date:20140917


On 17/09/14 03:01, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
 On 09/16/2014 03:14 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
 For some reason xfce-power-manager-1.3.1 does not satisfy what the local
 install needs but 1.3.0 does. So portage wants to make it so.

 Version 1.3.1 was removed from the tree, leaving only 1.3.0 to satisfy
 XFCE_PLUGINS=battery/brightness.




That's not it. Portage doesn't work like that.

It's because he specifically keyworded 1.3.1 in package.keywords,
instead using something smart like:

xfce-extra/xfce4-power-manager-

To get latest non-live version.

Re: [gentoo-user] Ansible, puppet and chef

2014-09-17 Thread Tomas Mozes


On 2014-09-16 22:43, Alan McKinnon wrote:

Anyone here used ansible and at least one of puppet/chef?

What are your thoughts?

I've made several attempts over the years to get puppet going but never
really got it off the ground. Chef I stay away from (likely due to the
first demo of it I saw and how badly that went)

Puppet seems to me a good product for a large site with 1000 hosts.
Not so much for ~20 or so. Plus puppet's language and configs get large
and hard to keep track of - lots and lots of directory trees with many
things mentioning other things. (Nagios has the same problem if you
start keeping host, services, groups and commands in many different 
files)


I've stumbled upon ansible, it seems much better than puppet for
smallish sites with good odds I might even keep the whole thing in my
head at any one time :-)

Anyone care to share experiences?


We use ansible.

I like it because you don't need any agents to install, just the ssh 
keys and python, which is mandatory on gentoo anyway. We use a 
minimalistic script that bootstraps machines (xen-domU) and then 
everything else is configured via ansible. Since version 1.6 there is 
the portage module to install software and you can do pretty stuff with 
replace/lineinfile/template/copy modules.


The roles are a good way of keeping your systems equal. We have a common 
role for all gentoo machines, then roles specific for dom0 and domU 
machines and then the actual roles of a project (project-app for 
application server of a project). You can even more abstract it to have 
a common application server or a common database, but since you can 
include other playbooks, we don't use it that way (also to not get lost 
in too many levels of abstractions).


For upgrades you either write precise playbooks (for example, before you 
used a specific testing package and now you want a newer testing 
one) where you delete the previous package.accept_keywords line and 
insert the new one. Or by having a small number of servers it's often 
faster by clusterssh.

Re: [gentoo-user] Ansible, puppet and chef

On 17/09/2014 03:30, Alec Ten Harmsel wrote:
 We use bcfg2, and all I can say is to stay away. XML abuse runs rampant
 in bcfg2. From what I've heard from other professional sysadmins, Puppet
 is the favorite, but that's mostly conjecture.

XML. Ugh. OSSEC works like that too. The software itself works well but
the config is painful.


 
 Alec
 
 On 09/16/2014 04:43 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
 Anyone here used ansible and at least one of puppet/chef?

 What are your thoughts?

 I've made several attempts over the years to get puppet going but never
 really got it off the ground. Chef I stay away from (likely due to the
 first demo of it I saw and how badly that went)

 Puppet seems to me a good product for a large site with 1000 hosts.
 Not so much for ~20 or so. Plus puppet's language and configs get large
 and hard to keep track of - lots and lots of directory trees with many
 things mentioning other things. (Nagios has the same problem if you
 start keeping host, services, groups and commands in many different files)

 I've stumbled upon ansible, it seems much better than puppet for
 smallish sites with good odds I might even keep the whole thing in my
 head at any one time :-)

 Anyone care to share experiences?



 
 
 


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Ansible, puppet and chef


On Tuesday, September 16, 2014 10:43:18 PM Alan McKinnon wrote:
 Anyone here used ansible and at least one of puppet/chef?
 
 What are your thoughts?
 
 I've made several attempts over the years to get puppet going but never
 really got it off the ground. Chef I stay away from (likely due to the
 first demo of it I saw and how badly that went)
 
 Puppet seems to me a good product for a large site with 1000 hosts.
 Not so much for ~20 or so. Plus puppet's language and configs get large
 and hard to keep track of - lots and lots of directory trees with many
 things mentioning other things. (Nagios has the same problem if you
 start keeping host, services, groups and commands in many different files)
 
 I've stumbled upon ansible, it seems much better than puppet for
 smallish sites with good odds I might even keep the whole thing in my
 head at any one time :-)
 
 Anyone care to share experiences?

No experiences yet, but I have been looking for options to quickly and easily 
create (and remove) VMs lab environments.

