Re: [gentoo-user] how to use my SSD the right way ;-)
Am 03.01.2014 08:34, schrieb Alan McKinnon: > BFQ for both is the recommendation. > > But do try it both ways to see how it performs and compare. sure, thanks. So I edit my udev-rules (and could leave them away and simply compile bfq in as default if needed).
Re: [gentoo-user] how to use my SSD the right way ;-)
On 03/01/2014 09:25, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: > Am 03.01.2014 07:52, schrieb Alan McKinnon: >> On 03/01/2014 00:46, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: >>> BFQ only for the SSDs ? >> >> Yes. The scheduler knows how to deal with SSDs while keeping everything >> responsive even under load. >> >> BFQ seems a good fit for your workcase - desktop/laptop. For those, >> interactive performance is the most important thing. > > So you set BFQ for the SSDs and CFQ for the hdds ? I have both in my > desktop. > > > > BFQ for both is the recommendation. But do try it both ways to see how it performs and compare. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] how to use my SSD the right way ;-)
Am 03.01.2014 07:52, schrieb Alan McKinnon: > On 03/01/2014 00:46, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: >> BFQ only for the SSDs ? > > Yes. The scheduler knows how to deal with SSDs while keeping everything > responsive even under load. > > BFQ seems a good fit for your workcase - desktop/laptop. For those, > interactive performance is the most important thing. So you set BFQ for the SSDs and CFQ for the hdds ? I have both in my desktop.
Re: [gentoo-user] how to use my SSD the right way ;-)
On 03/01/2014 00:46, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: > Am 02.01.2014 23:39, schrieb Alan McKinnon: > >> Give BFQ a try, set USE=experimental in *-sources to patch the source >> >> euses -sf experimental giove further info and links > > thanks for the hint ... > > edited USE-flags and re-emerging sources ... > > BFQ only for the SSDs ? > > > Yes. The scheduler knows how to deal with SSDs while keeping everything responsive even under load. BFQ seems a good fit for your workcase - desktop/laptop. For those, interactive performance is the most important thing. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Preparing a shared USB stick
On 03/01/2014 01:02, Chris Stankevitz wrote: > Hello, > > Please consider a USB "stick" that is unformatted but is to be used by > multiple people/machines. Ideally your instructions will work for all > people/os/WM, but if necessary please assume that everyone is running > gnome under linux > > 1. How should I prepare this device so that it can be plugged into any > machine and will be writable by anyone? I suspect the answer will > involve words like fdisk, mkfs.xxx, mkdir/mount, chmod/chown. I'm > most interested in the chmod/chown part. > > 2. How can I prepare the device so that files/directories added by > people in the future will continue to be writable by anyone? > > 3. How can I ensure that all files will appear to have the same owner; > or, if this is not important, can you explain why it should not be a > problem. > > And of course if you can refer me to a document that explains this I'm > happy to read it. Just go with FAT and automounting by the DE. It's a removeable stick, the user has it in their hands so the entire concept of security is instantly null and void right there. Forget all about /etc/fstab, mount options user and user, mount options mask, fmask and dmask. Instead, put each user that needs to use it in the plugdev or disk group as appropriate and let the DE do the heavy lifting; and remove from fstab anything and everything related to removeable USB sticks. If you let the DE do the automounting for you, you get a filemanager window (dolphin, nautilus and friends) and the contents of the stick are visible right there, ready to use, all set up correctly. DO NOT USE NTFS ON A STICK. The driver has been reverse-engineered and there is no guarantee that writing to it under anything that isn't Windows will work. FAT is a published standard and we all know how it works. tl;dr You don't need chown/chmod at all. FAT has no concept of owner and permissions, so the kernel fudges these. Basically, when mounting the stick it pretends every file on it is owned by the user that mounted it and everything has permissions 777, regardless of who plugged it in. Considering the nature of a USB stick, this is almost always what you want. Don't bother partitioning the stick either, Windows treats them as one huge floppy and so should you. You will normally only ever have one partition anyway, so why have any at all? The code supports this. To format it in Linux, do this: mkfs.vfat -I /dev/ Stay far away from /etc/fstab. That file was designed ages ago for permanent mounts, like / and /usr and /home. To work properly, you must be able to uniquely identify any device and never get it confused. You just can't do that with sticks, not even with fs labels, and you certainly don't want to hand-edit UUIDs. And you still have to deal with users having different uids on each machine. Ugh. The DE just makes all this hassle go away. If your sticks are larger than 32G, you might want to use exFAT instead of FAT - think of it as FAT that can deal with huge disks properly: emerge sys-fs/fuse-exfat you will need FUSE support in your kernel for this. