck separate /usr
Alex Schuster wrote: Not with mine :) Maybe I'll give dracut a try. It seems to be a nice utility, and I was about to try it, but then I read about Dale's problems and decided to stay with genkernel for a while. Wonko I'm not sure but I think the reason I was having so much trouble was that I didn't remove the failed try at a init thingy in the kernel itself. I tried that first but it didn't work. When I started trying to use dracut, I didn't even think to disable or remove the in kernel one. I have updated my kernel several times since and I have not had a single issue. So, if you decide to use dracut, make sure you clean out the old cruft first. That said, I didn't know dracut could do the file system checks before mounting and doing the switch_root thing. I see it include the programs but never seen it actually do the check. Makes me wonder. Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words! Miss the compile output? Hint: EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS=--quiet-build=n
Re: [gentoo-user] Are those green drives any good?
Hello, On Sat, 12 May 2012, Mick wrote: Is this 193 Load_Cycle_Count an issue only on the green drives? AFAIK it was a firmware bug on some models. I have a very old Compaq laptop here that shows: # smartctl -A /dev/sda | egrep Power_On|Load_Cycle 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0012 055 055 000Old_age Always - 19830 193 Load_Cycle_Count0x0012 001 001 000Old_age Always - 1739734 Laptop drives are _built_ for unloading frequently to protect the drive from bumps and also to save power. Desktop drives are _not_ built for that. So, don't worry. HTH, -dnh -- Death: I am last minute stuff!
Re: [gentoo-user] Are those green drives any good?
Hello, On Sat, 12 May 2012, Frank Steinmetzger wrote: On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:20:57PM -0400, Norman Invasion wrote: On 9 May 2012 04:47, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, As some know, I'm planning to buy me a LARGE hard drive to put all my videos on, eventually. The prices are coming down now. I keep seeing these green drives that are made by just about every company nowadays. When comparing them to a non green drive, do they hold up as good? Are they as dependable as a plain drive? I guess they are more efficient and I get that but do they break quicker, more often or no difference? I have noticed that they tend to spin slower and are cheaper. That much I have figured out. Other than that, I can't see any other difference. Data speeds seem to be about the same. They have an ugly tendency to nod off at 6 second intervals. This runs up 193 Load_Cycle_Count unacceptably: as many as a few hundred thousand in a year a million cycles is getting close to the lifetime limit on most hard drives. I end up running some iteration of # hdparm -B 255 /dev/sda every boot. I bought my current internal laptop disk for Christmas 2008. It's a Samsung HM500JI (with 500 GB). Early on I noticed that, according to smartctl, its Load_Cycle_Count is increasing every 2 or 3 seconds. I even asked Samsung about this, but they either couldn't give any clue or didn't want to, b/c the Serial Number is from Turkey, so not from the European market. Anyhoo... I just checked the values: Power on hours:11500 Start/stop count: 2797 Power cycle count: 2197 But the load cycle count is at almost 12.3 million(!). That just can't be right. I stopped believing that number a good while ago. As I said in another mail: laptop drives are built for frequent unloading. Your number does seem a bit high though, that's about 1000 load cycles per hour... OTOH, I just became a bit nervous when looking at smartctl's output... Reallocated sectors:7 (threshold 10) Calibration retry count: 1631 Load retry count:1631 That's not healty. c.f. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.M.A.R.T. HTH, -dnh -- To resist the influence of others, knowledge of one's self is most important. -- Teal'C, Stargate SG-1, 9x14 - Stronghold
Re: [gentoo-user] What to use for Flash?