I agree with your comments on Chef and Puppet.
Ansible looks nice and seems easy to manage. I miss an option to store the 
configuration inside a database, but I don't see an issue adding the 
generation of the config-files from database tables to the rest of the 
environment I am working on.

I like that Ansible also seems to support MS Windows nodes, just too bad that 
requires enabling it after install. But with this, cloning VMs and changing 
the network configs afterwards seems easier to manage.

--
Joost

Re: [gentoo-user] File system testing


On Tuesday, September 16, 2014 07:07:38 PM James wrote:
 Hello,
 
 By now many are familiar with my keen interest in clustering gentoo
 systems. So, what most cluster technologies use is a distributed file
 system on top of the local (HD/SDD) file system. Naturally not
 all file systems, particularly the distributed file systems, have
 straightforward instructions. Also, an device file system, such as
 XFS and a distibuted (on top of the device file system) combination
 may not work very well when paired. So a variety of testing is
 something I'm researching. Eliminiation of either file system
 listed below, due to Gentoo User Experience is most welcome information,
 as well as tips and tricks to setting up any file system.
 
 
 Distributed File Systems (DFS):
 HDFS (poor performance)
 Lustre
 Ceph
 XtreemFS
 GlusterFS
 MooseFS
 FhGFS (BeeGFS) soon to be entirely open sourced?
 Any other distributed file systems I should consider using?
 
 Local (Device) File Systems LFS:
 btrfs
 zfs
 ext4
 xfs
 
 Obviously I do not what to test all combinations of DFS/LocalFS
 so your comments are extremely welcome as is any and all
 related information.
 
 James

James,

Is my understanding correct that the top list all require one of the bottom 
list?
Eg. the clustering FSs only ensure the files on the LFSs are 
duplicated/spread over the various nodes?

I would normally expect the clustering FS to be either the full layer or a 
clustered block-device where an FS can be placed on top.

Otherwise it seems more like a network filesystem with caching options (See 
AFS).

I am also interested in these filesystems, but for a slightly different 
scenario:

- 2 servers in remote locations (different offices)
- 1 of these has all the files stored (server A) at the main office
- The other (server B - remote office) needs to offer all files from serverA

When server B needs to supply a file, it needs to check if the local copy is 
still the valid version. If yes, supply the local copy, otherwise download 
from server A. When a file is changed, server A needs to be updated.
While server B is sharing a file, the file needs to be locked on server A 
preventing simultaneous updates.

I prefer not to supply the same amount of storage at server B as server A has.
The remote location generally only needs access to 5% of the total amount of 
files stored on server A. But not always the same 5%.

Does anyone know of a filesystem that can handle this?

--
Joost

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: FhGFS or BeeGFS on Gentoo?


On Monday, September 15, 2014 06:31:26 PM James wrote:
 James wireless at tampabay.rr.com writes:
  Any brave souls put FhGFS on a gentoo system?
 
 Oops, I forgot the most interesting link of all. [1]
 
 
 James
 
 [1] http://moo.nac.uci.edu/~hjm/fhgfs_vs_gluster.html

I got a 404-error on this link.

--
Joost

Re: [gentoo-user] FhGFS or BeeGFS on Gentoo?


On Monday, September 15, 2014 06:12:15 PM James wrote:
 Howdy,
 
 
 Any brave souls put FhGFS on a gentoo system? [1]  It's a distributed File
 System and some run it on top of ZFS or EXT4 or BTRFS, with
 very positive results. It is in the process of going open source
 from what I've read about.  It is suppose to be wonderful when
 compared to Gluster, HDFS or any other distributed file system,
 as I've heard from several sources.
 
 There's even a guide on skipping the partitioning of the devices
 and putting the file system directly on the device; even SSD
 and such. [2]
 
 
 curiously,
 James
 
 [1] http://www.fhgfs.com/cms/download
 
 [2] http://www.fhgfs.com/wiki/PartitionAlignment#noparts

These look interesting, will have a look at these later.

But, isn't Fraunhover the organisation that caused alot of licensing issues 
with getting MP3 support in OSS projects?
How is their licensing with regards to FHGFS?

--
Joost

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ansible, puppet and chef

On 17/09/2014 07:46, Hans de Graaff wrote:
 On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 22:43:18 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
 
 Puppet seems to me a good product for a large site with 1000 hosts.
 Not so much for ~20 or so. Plus puppet's language and configs get large
 and hard to keep track of - lots and lots of directory trees with many
 things mentioning other things. (Nagios has the same problem if you
 start keeping host, services, groups and commands in many different
 files)
 
 I'm using puppet for small installs ( 10 hosts) and am quite happy with 
 it. It's wonderful to push some changes and have all these hosts 
 configure themselves accordingly. Not to mention the joy of adding new 
 hosts.