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Preparing a shared USB stick
2014/1/2 Mateusz Kowalczyk > On 02/01/14 23:02, Chris Stankevitz wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Please consider a USB "stick" that is unformatted but is to be used by > > multiple people/machines. Ideally your instructions will work for all > > people/os/WM, but if necessary please assume that everyone is running > > gnome under linux > > Well, if it ideally should work across multiple operating systems, > you're probably stuck with FAT32 or similar due to Windows. > > > 1. How should I prepare this device so that it can be plugged into any > > machine and will be writable by anyone? I suspect the answer will > > involve words like fdisk, mkfs.xxx, mkdir/mount, chmod/chown. I'm > > most interested in the chmod/chown part. > > If you go with FAT, there's no notion of ownership (I believe) so it's > not a problem. If you don't, I still don't think chmod/chown matters > as long as the user has the permissions to write to the stick when > mounted on their own machine. I might be wrong though! > > > 2. How can I prepare the device so that files/directories added by > > people in the future will continue to be writable by anyone? > > Likewise, I think they'll be able to as long as they have the > permission to write to the mounted stick _on their own machine_. > > > 3. How can I ensure that all files will appear to have the same owner; > > or, if this is not important, can you explain why it should not be a > > problem. > > I think it's not a problem, at least not with FAT. > > > And of course if you can refer me to a document that explains this I'm > > happy to read it. > > > > Thank you, > > > > Chris > > > > I'm not an expert but hopefully this helps to at least steer you in > the right direction. I used multiple USB sticks across multiple > machines across multiple systems in the past and I never had any > ownership concerns that you do. The only issues were if one of the > systems couldn't read the file format used. > > -- > Mateusz K. > > As far as I know, in a Gentoo system, any user in the group "disk" will be able to read/write to any USB stick plugged into the computer, with no ownership to any written file. In Linux (at least), as users are internally treated as numbers, those would not match from one system to another, so there is no meaning in a user owning a file in a removable device. I would suggest to format tat USB stick using NTFS, as it will be possible to use its compression (to write a compressed file is, AFAIK, exclusive to Windows, but any NTFS file, compressed or not, is readable under Linux - including Android, I already tested it, and also my Blu-Ray player with USB connection is able to read my NTFS formated USB stick). Hope this helps Francisco
[gentoo-user] Re: recommendation sought for external disk
On 01/01/2014 03:28 PM, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 01 2014, walt wrote:
>
>> On 01/01/2014 02:07 PM, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote:
>>> My home desktop has had a seagate external 750GB drive ST3750640cbrk for
>>> a number of years and the disk is starting to fail.
>>
>> Maybe I'm weird or something but I've never once had a hard drive fail
>> gradually/gracefully. They all just stop working, usually when I power
>> the machine on for the first time in the morning.
>>
>> What warning is the disk giving you of early failure?
>
> First it wouldn't mount in during startup.
>
> Then I tried switching the USB ports on the desktop and rebooted.
> It mounted but fsck took forever with pauses.
The open-source culture in general seems to frown upon promotion of
proprietary software (as opposed to proprietary hardware) so I usually
avoid recommending proprietary software.
But, based on reports I consider reliable (how's them for weasel words!)
I'd suggest that Spin-Rite has a chance of restoring that drive to normal
function. ("Has a chance" == more weasel words).