Hinnerk van Bruinehsen wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10.05.2012 13:47, Dale wrote: Hi, There was a thread a while back that talked about flash. Well, I let mine upgrade and now it crashes, badly. I unmerged adobe-flash then tried lightspark and gnash. Neither of those work on sites I tried, which is sites I go to a good bit. Since Adobe is dropping Linux flash, that's what I read anyway, what is everyone using for flash now? Things I tried so far: www-plugins/adobe-flash-10.3.183.18 www-plugins/adobe-flash-11.2.202.233 www-plugins/adobe-flash-11.2.202.235 gnash-0.8.10-r2 lightspark-0.5.6 The version that worked last is: www-plugins/adobe-flash-11.1.102.55 It's no longer in the tree of course. sighs Ideas? Dale P. S. I'm working on a overlay. Any guesses on how well this is working out. lol You should be able to install an old version via a custom overlay. The ebuild should be here: http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/www-plugins/adobe-flash/adobe-flash-11.1.102.55.ebuild?hideattic=0view=log I would warn you to use it with caution since flash has a long history of vulnerabilities and normally it should be one of the last packages to keep a version from the stoneage (for flash it translates to older that 2-26 weeks, normally). -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPr6WeAAoJEJwwOFaNFkYce4sIAMDsHdMGOPL7rgchZDLLlrQ8 gTir67fawcPWZAwSc+0gN4wBBximmXYqdWyoZhGt8FJT70TDxy8hKR4leojkAS6k MtA87A7zCAW3AiW/sP+WeLt6wpjf+4lD3+iFwAclLGfvSg+4llNV0n08QaD3dCRL DSbQF1nUHw7uWsRa+YWFGbU8/v5TO5SsF+LGV7lx9henf3hWOKfpAGGvGqWIUsVm 1N6sj+09bLYdl9pfjYM+0OEiVUTih/eR9k2blhk3Gi5o4+p2d4DzRziV5n+DwD+r 1r0gwK//gf+EF5CnXvcjSztgw3pE2QWPTPJvmVPdf27jWdX2YIWo3FeWckl5aOI= =GSok -END PGP SIGNATURE- I tried to do the overlay thing. It hated me so it kept spitting out errors about one thing or the other. I used the rm command to correct the overlay issue. ;-) I did get the current version to work tho. It was just my old eyes missing a USE flag change. Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words! Miss the compile output? Hint: EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS=--quiet-build=n
Re: [gentoo-user] fsck separate /usr
120513 Alex Schuster wrote: I'm using the new udev with a separate /usr partition ... after an unclean shutdown -- reading files in /proc/pid/ was not a good idea -- /usr wants to be fsck'ed. But it is already mounted at that stage. Maybe I should just enlarge my root partition and move /usr there Did you see my description of how I did that ? -- see list 120506 . The actual process took me 2 h 30 m , but preparations spread out longer. Everything else is working just as before, but I don't have to bother ever about Initramfs (whatever that is : smile), can update Udev without any worries when it becomes stable. HTH -- ,, SUPPORT ___//___, Philip Webb ELECTRIC /] [] [] [] [] []| Cities Centre, University of Toronto TRANSIT`-O--O---' purslowatchassdotutorontodotca
Re: [gentoo-user] fsck separate /usr
Philip Webb writes:
120513 Alex Schuster wrote:
I'm using the new udev with a separate /usr partition ...
after an unclean shutdown
-- reading files in /proc/pid/ was not a good idea --
/usr wants to be fsck'ed. But it is already mounted at that stage.
Maybe I should just enlarge my root partition and move /usr there
Did you see my description of how I did that ? -- see list 120506 .
The actual process took me 2 h 30 m , but preparations spread out
longer. Everything else is working just as before,
but I don't have to bother ever about Initramfs (whatever that is :
smile), can update Udev without any worries when it becomes stable.
HTH
I saw that, but here it will be much easier. All is on LVM here, so this should
do it:
# enlarge root partition
lvresize -L +17G /dev/weird/root
cryptsetup resize root
resize2fs /dev/mapper/root
# make sure /usr is not being written to. For other partitions, I'd
# create an LVM snapshot
mount -o remount,ro /usr
# mount root to another place, without mounts like /usr showing up there
mkdir /tmp/bindroot
mount -o bind / /tmp/bindroot
# copy data over
rsync -ax /usr /tmp/bindroot/
# remove /usr stuff from fstab and dmcrypt
sed /\/dev\/weird\/usr/ d /etc/fstab
sed -i /^target=usr2$/{N;N:N:d} /etc/conf.d/dmcrypt
# done!
reboot
No need for downtime except for the reboot, I guess I cannot unmount /usr
otherwise.
Wonko
[gentoo-user] libicui18n.so.49 troubles
Hi, I had to mask icu-49 because some packages failed to compile during a world update. I reverted back to 4.8, but now certain applications complain about .49 missing. revdep-rebuild isn't able to detect breakages and neither revdep-rebuild -L libicui18n.so.49 solved the problem. How do I solve this? -- Nilesh Govindarajan http://nileshgr.com
Re: [gentoo-user] What to use for Flash?