I want the benefits of puppet and the end result it brings about -
that's already established.

 
 The configuration can get large, but then again, these are all things 
 that you are already managing on the host. Better to do it all in one 
 place, rather than on each individual host with all its associated 
 inconsistencies.
 
 Us being a ruby shop I never looked at ansible and I'm not even sure it 
 existed when we choose puppet.

Ansible is somewhat new, and reading between the lines it might have
been written in response to large complex puppet installs.


 One thing you can do to make the deployment easier for smaller scale 
 setups would be to use a masterless puppet. One less component to worry 
 about. Just distribute the puppet repository and run puppet apply.


Well, I've already decided to not use puppet, I find it over-complex for
my needs (not to mind that the language has some confusing parts to it )


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Ansible, puppet and chef

On 17/09/2014 09:07, Tomas Mozes wrote:
 On 2014-09-16 22:43, Alan McKinnon wrote:
 Anyone here used ansible and at least one of puppet/chef?

 What are your thoughts?

 I've made several attempts over the years to get puppet going but never
 really got it off the ground. Chef I stay away from (likely due to the
 first demo of it I saw and how badly that went)

 Puppet seems to me a good product for a large site with 1000 hosts.
 Not so much for ~20 or so. Plus puppet's language and configs get large
 and hard to keep track of - lots and lots of directory trees with many
 things mentioning other things. (Nagios has the same problem if you
 start keeping host, services, groups and commands in many different
 files)

 I've stumbled upon ansible, it seems much better than puppet for
 smallish sites with good odds I might even keep the whole thing in my
 head at any one time :-)

 Anyone care to share experiences?
 
 We use ansible.
 
 I like it because you don't need any agents to install, just the ssh
 keys and python, which is mandatory on gentoo anyway. We use a
 minimalistic script that bootstraps machines (xen-domU) and then
 everything else is configured via ansible. Since version 1.6 there is
 the portage module to install software and you can do pretty stuff with
 replace/lineinfile/template/copy modules.
 
 The roles are a good way of keeping your systems equal. We have a common
 role for all gentoo machines, then roles specific for dom0 and domU
 machines and then the actual roles of a project (project-app for
 application server of a project). You can even more abstract it to have
 a common application server or a common database, but since you can
 include other playbooks, we don't use it that way (also to not get lost
 in too many levels of abstractions).
 
 For upgrades you either write precise playbooks (for example, before you
 used a specific testing package and now you want a newer testing
 one) where you delete the previous package.accept_keywords line and
 insert the new one. Or by having a small number of servers it's often
 faster by clusterssh.


That's almost exactly the same setup I have in mind.

How complex do the playbooks get in real-life?


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Ansible, puppet and chef

On 17/09/2014 09:34, J. Roeleveld wrote:
 
 On Tuesday, September 16, 2014 10:43:18 PM Alan McKinnon wrote:
 Anyone here used ansible and at least one of puppet/chef?

 What are your thoughts?

 I've made several attempts over the years to get puppet going but never
 really got it off the ground. Chef I stay away from (likely due to the
 first demo of it I saw and how badly that went)

 Puppet seems to me a good product for a large site with 1000 hosts.
 Not so much for ~20 or so. Plus puppet's language and configs get large
 and hard to keep track of - lots and lots of directory trees with many
 things mentioning other things. (Nagios has the same problem if you
 start keeping host, services, groups and commands in many different files)

 I've stumbled upon ansible, it seems much better than puppet for
 smallish sites with good odds I might even keep the whole thing in my
 head at any one time :-)

 Anyone care to share experiences?
 
 No experiences yet, but I have been looking for options to quickly and easily 
 create (and remove) VMs lab environments.

Have you tried Vagrant?

I haven't tried it myself, I'm just reacting to the VM keyword ;-)

 
 I agree with your comments on Chef and Puppet.
 Ansible looks nice and seems easy to manage. I miss an option to store the 
 configuration inside a database, but I don't see an issue adding the 
 generation of the config-files from database tables to the rest of the 
 environment I am working on.

Ansible has an add-on called Tower that seems to do this. The marketing
blurb implies you can use almost any storage backend you like from MySQL
and PostGres to LDAP

 
 I like that Ansible also seems to support MS Windows nodes, just too bad that 
 requires enabling it after install. But with this, cloning VMs and changing 
 the network configs afterwards seems easier to manage.