Anyway, consider buying Spin-Rite here:
https://www.grc.com/sr/spinrite.htm
My own hard drives usually fail catastrophically within the the first month,
so I just return them for replacement under warranty. But if I ever have
an older drive fail I will certainly use Spin-Rite before giving up hope.
[gentoo-user] Re: how to use my SSD the right way ;-)
On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 00:59:29 +0200, Anton Shumskyi wrote: > Hi, there is a native queuing at my INTEL SSD 64GB, so i'v set "noop" > scheduler via udev rules. And it's kind a luggish when deleting a lot files > like kernel sources (at ext4,xfs,btrfs, FS makes no difference, some cheap That's the discard setting. Since kernel 3.8.x the block layer sends TRIMs synchronously and this totally tanked performance. Just run without discard and run fstrim nightly. > hardware stuff). Will test some day another scheduler like "deadline" on Will not help in this case. -h
Re: [gentoo-user] coolest mp3 player?
Hello! On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 17:16:22 + (UTC) james wrote: > Well, I have not kept up on mp3/wav/ portable players, > so your input as to a Gentoo friendly device is welcome. A miniture > video screen is not necessary, and keeping costs down is desired. > Google for this said device leaves me with this scant choices: > > Sandisk has the Sansa Clip + > I have been using this model for several years and I am just fond of it. It has a great hardware quality (at least, its playback part), and by installing the RockBox on it you obtain a very powerful software which you can even customize by yourself. It is also GNU/Linux-friendly, since the latest versions of RockBox feature the complete USB exchange support, and you can copy the files just like to a regular USB flash drive. I recommend this player to everybody, especially to the people who appreciate free software. My only doubt is whether these players are still available on the market or not. Sansa Clip+ is a rather old model. Regards, Vladimir - v_2e
Re: [gentoo-user] Preparing a shared USB stick
On 02/01/14 23:02, Chris Stankevitz wrote: > Hello, > > Please consider a USB "stick" that is unformatted but is to be used by > multiple people/machines. Ideally your instructions will work for all > people/os/WM, but if necessary please assume that everyone is running > gnome under linux Well, if it ideally should work across multiple operating systems, you're probably stuck with FAT32 or similar due to Windows. > 1. How should I prepare this device so that it can be plugged into any > machine and will be writable by anyone? I suspect the answer will > involve words like fdisk, mkfs.xxx, mkdir/mount, chmod/chown. I'm > most interested in the chmod/chown part. If you go with FAT, there's no notion of ownership (I believe) so it's not a problem. If you don't, I still don't think chmod/chown matters as long as the user has the permissions to write to the stick when mounted on their own machine. I might be wrong though! > 2. How can I prepare the device so that files/directories added by > people in the future will continue to be writable by anyone? Likewise, I think they'll be able to as long as they have the permission to write to the mounted stick _on their own machine_. > 3. How can I ensure that all files will appear to have the same owner; > or, if this is not important, can you explain why it should not be a > problem. I think it's not a problem, at least not with FAT. > And of course if you can refer me to a document that explains this I'm > happy to read it. > > Thank you, > > Chris > I'm not an expert but hopefully this helps to at least steer you in the right direction. I used multiple USB sticks across multiple machines across multiple systems in the past and I never had any ownership concerns that you do. The only issues were if one of the systems couldn't read the file format used. -- Mateusz K.