On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 08:32:38PM +0100, Mick wrote: On Saturday 12 May 2012 17:42:34 ny6...@gmail.com wrote: I hope not. HTML5 runs like crap here. I think it may need a faster dl speed than I've got. If everything does migrate I might have to upgrade my internet speed. Have you tried increasing the cache on your video player that html5 uses? -- Regards, Mick I don't have a video player on my system. I don't know what it's using, then. I wonder if I can increase the cache someway Terry pgp5MDZaK0Qu9.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] libicui18n.so.49 troubles
On Sun, 13 May 2012 20:58:51 +0530, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote: I had to mask icu-49 because some packages failed to compile during a world update. Same here, but the problems seem fixed now and I unmasked 49-r1 a week or so ago. -- Neil Bothwick Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] fsck separate /usr
On Sun, 13 May 2012 17:11:55 +0200, Alex Schuster wrote: # copy data over rsync -ax /usr /tmp/bindroot/ It would be wise to remount /usr read-only before doing this. No need for downtime except for the reboot, I guess I cannot unmount /usr otherwise. You could drop to single user mode to unmount /usr, but as that involves stopping and restarting just about every service, it is just as convenient to reboot... unless you are aiming for some sort of uptime record. -- Neil Bothwick In possession of a mind not merely twisted, but actually sprained. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] libicui18n.so.49 troubles
Am Sonntag, 13. Mai 2012, 20:58:51 schrieb Nilesh Govindrajan: Hi, I had to mask icu-49 because some packages failed to compile during a world update. I reverted back to 4.8, but now certain applications complain about .49 missing. revdep-rebuild isn't able to detect breakages and neither revdep-rebuild -L libicui18n.so.49 solved the problem. How do I solve this? just updated this noon, run revdep-rebuilt and everything is fine. -- #163933
Re: [gentoo-user] libicui18n.so.49 troubles
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 05/13/2012 06:05 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote: On Sun, 13 May 2012 20:58:51 +0530, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote: I had to mask icu-49 because some packages failed to compile during a world update. Same here, but the problems seem fixed now and I unmasked 49-r1 a week or so ago. revdep-rebuild handles all packages except qt-core which you need to rebuild yourself. If you found a package that does not build with the new icu after running revdep-rebuild emerge -1 qt-core file a bug report. - -- Regards, Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJPr+7VAAoJEPqDWhW0r/LCU40QAKDNvRiPawyKD/TyTHjF2Wsv PWYtwsDRE2+ryNrR8sk6kWvRF5enOZBNNYKLSplMGhPd0/Mkl4td9wfrzwsvwgBT et0IFgLI08eOdPtRGXVb4KHImvU707+5JWKrKbTe6F+b43B5xkrat+CZqDrMIj0P 4A0imMspS2bZC30QVW5UCPlVtg/E4Ah+1yCS/9Q2pdaB3hDkjXKpqPpWp0XA1ujR kKCibQi+IIFCpm81Z0OAmLptUdaOjpmJbZB/rzYT2rHqG4SzmpmCA8dSeM/Ywmkq zXvqpDOLW87dFYXjE9k1Vn6CUzSHUZOYVtvJkbmvUl/rLp24rEq8L7MVACyHjLBQ UHWynw1INOLGLEOVEHFGKFxev4x1YvNQJnOtEj/4BncSeMMcK+Kceu4r5jV6Ehx2 MI4OLixwrx7aq7/aJUMBKdfBS9u2rseO1l8Epy6gFzca+eSzIjU82ikOcDOowVuT KI/t3+Q/N+9TPy+V11Exm8+ApdZ8rFrmc5OKktJHJe9q8SNrKNLadHrxHO3T98Ro vZxt4oMPk9YV8MdJPAgODsQeRq4Tpr3yCg/cK/oIntvZqEFMOS0JVF3OqJ0GP0yz np8WSxORBo+XA9G/9XfyjGyX943IbHlv/O0C7T4oPqTBEYqGaeZRIbOY56dYhAD9 Ecn1lXWFjUpS/hPZe2eW =YQCQ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-user] fsck separate /usr
Neil Bothwick writes: On Sun, 13 May 2012 17:11:55 +0200, Alex Schuster wrote: # copy data over rsync -ax /usr /tmp/bindroot/ It would be wise to remount /usr read-only before doing this. Yes, as written a few lines above what you quoted :) No need for downtime except for the reboot, I guess I cannot unmount /usr otherwise. You could drop to single user mode to unmount /usr, but as that involves stopping and restarting just about every service, it is just as convenient to reboot... Probably much much more convenient. I even guess the downtime of any service would actually be less. unless you are aiming for some sort of uptime record. The record is about 420 days, and it will last for a while. So rebooting every few weeks is okay :) But it's cool that I _could_ do this without a reboot. Wonko
Re: [gentoo-user] fsck separate /usr
On Sun, 13 May 2012 19:27:07 +0200, Alex Schuster wrote: It would be wise to remount /usr read-only before doing this. Yes, as written a few lines above what you quoted :) :P -- Neil Bothwick Do hungry crows have ravenous appetites? signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] I want to play movies without hangs [SOLVED, sort of]