I'm lucky, this is a Unix-only shop so I don't have to deal with Windows
servers. The three managers who have Windows laptops for varying reasons
have all been clearly told upfront they will support themselves and I
ain't touching it :-)


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] crontab backup

2014-09-17 Thread Neil Bothwick

On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 19:30:36 -0600, Joseph wrote:

 I'm trying to backup crontab from various boxes to files, so I'm using
 (run once a month) 11 01 * * 5 crontab -l
  /home/joseph/business/backup/crontabs/syscon7_joseph_crontab
 
 but I can from bash: cannot overwrite existing file

Do you have noclobber in your shell options? If so, replace  with | to
overwrite files. Or use tee, which will happily overwrite files with no
consideration of their type, content or importance :(


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Growing old is mandatory; growing up is optional!!


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Eapi 6 ?

2014-09-17 Thread Neil Bothwick

On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 03:40:37 + (UTC), James wrote:

  You can often do it without touching the ebuild at all by putting  
 
  post_src_unpack() {
  cd ${S}
  epatch_user
  }  
 
  in /etc/portage/env/category/package[-version]  
 
 Nice trick to know.  But,
 I do not have an /etc/portage/env/ dir?
 Just make them up?

Yes. Portage doesn't know which directories you need, just create them
when you do.

 Or is this the reference:
 http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki//etc/portage/env

That's a different, but equally useful, use of /etc/portage/env.

 Any docs somewhere as this looks more like a sets trick?

The functions are explained in man 5 ebuild, /etc/portage is covered in
man portage. The rest was gathered by starting at http:///www and working
down...


-- 
Neil Bothwick

If Micro built cars, the worlds population would be in decline


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-user] Ansible, puppet and chef


On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 10:12:52 AM Alan McKinnon wrote:
 On 17/09/2014 09:34, J. Roeleveld wrote:
  On Tuesday, September 16, 2014 10:43:18 PM Alan McKinnon wrote:
  Anyone here used ansible and at least one of puppet/chef?
  
  What are your thoughts?
  
  I've made several attempts over the years to get puppet going but never
  really got it off the ground. Chef I stay away from (likely due to the
  first demo of it I saw and how badly that went)
  
  Puppet seems to me a good product for a large site with 1000 hosts.
  Not so much for ~20 or so. Plus puppet's language and configs get large
  and hard to keep track of - lots and lots of directory trees with many
  things mentioning other things. (Nagios has the same problem if you
  start keeping host, services, groups and commands in many different
  files)
  
  I've stumbled upon ansible, it seems much better than puppet for
  smallish sites with good odds I might even keep the whole thing in my
  head at any one time :-)
  
  Anyone care to share experiences?
  
  No experiences yet, but I have been looking for options to quickly and
  easily create (and remove) VMs lab environments.
 
 Have you tried Vagrant?

Nope.

 I haven't tried it myself, I'm just reacting to the VM keyword ;-)

Yes, but it doesn't have support for Xen or KVM and I'd need to write a custom 
provider to make that work.
That basically does what I am looking into, but with the products we work 
with, I need more custom activities in some of the VMs then are easily 
organised.

  I agree with your comments on Chef and Puppet.
  Ansible looks nice and seems easy to manage. I miss an option to store the
  configuration inside a database, but I don't see an issue adding the
  generation of the config-files from database tables to the rest of the
  environment I am working on.
 
 Ansible has an add-on called Tower that seems to do this. The marketing
 blurb implies you can use almost any storage backend you like from MySQL
 and PostGres to LDAP

Ok, from a quick scan of that page, it looked like a web frontend for some 
stuff. I'll definitely look into that part. The rest is more custom, so I 
might just generate the config files on the fly.

  I like that Ansible also seems to support MS Windows nodes, just too bad
  that requires enabling it after install. But with this, cloning VMs and
  changing the network configs afterwards seems easier to manage.
 
 I'm lucky, this is a Unix-only shop so I don't have to deal with Windows
 servers. The three managers who have Windows laptops for varying reasons
 have all been clearly told upfront they will support themselves and I
 ain't touching it :-)

Not all products we deal with run on non-MS Windows systems, so we are sort-of 
stuck with it. They only run inside VMs that are only accessible via the LAB 
network. Which means, no access to the internet unless specifically allowed. 
(The host and port on the internet needs to be known prior to allowing access)

--
Joost

Re: [gentoo-user] Ansible, puppet and chef

2014-09-17 Thread Eray Aslan

On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 10:43:18PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
 Puppet seems to me a good product for a large site with 1000 hosts.
 Not so much for ~20 or so.