Re: [gentoo-user] how to use my SSD the right way ;-)
Am 02.01.2014 23:59, schrieb Anton Shumskyi: > And the best guide is at Arch wiki=) As always=) > https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Solid_State_Drives been there before ;-)
[gentoo-user] Preparing a shared USB stick
Hello, Please consider a USB "stick" that is unformatted but is to be used by multiple people/machines. Ideally your instructions will work for all people/os/WM, but if necessary please assume that everyone is running gnome under linux 1. How should I prepare this device so that it can be plugged into any machine and will be writable by anyone? I suspect the answer will involve words like fdisk, mkfs.xxx, mkdir/mount, chmod/chown. I'm most interested in the chmod/chown part. 2. How can I prepare the device so that files/directories added by people in the future will continue to be writable by anyone? 3. How can I ensure that all files will appear to have the same owner; or, if this is not important, can you explain why it should not be a problem. And of course if you can refer me to a document that explains this I'm happy to read it. Thank you, Chris
Re: [gentoo-user] how to use my SSD the right way ;-)
Hi, there is a native queuing at my INTEL SSD 64GB, so i'v set "noop" scheduler via udev rules. And it's kind a luggish when deleting a lot files like kernel sources (at ext4,xfs,btrfs, FS makes no difference, some cheap hardware stuff). Will test some day another scheduler like "deadline" on top of native one at hardware, it's some kernel overhead but hope system will not freeze for half a minute or more at high I/O For me best performance was at XFS, but for you ZFS (or less stable BTRFS) may be a better choice if you have powerful enough CPU, my 2 core + HT Intel Atom is too slow for it =( and fstab options for my XFS (discard = trim option) attr2,discard,inode64,noquota,relatime And the best guide is at Arch wiki=) As always=) https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Solid_State_Drives
Re: [gentoo-user] how to use my SSD the right way ;-)
Am 02.01.2014 23:39, schrieb Alan McKinnon: > Give BFQ a try, set USE=experimental in *-sources to patch the source > > euses -sf experimental giove further info and links thanks for the hint ... edited USE-flags and re-emerging sources ... BFQ only for the SSDs ?
Re: [gentoo-user] how to use my SSD the right way ;-)
On 03/01/2014 00:23, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: > Am 02.01.2014 23:17, schrieb Alan McKinnon: > >> Before you test other fs's, do you use BFQ? What IO scheduler do you use? > > for SSD(s): noop > for HDD(s): cfq > > both triggered/set via udev-rules > > > > > Give BFQ a try, set USE=experimental in *-sources to patch the source euses -sf experimental giove further info and links -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] how to use my SSD the right way ;-)
Am 02.01.2014 23:17, schrieb Alan McKinnon: > Before you test other fs's, do you use BFQ? What IO scheduler do you use? for SSD(s): noop for HDD(s): cfq both triggered/set via udev-rules
Re: [gentoo-user] how to use my SSD the right way ;-)
On 03/01/2014 00:14, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: > > I am running both my desktop and laptop on SSDs for years now. > > I think I got the basic things right: > > proper alignment of partitions, scheduler, TRIM (fstrim) ... you know. > > Today I received my new and shiny Samsung 840 EVO and migrated my > desktop to it (writing this very email running Gentoo on it). > > I use ext4 for / and /home ... with "noatime", yes. > > I wonder if I should test another filesystem for /home or even / ... > maybe XFS? The system is snappy and works fine, I just wonder if another > fs would perform better with SSDs ? > > Any opinions? > > Greets, Stefan > > > Before you test other fs's, do you use BFQ? What IO scheduler do you use? -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
[gentoo-user] how to use my SSD the right way ;-)
I am running both my desktop and laptop on SSDs for years now. I think I got the basic things right: proper alignment of partitions, scheduler, TRIM (fstrim) ... you know. Today I received my new and shiny Samsung 840 EVO and migrated my desktop to it (writing this very email running Gentoo on it). I use ext4 for / and /home ... with "noatime", yes. I wonder if I should test another filesystem for /home or even / ... maybe XFS? The system is snappy and works fine, I just wonder if another fs would perform better with SSDs ? Any opinions? Greets, Stefan
Re: [gentoo-user] coolest mp3 player?
Am 02.01.2014 18:16, schrieb james: > Well, I have not kept up on mp3/wav/ portable players, > so your input as to a Gentoo friendly device is welcome. A miniture > video screen is not necessary, and keeping costs down is desired. > Google for this said device leaves me with this scant choices: > > Sandisk has the Sansa Clip + isn't bad. Just put rockbox on it. The only reason I stopped using it: in the car, I have stereo At home, my computer provides the music
Re: [gentoo-user] coolest mp3 player?