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 4:56 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: [1] .avi files are notorious for this shit. It's what happens when you are Microsoft and you release any old crappy format without consulting the other experts out there (who will always outnumber you) Which better container formats were available at the time AVI was released (1992)? The only contemporary container format I'm aware of is RIFF, which came out in 1988. MPEG-1 didn't come out until 1993, which was the same year the Ogg project started. Real's stuff didn't come out until 1995. Matroska was announced a decade later, in 2005. Matroska, MP4 and even OGG are nicer container formats, sure, but they weren't around yet. And even with any of them, it's perfectly possible to accidentally get A/V desync or stuttering if you don't mux your streams properly. (This post draws heavily on Wikipedia for date information, and dates may be considered only as accurate as Wikipedia...) -- :wq
[gentoo-user] [OT] Curious hdparm results
I have a usb3 docking station which is showing some behavior I don't understand: #hdparm -t /dev/sdc /dev/sdc: Timing buffered disk reads: 266 MB in 3.00 seconds = 88.59 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 268 MB in 3.01 seconds = 89.05 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 266 MB in 3.01 seconds = 88.43 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 266 MB in 3.02 seconds = 88.10 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 306 MB in 3.01 seconds = 101.72 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 266 MB in 3.00 seconds = 88.59 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 306 MB in 3.00 seconds = 101.84 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 306 MB in 3.00 seconds = 101.86 MB/sec That's all the same disk, repeating hdparm as fast as I could. The disk was not even mounted at the time, and no other disks were active. Two very different but reproducible numbers, changing values at random times. The only thing I can think of is that the disk may be doing a SMART self-test, but for some reason the USB connection prevents me from accessing the data so I can't test my theory. Any other ideas?
Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Curious hdparm results
Am Sonntag, 13. Mai 2012, 13:28:45 schrieb walt: I have a usb3 docking station which is showing some behavior I don't understand: #hdparm -t /dev/sdc /dev/sdc: Timing buffered disk reads: 266 MB in 3.00 seconds = 88.59 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 268 MB in 3.01 seconds = 89.05 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 266 MB in 3.01 seconds = 88.43 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 266 MB in 3.02 seconds = 88.10 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 306 MB in 3.01 seconds = 101.72 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 266 MB in 3.00 seconds = 88.59 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 306 MB in 3.00 seconds = 101.84 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 306 MB in 3.00 seconds = 101.86 MB/sec That's all the same disk, repeating hdparm as fast as I could. The disk was not even mounted at the time, and no other disks were active. Two very different but reproducible numbers, changing values at random times. The only thing I can think of is that the disk may be doing a SMART self-test, but for some reason the USB connection prevents me from accessing the data so I can't test my theory. Any other ideas? it is usb... don't loose any sweat about it. The numbers are fine and variation is to be expected. -- #163933
Re: [gentoo-user] I want to play movies without hangs [SOLVED, sort of]
On Sun, 13 May 2012 14:12:04 -0400 Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 4:56 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: [1] .avi files are notorious for this shit. It's what happens when you are Microsoft and you release any old crappy format without consulting the other experts out there (who will always outnumber you) Which better container formats were available at the time AVI was released (1992)? The only contemporary container format I'm aware of is RIFF, which came out in 1988. MPEG-1 didn't come out until 1993, which was the same year the Ogg project started. Real's stuff didn't come out until 1995. Matroska was announced a decade later, in 2005. Matroska, MP4 and even OGG are nicer container formats, sure, but they weren't around yet. And even with any of them, it's perfectly possible to accidentally get A/V desync or stuttering if you don't mux your streams properly. (This post draws heavily on Wikipedia for date information, and dates may be considered only as accurate as Wikipedia...) You missed the essence of my post entirely. -- Alan McKinnnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Curious hdparm results