On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 17:16:22 + (UTC), james wrote: > Well, I have not kept up on mp3/wav/ portable players, > so your input as to a Gentoo friendly device is welcome. A miniture > video screen is not necessary, and keeping costs down is desired. > Google for this said device leaves me with this scant choices: > > Sandisk has the Sansa Clip + > > Cowon iAudio 10 > > Creative's Zen Touch 2 > > I definately need something simple; able to copy files > from a gentoo system over to the device with ease. I thinking of a > robust application (gui) that runs on my gentoo box for file format > changes, then easy copy to the device, in folders, playlists, > management etc etc. Support for many various audio file formats is a > plus, either in the management (gui) api or on the device, natively. I used to use a Sansa Clip and really like it. It is a straightforward USB mass storage device so you can copy file with your favourite GUI or plain old rsync. It also plays Ogg Vorbis as well as MP3. The only reason I stopped using it is that I now use my phone to listen to music. -- Neil Bothwick If I save time, when do I get it back? signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] coolest mp3 player?
Well, I have not kept up on mp3/wav/ portable players, so your input as to a Gentoo friendly device is welcome. A miniture video screen is not necessary, and keeping costs down is desired. Google for this said device leaves me with this scant choices: Sandisk has the Sansa Clip + Cowon iAudio 10 Creative's Zen Touch 2 I definately need something simple; able to copy files from a gentoo system over to the device with ease. I thinking of a robust application (gui) that runs on my gentoo box for file format changes, then easy copy to the device, in folders, playlists, management etc etc. Support for many various audio file formats is a plus, either in the management (gui) api or on the device, natively. I do not want anything crippled by apple, Sony, Redmond.. Possibly a custom cover for a Rasberry PI or something commercial or is fine. I also have a large collection of audio recordings I want to be able to put into folders on the device, that are not commercial. James
[gentoo-user] Re: PHP 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5
Tanstaafl libertytrek.org> writes: > I have a VM running in the cloud that has an old web/php app (10+ years > old, believe it or not), that still runs fine on apache 2.2.25, but I > pinned php to 5.3 some time ago. googling for "vulnerabilities in php 5.3" yeilded many interesting links. Here is one: http://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-74/product_id-128/version_id-97802/PHP-PHP-5.3.3.html > Does anyone see any big potential gotchas (major changes) with php 5.4, > or even 5.5, if I were to upgrade it? Security wise, there are many tools for testing the security of your web server, hopefully, you are concurrent on your server testing: http://projects.webappsec.org/w/page/13246988/Web Application Security Scanner List open source list at the bottom Google for php--bugs to see if any related to your servers. If what you have done is secure, then it *should* be ok, just monitor and watch your logs closely for a while. hth, James
Re: [gentoo-user] recommendation sought for external disk
On Thu, Jan 02 2014, Helmut Jarausch wrote: > On 01/01/2014 11:07:22 PM, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: >> My home desktop has had a seagate external 750GB drive ST3750640cbrk >> for >> a number of years and the disk is starting to fail. The system gets >> only modest usage. It is powered on about 1/2 the time and the disk >> often goes significant periods without activity so it spins down. >> >> I was considering what seagate calls an "expansion hard drive". They >> are USB 3, but I will be using only USB 2. > > If you have a free expansion slot I'd install a (very cheap) USB 3 > adapter. > There is a tremendous difference in speed compared to USB 2. > > Data transfer to my (quite recent) external USB 3 drives is about 130 > MB/s > (measured by iotop) which is faster than for my built in SATA 3 drives. > > Helmut Thanks for the advice (and numbers). I do have a slot and may follow your suggestion. My only reluctance is that the disk gets such light usage that I don't notice its slowdown compared to my internal faster disk. So I have pause if opening the case is justified. But again, thanks for your helpful msg. allan
Re: [gentoo-user] PHP 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5
On 01/02/2014 07:46 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: > Hi all, > > I have a VM running in the cloud that has an old web/php app (10+ years > old, believe it or not), that still runs fine on apache 2.2.25, but I > pinned php to 5.3 some time ago. > > Does anyone see any big potential gotchas (major changes) with php 5.4, > or even 5.5, if I were to upgrade it? > If it runs *cleanly* on PHP 5.3, then it will be fine with PHP 5.5. Enable all warnings with PHP 5.3 and see what it tells you. A number of things were removed between 5.3 and 5.5, but you will be warned about them in 5.3. * http://us1.php.net/manual/en/migration54.incompatible.php * http://us1.php.net/manual/en/migration55.incompatible.php
Re: [gentoo-user] PHP 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5
On 02/01/2014 15:36, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 2014-01-02 8:15 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote: >> On 02/01/2014 14:46, Tanstaafl wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I have a VM running in the cloud that has an old web/php app (10+ years >>> old, believe it or not), that still runs fine on apache 2.2.25, but I >>> pinned php to 5.3 some time ago. >>> >>> Does anyone see any big potential gotchas (major changes) with php 5.4, >>> or even 5.5, if I were to upgrade it? > >> Impossible to say without seeing your php code. Potentially there are >> many changes. >> >> You'd be better off doing the heavy lifting yourself first: >> >> 1. read all the changelogs >> 2. run it in a staging vm with php5.5 and see what happens > > Actually, I was just thinking of doing #2 on the dev server (no dev > going on, but I had this set up some time ago when we moved the > production server to linode, so now at least I can test things without > breaking the production system), and if it breaks, just downgrade back > to 5.3... > > That assumes, of course... > > Is php difficult to downgrade after an upgrade? I don't see why not, all three are in the tree and supported (and it's not glibc) It might take a few goes through the emerge && depclean cycle to get it back to a working state but it should all sort out eventually. And you can always quickpkg things that get upgraded before doing the emerge. Even better, use a VM and snapshot it. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] PHP 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5
You can have more than one Tanstaafl wrote: > > On 02/01/2014 14:46, Tanstaafl wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> I have a VM running in the cloud that has an old web/php app (10+ years > >> old, believe it or not), that still runs fine on apache 2.2.25, but I > >> pinned php to 5.3 some time ago. > >> > >> Does anyone see any big potential gotchas (major changes) with php 5.4, > >> or even 5.5, if I were to upgrade it? > > > Impossible to say without seeing your php code. Potentially there are > > many changes. > > > > You'd be better off doing the heavy lifting yourself first: > > > > 1. read all the changelogs > > 2. run it in a staging vm with php5.5 and see what happens > > Actually, I was just thinking of doing #2 on the dev server (no dev > going on, but I had this set up some time ago when we moved the > production server to linode, so now at least I can test things without > breaking the production system), and if it breaks, just downgrade back > to 5.3... > > That assumes, of course... > > Is php difficult to downgrade after an upgrade? You can have more than one version of php at a time, now. See the portage news items for details. You will need PHP_TARGETS variable to decide which ones you want to work with. -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici cov...@ccs.covici.com
Re: [gentoo-user] PHP 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5
On 2014-01-02 8:15 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote: On 02/01/2014 14:46, Tanstaafl wrote: Hi all, I have a VM running in the cloud that has an old web/php app (10+ years old, believe it or not), that still runs fine on apache 2.2.25, but I pinned php to 5.3 some time ago. Does anyone see any big potential gotchas (major changes) with php 5.4, or even 5.5, if I were to upgrade it? Impossible to say without seeing your php code. Potentially there are many changes. You'd be better off doing the heavy lifting yourself first: 1. read all the changelogs 2. run it in a staging vm with php5.5 and see what happens Actually, I was just thinking of doing #2 on the dev server (no dev going on, but I had this set up some time ago when we moved the production server to linode, so now at least I can test things without breaking the production system), and if it breaks, just downgrade back to 5.3... That assumes, of course... Is php difficult to downgrade after an upgrade? Thx Alan...