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 4:28 PM, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote: I have a usb3 docking station which is showing some behavior I don't understand: #hdparm -t /dev/sdc /dev/sdc: Timing buffered disk reads: 266 MB in 3.00 seconds = 88.59 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 268 MB in 3.01 seconds = 89.05 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 266 MB in 3.01 seconds = 88.43 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 266 MB in 3.02 seconds = 88.10 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 306 MB in 3.01 seconds = 101.72 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 266 MB in 3.00 seconds = 88.59 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 306 MB in 3.00 seconds = 101.84 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 306 MB in 3.00 seconds = 101.86 MB/sec That's all the same disk, repeating hdparm as fast as I could. The disk was not even mounted at the time, and no other disks were active. Two very different but reproducible numbers, changing values at random times. The only thing I can think of is that the disk may be doing a SMART self-test, but for some reason the USB connection prevents me from accessing the data so I can't test my theory. Any other ideas? bonnie++? My first guess is that something on the same USB bus might be periodically active, changing how the kernel manages talking to USB devices. Try ensuring no other USB devices are connected (or active), and running something like hdparm -t /dev/sdc; hdparm -t /dev/sdc; hdparm -t /dev/sdc; hdparm -t /dev/sdc; hdparm -t /dev/sdc; hdparm -t /dev/sdc ...letting the shell automate it for you. My second guess would be something relating to the kernel's page cache...but I'm unsure if a filesystem needs to be mounted first. My third guess would be some internal buffering behavior inside the USB disk, and hdparm's behavior happens to straddle an edge condition. -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-user] I want to play movies without hangs [SOLVED, sort of]
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, 13 May 2012 14:12:04 -0400 Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 4:56 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: [1] .avi files are notorious for this shit. It's what happens when you are Microsoft and you release any old crappy format without consulting the other experts out there (who will always outnumber you) Which better container formats were available at the time AVI was released (1992)? The only contemporary container format I'm aware of is RIFF, which came out in 1988. MPEG-1 didn't come out until 1993, which was the same year the Ogg project started. Real's stuff didn't come out until 1995. Matroska was announced a decade later, in 2005. Matroska, MP4 and even OGG are nicer container formats, sure, but they weren't around yet. And even with any of them, it's perfectly possible to accidentally get A/V desync or stuttering if you don't mux your streams properly. (This post draws heavily on Wikipedia for date information, and dates may be considered only as accurate as Wikipedia...) You missed the essence of my post entirely. Anti-Microsoft snark? I thought I was calling you on it. -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-user] I want to play movies without hangs [SOLVED, sort of]
On Sun, 13 May 2012 17:01:07 -0400 Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, 13 May 2012 14:12:04 -0400 Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 4:56 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: [1] .avi files are notorious for this shit. It's what happens when you are Microsoft and you release any old crappy format without consulting the other experts out there (who will always outnumber you) Which better container formats were available at the time AVI was released (1992)? The only contemporary container format I'm aware of is RIFF, which came out in 1988. MPEG-1 didn't come out until 1993, which was the same year the Ogg project started. Real's stuff didn't come out until 1995. Matroska was announced a decade later, in 2005. Matroska, MP4 and even OGG are nicer container formats, sure, but they weren't around yet. And even with any of them, it's perfectly possible to accidentally get A/V desync or stuttering if you don't mux your streams properly. (This post draws heavily on Wikipedia for date information, and dates may be considered only as accurate as Wikipedia...) You missed the essence of my post entirely. Anti-Microsoft snark? I