Re: [gentoo-user] PHP 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5
On 02/01/2014 14:46, Tanstaafl wrote: > Hi all, > > I have a VM running in the cloud that has an old web/php app (10+ years > old, believe it or not), that still runs fine on apache 2.2.25, but I > pinned php to 5.3 some time ago. > > Does anyone see any big potential gotchas (major changes) with php 5.4, > or even 5.5, if I were to upgrade it? > > Thx > > > Impossible to say without seeing your php code. Potentially there are many changes. You'd be better off doing the heavy lifting yourself first: 1. read all the changelogs 2. run it in a staging vm with php5.5 and see what happens some folks might be in a position to tell you what happened to them with such an upgrade, but that's only a partial picture, you'd still have to deal with what *your* code does -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] NFS & static ports - driving me crazy...
On 2014-01-02 7:48 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2014-01-02 7:38 AM, William Kenworthy wrote: Try this: # /etc/conf.d/nfs Thanks Bill, I will... But what do I need to restart to test the changes? I'd rather not have to reboot every time... Is it just rpcbind? Or do I need to restart nfs/nfsmmount too? Others? Thanks... hope I can get this resolved... Made the above changes, restarted rpcbind, current nfs mounts successfully unmounted, but failed to remount, and the OUTBOUND firewall now shows a different port being used/blocked (this time it was UDP 51804...
Re: [gentoo-user] NFS & static ports - driving me crazy...
On 2014-01-02 7:38 AM, William Kenworthy wrote: Try this: # /etc/conf.d/nfs Thanks Bill, I will... But what do I need to restart to test the changes? I'd rather not have to reboot every time... Is it just rpcbind? Or do I need to restart nfs/nfsmmount too? Others? Thanks... hope I can get this resolved...
[gentoo-user] PHP 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5
Hi all, I have a VM running in the cloud that has an old web/php app (10+ years old, believe it or not), that still runs fine on apache 2.2.25, but I pinned php to 5.3 some time ago. Does anyone see any big potential gotchas (major changes) with php 5.4, or even 5.5, if I were to upgrade it? Thx
Re: [gentoo-user] NFS & static ports - driving me crazy...
Try this: # /etc/conf.d/nfs # If you wish to set the port numbers for lockd, # please see /etc/sysctl.conf # Optional services to include in default `/etc/init.d/nfs start` # For NFSv4 users, you'll want to add "rpc.idmapd" here. NFS_NEEDED_SERVICES="rpc.idmapd" # Number of servers to be started up by default OPTS_RPC_NFSD="8" # Options to pass to rpc.mountd # ex. OPTS_RPC_MOUNTD="-p 32767" OPTS_RPC_MOUNTD="-p 4000" # Options to pass to rpc.statd # ex. OPTS_RPC_STATD="-p 32765 -o 32766" OPTS_RPC_STATD="-p4001 -o4002" #-p 4000" # Options to pass to rpc.idmapd OPTS_RPC_IDMAPD="" # Options to pass to rpc.gssd OPTS_RPC_GSSD="" # Options to pass to rpc.svcgssd OPTS_RPC_SVCGSSD="" # Options to pass to rpc.rquotad (requires sys-fs/quota) OPTS_RPC_RQUOTAD="" # Timeout (in seconds) for exportfs EXPORTFS_TIMEOUT=30 in /etc/sysctl.conf: ... # TCP Port for lock manager fs.nfs.nlm_tcpport = 4003 # UDP Port for lock manager fs.nfs.nlm_udpport = 4003 asterisk ~ # rpcinfo -p program vers proto port service 104 tcp111 portmapper 103 tcp111 portmapper 102 tcp111 portmapper 104 udp111 portmapper 103 udp111 portmapper 102 udp111 portmapper 1000241 udp 4001 status 1000241 tcp 4001 status 151 udp 4000 mountd 151 tcp 4000 mountd 152 udp 4000 mountd 152 tcp 4000 mountd 153 udp 4000 mountd 153 tcp 4000 mountd 132 tcp 2049 nfs 133 tcp 2049 nfs 132 udp 2049 nfs 133 udp 2049 nfs 1000211 udp 4003 nlockmgr 1000213 udp 4003 nlockmgr 1000214 udp 4003 nlockmgr 1000211 tcp 4003 nlockmgr 1000213 tcp 4003 nlockmgr 1000214 tcp 4003 nlockmgr asterisk ~ # BillK On 02/01/14 19:23, Tanstaafl wrote: > No one? > > Another reboot, and had to open up OUTGOING