thought I was calling you on it. I said .avi is a crappy format, and it is, that much is obvious to anyone who understands the simple basics of what a container should do. It would have been obvious to the .avi developers then. And yet it somehow made it's way to market and got used extensively You asked what alternatives were available. That is not a question I asked. It matters nothing that the public used .avi so much (they had precious little in the way of choice). So whether they had alternatives or not is irrelevant. The entire gist of my post was about how .avi as it stands is crappy and should never have been released by an entity with the engineering clout of Microsoft as they don't have the excuse of being one dude in Mom's basement who didn't know better. They really should have known better. -- Alan McKinnnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] I want to play movies without hangs [SOLVED, sort of]
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, 13 May 2012 17:01:07 -0400 Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, 13 May 2012 14:12:04 -0400 Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 4:56 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: [1] .avi files are notorious for this shit. It's what happens when you are Microsoft and you release any old crappy format without consulting the other experts out there (who will always outnumber you) Which better container formats were available at the time AVI was released (1992)? The only contemporary container format I'm aware of is RIFF, which came out in 1988. MPEG-1 didn't come out until 1993, which was the same year the Ogg project started. Real's stuff didn't come out until 1995. Matroska was announced a decade later, in 2005. Matroska, MP4 and even OGG are nicer container formats, sure, but they weren't around yet. And even with any of them, it's perfectly possible to accidentally get A/V desync or stuttering if you don't mux your streams properly. (This post draws heavily on Wikipedia for date information, and dates may be considered only as accurate as Wikipedia...) You missed the essence of my post entirely. Anti-Microsoft snark? I thought I was calling you on it. I said .avi is a crappy format, and it is, that much is obvious to anyone who understands the simple basics of what a container should do. The MPEG group had only been formed four years prior to AVI's release, and didn't release their first standard until a year later. Meanwhile, Microsoft needed a video file format that: 1) Was a file format that sat on disk 2) Synchronized audio and video 3) Integrated cleanly with their being-developed operating system (AVI is very closely related to the Video for Windows API. It's worth noting that WMF, another Microsoft format from this time, is essentially a serialized form of their drawing primitives.) 4) Ran smoothly on an 80386 at 33MHz with a 16-bit, 8MHz data bus between the CPU and persistent storage. With the exception of perhaps (3), those are the basics. Consider that this was released in 1992, and then consider that it had probably been under development for at least a couple years prior. I won't disagree that AVI is a crappy format by today's standards, and that it should be avoided where possible, but what you consider simple and obvious today was *new* at the time, and so not simple and obvious. It would have been obvious to the .avi developers then. And yet it somehow made it's way to market and got used extensively You asked what alternatives were available. That is not a question I asked. It matters nothing that the public used .avi so much (they had precious little in the way of choice). So whether they had alternatives or not is irrelevant. It's entirely relevant if you want to consider whether not the expertise to come up with a 2012-modern format *existed* in the lead-up time to 1992. The entire gist of my post was about how .avi as it stands is crappy and should never have been released by an entity with the engineering clout of Microsoft as they don't have the excuse of being one dude in Mom's basement who didn't know better. They really should have known better. Seriously, why? Why do you think that the entire engineering clout of a company which hadn't yet taken over the desktop market(!) would be focused on perfecting AVI, one piece of a large, already-late-to-market product? They had a bunch of difficult things to pay attention to, such as mixing protected-mode and real-mode applications on hardware in a task-switching environment, and working around compatibility for programs whose developers still assumed they had full run of the system. On a 386. -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-user] What to use for Flash?
On Sunday 13 May 2012 16:29:53 ny6...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 08:32:38PM +0100, Mick wrote: On Saturday 12 May 2012 17:42:34 ny6...@gmail.com wrote: I hope not. HTML5 runs like crap here. I think it may need a faster dl speed than I've got. If everything does migrate I might have to upgrade my internet speed. Have you tried increasing the cache on your video player that html5 uses? I don't have a video player on my system. I don't know what it's using, then. I wonder if I can increase the cache someway Terry You could use lsof to see what plugin or video player is called. -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] I want to play movies without hangs [SOLVED, sort of]
On Sun, 13 May 2012 18:03:59 -0400 Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, 13 May 2012 17:01:07 -0400 Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, 13 May 2012 14:12:04 -0400 Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 4:56 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: [1] .avi files are notorious for this shit. It's what happens when you are Microsoft and you release any old crappy format without consulting the other experts out there (who will always outnumber you) Which better container formats were available at the time AVI was released (1992)? The only contemporary container format I'm aware of is RIFF, which came out in 1988. MPEG-1 didn't come out until 1993, which was the same year the Ogg project started. Real's stuff didn't come out until 1995. Matroska was announced a decade later, in 2005. Matroska, MP4 and even OGG are nicer container formats, sure, but they weren't around yet. And even with any of them, it's perfectly possible to accidentally get A/V desync or stuttering if you don't mux your streams properly. (This post draws heavily on Wikipedia for date information, and dates may be considered only as accurate as Wikipedia...) You missed the essence of my post entirely. Anti-Microsoft snark? I thought I was calling you on it. I said .avi is a crappy format, and it is, that much is obvious to anyone who understands the simple basics of what a container should do. The MPEG group had only been formed four years prior to AVI's release, and didn't release their first standard until a year later. Meanwhile, Microsoft needed a video file format that: 1) Was a file format that sat on disk 2) Synchronized audio and video This is the part they got wrong. Would you not agree that this is the second-most important feature required, where the ability to actually play the audio/video at all is the first? Getting that wrong is to me akin to building a car and forgetting to provide it with an adequate means of stopping. There are many other things that can be forgiven where one would need a predictive crystal ball, but needing time sync information in the container is just simply self-evident. 3) Integrated cleanly with their being-developed operating system (AVI is very closely related to the Video for Windows API. It's worth noting that WMF, another Microsoft format from this time, is essentially a serialized form of their drawing primitives.) 4) Ran smoothly on an 80386 at 33MHz with a 16-bit, 8MHz data bus between the CPU and persistent storage. With the exception of perhaps (3), those are the basics. Consider that this was released in 1992, and then consider that it had probably been under development for at least a couple years prior. I won't disagree that AVI is a crappy format by today's standards, and that it should be avoided where possible, but what you consider simple and obvious today was *new* at the time, and so not simple and obvious. I'm not talking about today's standards. I'm talking about 1992 standards. It's not reasonable to expect MS devs to anticipate algorithms that did not exist then, or hardware that was 10 years away, or even that the internet would be what it is. I do expect devs to get right aspects of their software that will be used right at the time it is released. It would have been obvious to the .avi developers then. And yet it somehow made it's way to market and got used extensively You asked what alternatives were available. That is not a question I asked. It matters nothing that the public used .avi so much (they had precious little in the way of choice). So whether they had alternatives or not is irrelevant. It's entirely relevant if you want to consider whether not the expertise to come up with a 2012-modern format *existed* in the lead-up time to 1992. Again, I'm not talking about 2012 The entire gist of my post was about how .avi as it stands is crappy and should never have been released by an entity with the engineering clout of Microsoft as they don't have the excuse of being one dude in Mom's basement who didn't know better. They really should have known better. Seriously, why? Why do you think that the entire engineering clout of a company which hadn't yet taken over the desktop market(!) would be focused on perfecting AVI, one piece of a large, already-late-to-market product? They had a bunch of difficult things to pay attention to, such as mixing protected-mode and real-mode applications on hardware in a task-switching environment, and working around compatibility for programs whose developers still assumed they had full run of the system. On a 386. No, I expect them to get the basics
Re: [gentoo-user] I want to play movies without hangs [SOLVED, sort of]