port 57212 this time. > > Why are the static ports I'm assigning not being used? > > On 2013-12-31 8:11 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: >> On 2013-12-31 7:30 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: >>> I've made the following changes to the following config files: >>> >>> /etc/conf.d/nfs >>> >>> OPTS_RPC_MOUNTD="-p 32767" >>> OPTS_RPC_STATD="-p 32765 -o 32766" >>> >>> I've also changed the lockd ports >>> >>> /etc/sysctl.conf >>> >>> # You should compile nfsd into the kernel or add it >>> # to modules.autoload for this to work properly >>> # TCP Port for lock manager >>> fs.nfs.nlm_tcpport = 4001 >>> # UDP Port for lock manager >>> fs.nfs.nlm_udpport = 4001 >>> >>> But when I try to mount the remote filesystem, I see the outbound >>> request being blocked by the firewall. >>> >>> If I open up the port in the firewall, it mounts immediately. >>> >>> But after a reboot, the next time I try mounting it, some other random >>> port shows up in the firewall logs... >>> >>> This can't be all that difficult... I must be missing something obvious. >> >> # rpcinfo -p >> program vers proto port service >> 104 tcp111 portmapper >> 103 tcp111 portmapper >> 102 tcp111 portmapper >> 104 udp111 portmapper >> 103 udp111 portmapper >> 102 udp111 portmapper >> 1000241 udp 32765 status >> 1000241 tcp 32765 status >> >> Again, this system is NOT running an NFS SERVER, I am only trying to use >> the nfs CLIENT to mount a remote NFS share - so, is the above what I >> should expect to see? something tells me no... >> >> Shouldn't the lockd ports be showing up to? >> > >
Re: [gentoo-user] NFS & static ports - driving me crazy...
No one? Another reboot, and had to open up OUTGOING port 57212 this time. Why are the static ports I'm assigning not being used? On 2013-12-31 8:11 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2013-12-31 7:30 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: I've made the following changes to the following config files: /etc/conf.d/nfs OPTS_RPC_MOUNTD="-p 32767" OPTS_RPC_STATD="-p 32765 -o 32766" I've also changed the lockd ports /etc/sysctl.conf # You should compile nfsd into the kernel or add it # to modules.autoload for this to work properly # TCP Port for lock manager fs.nfs.nlm_tcpport = 4001 # UDP Port for lock manager fs.nfs.nlm_udpport = 4001 But when I try to mount the remote filesystem, I see the outbound request being blocked by the firewall. If I open up the port in the firewall, it mounts immediately. But after a reboot, the next time I try mounting it, some other random port shows up in the firewall logs... This can't be all that difficult... I must be missing something obvious. # rpcinfo -p program vers proto port service 104 tcp111 portmapper 103 tcp111 portmapper 102 tcp111 portmapper 104 udp111 portmapper 103 udp111 portmapper 102 udp111 portmapper 1000241 udp 32765 status 1000241 tcp 32765 status Again, this system is NOT running an NFS SERVER, I am only trying to use the nfs CLIENT to mount a remote NFS share - so, is the above what I should expect to see? something tells me no... Shouldn't the lockd ports be showing up to?
Re: [gentoo-user] recommendation sought for external disk
On 01/01/2014 11:07:22 PM, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: My home desktop has had a seagate external 750GB drive ST3750640cbrk for a number of years and the disk is starting to fail. The system gets only modest usage. It is powered on about 1/2 the time and the disk often goes significant periods without activity so it spins down. I was considering what seagate calls an "expansion hard drive". They are USB 3, but I will be using only USB 2. If you have a free expansion slot I'd install a (very cheap) USB 3 adapter. There is a tremendous difference in speed compared to USB 2. Data transfer to my (quite recent) external USB 3 drives is about 130 MB/s (measured by iotop) which is faster than for my built in SATA 3 drives. Helmut