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, 13 May 2012 18:03:59 -0400 Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, 13 May 2012 17:01:07 -0400 Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, 13 May 2012 14:12:04 -0400 Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 4:56 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: [1] .avi files are notorious for this shit. It's what happens when you are Microsoft and you release any old crappy format without consulting the other experts out there (who will always outnumber you) Which better container formats were available at the time AVI was released (1992)? The only contemporary container format I'm aware of is RIFF, which came out in 1988. MPEG-1 didn't come out until 1993, which was the same year the Ogg project started. Real's stuff didn't come out until 1995. Matroska was announced a decade later, in 2005. Matroska, MP4 and even OGG are nicer container formats, sure, but they weren't around yet. And even with any of them, it's perfectly possible to accidentally get A/V desync or stuttering if you don't mux your streams properly. (This post draws heavily on Wikipedia for date information, and dates may be considered only as accurate as Wikipedia...) You missed the essence of my post entirely. Anti-Microsoft snark? I thought I was calling you on it. I said .avi is a crappy format, and it is, that much is obvious to anyone who understands the simple basics of what a container should do. The MPEG group had only been formed four years prior to AVI's release, and didn't release their first standard until a year later. Meanwhile, Microsoft needed a video file format that: 1) Was a file format that sat on disk 2) Synchronized audio and video This is the part they got wrong. Would you not agree that this is the second-most important feature required, where the ability to actually play the audio/video at all is the first? You're going to have to go into detail. Last I checked, old versions of Windows shipped with AVI files for their animations, and those AVI files played fine. So it _sounds_ like they're able to play video, at least. And my largish collection of AMVs and videos I've put together myself suggest that AVI can play synchronized audio and video. Getting that wrong is to me akin to building a car and forgetting to provide it with an adequate means of stopping. There are many other things that can be forgiven where one would need a predictive crystal ball, but needing time sync information in the container is just simply self-evident. Only if you anticipate your audio and video streams deviating from intended usages. AVI is used for far more things than it was designed to do. Reading deeper into its history, it sounds like it was embraced and extended by entities outside of Microsoft to do things it wasn't designed for in the first place. So expecting it to handle VBR audio or video with predictive frames is kinda like putting a supercharger in a Pinto and complaining when it winds up sitting on its own roof. 3) Integrated cleanly with their being-developed operating system (AVI is very closely related to the Video for Windows API. It's worth noting that WMF, another Microsoft format from this time, is essentially a serialized form of their drawing primitives.) 4) Ran smoothly on an 80386 at 33MHz with a 16-bit, 8MHz data bus between the CPU and persistent storage. With the exception of perhaps (3), those are the basics. Consider that this was released in 1992, and then consider that it had probably been under development for at least a couple years prior. I won't disagree that AVI is a crappy format by today's standards, and that it should be avoided where possible, but what you consider simple and obvious today was *new* at the time, and so not simple and obvious. I'm not talking about today's standards. I'm talking about 1992 standards. _Those standards didn't exist._ That's been my key point. Yes, there was SMPTE, but that's for video recording and production houses, and that was certainly not a planned usage for AVI. It's not reasonable to expect MS devs to anticipate algorithms that did not exist then, or hardware that was 10 years away, or even that the internet would be what it is. I do expect devs to get right aspects of their software that will be used right at the time it is released. The earliest AVI files I'm aware of were sequences of RLE bitmaps, and the code doing playback knew *exactly* what the framerate was, because it knew what the video was for. Framerate support was added by external parties because external parties wanted to extend AVI for their own purposes. For that
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: make of gentoo-sources-3.2.12 fails
regrettably no. at this point make (correctly) assumes that mounts.o should have been built, but it didn't. sorry for my delayed replay, I've tried I lot of possibilities, needless to say without success. thanks michael -- Michael Scherer Univ.klinik f. Psychiatrie email: michael.sche...@meduniwien.ac.at phone: +43 6991 941 22 54 - Original Message - From: walt w41...@gmail.com To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Sent: Saturday, 12 May, 2012 20:17 Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: make of gentoo-sources-3.2.12 fails On 05/10/2012 07:20 AM, Michael Scherer wrote: LD init/mounts.o ls -Al -m elf_x86_64 -r -o init/mounts.o init/do_mounts.o init/do_mounts_initrd.o init/mounts.o: No such file or directory Maybe that step is correct but it sure looks strange to me. Looks like 'ls' is being substituted for 'ld', maybe? Is that a cut-and- paste error?
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: make of gentoo-sources-3.2.12 fails
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 03:44:31AM +0200, Michael Scherer wrote: regrettably no. at this point make (correctly) assumes that mounts.o should have been built, but it didn't. sorry for my delayed replay, I've tried I lot of possibilities, needless to say without success. thanks michael -- Michael Scherer Univ.klinik f. Psychiatrie email: michael.sche...@meduniwien.ac.at phone: +43 6991 941 22 54 - Original Message - From: walt w41...@gmail.com To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Sent: Saturday, 12 May, 2012 20:17 Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: make of gentoo-sources-3.2.12 fails On 05/10/2012 07:20 AM, Michael Scherer wrote: LD init/mounts.o ls -Al -m elf_x86_64 -r -o init/mounts.o init/do_mounts.o init/do_mounts_initrd.o init/mounts.o: No such file or directory Maybe that step is correct but it sure looks strange to me. Looks like 'ls' is being substituted for 'ld', maybe? Is that a cut-and- paste error? Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? Terry