I find that for a few machines, puppet is overkill.  For a lot of
machines, puppet can become unmanageable - with puppet master and
security being the culprit.

We have used puppet a lot but recently settled on salt (strictly
speaking not my decision so cannot really compare it with ansible) and
we are happy with the outcome.  You might want to consider
app-admin/salt as well.

-- 
Eray

[gentoo-user] Reverse Tethering - How to?

2014-09-17 Thread Helmut Jarausch


Hi,

how do I need to configure my Gentoo box to allow for reverse tethering  
from my (rooted) Android phone?


Many thanks for a hint,
Helmut

Re: [gentoo-user] Ansible, puppet and chef


On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 12:19:37 PM Eray Aslan wrote:
 On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 10:43:18PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
  Puppet seems to me a good product for a large site with 1000 hosts.
  Not so much for ~20 or so.
 
 I find that for a few machines, puppet is overkill.  For a lot of
 machines, puppet can become unmanageable - with puppet master and
 security being the culprit.
 
 We have used puppet a lot but recently settled on salt (strictly
 speaking not my decision so cannot really compare it with ansible) and
 we are happy with the outcome.  You might want to consider
 app-admin/salt as well.

Looks good (had a really quick look).
From what I read (and please correct me if I'm wrong), a difference between 
salt and ansible is:

Salt Requires a daemon to be installed and running on all machines
and the versions need to be (mostly) in sync

For Alan, this might work, but for my situation it wouldn't, as I'd need to 
keep various VMs in sync with the rest where I'd prefer to simply clone them 
and then enforce changes. Relying on SSH and powershell makes that simpler.

But, it does mean that all nodes need to have incoming ports open. With Salt, 
all nodes connect back to the master. This allows a tighter security.

--
Joost

Re: [gentoo-user] Reverse Tethering - How to?


On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 11:24:36 AM Helmut Jarausch wrote:
 Hi,
 
 how do I need to configure my Gentoo box to allow for reverse tethering
 from my (rooted) Android phone?
 
 Many thanks for a hint,
 Helmut

What do you mean with reverse tethering?
That your mobile uses the network connection of your Gentoo box, or your 
Gentoo box the network connection of your mobile?

Generally, the device sharing the connection needs to play WIFI Access Point.

--
Joost

Re: [gentoo-user] Reverse Tethering - How to?

2014-09-17 Thread Helmut Jarausch


On 09/17/2014 11:43:28 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:


On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 11:24:36 AM Helmut Jarausch wrote:
 Hi,

 how do I need to configure my Gentoo box to allow for reverse  
tethering

 from my (rooted) Android phone?

 Many thanks for a hint,
 Helmut

What do you mean with reverse tethering?
That your mobile uses the network connection of your Gentoo box, or  
your

Gentoo box the network connection of your mobile?


My mobile should be able to use the (wired) network connection of my  
Gentoo box.




Generally, the device sharing the connection needs to play WIFI  
Access Point.




How to do that on Gentoo?

Thanks,
Helmut

Re: [gentoo-user] Reverse Tethering - How to?


On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 11:46:12 AM Helmut Jarausch wrote:
 On 09/17/2014 11:43:28 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
  On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 11:24:36 AM Helmut Jarausch wrote:
   Hi,
   
   how do I need to configure my Gentoo box to allow for reverse
  
  tethering
  
   from my (rooted) Android phone?
   
   Many thanks for a hint,
   Helmut
  
  What do you mean with reverse tethering?
  That your mobile uses the network connection of your Gentoo box, or
  your
  Gentoo box the network connection of your mobile?
 
 My mobile should be able to use the (wired) network connection of my
 Gentoo box.

Ok, I assumed that was the case, but wanted to be sure.

  Generally, the device sharing the connection needs to play WIFI
  Access Point.
 
 How to do that on Gentoo?

If your Gentoo box has a wired connection and a wireless one.
The wired is currently used and the wireless is not.
Then you need to get your wireless card to function as an access point. 
(Google for Gentoo Linux Howto WIFI Access Point or similar) and you should 
find some information on how to do this.

--
Joost

Re: [gentoo-user] Reverse Tethering - How to?

2014-09-17 Thread Helmut Jarausch


On 09/17/2014 11:50:58 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:


On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 11:46:12 AM Helmut Jarausch wrote:
 On 09/17/2014 11:43:28 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
  On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 11:24:36 AM Helmut Jarausch  
wrote:

   Hi,
  
   how do I need to configure my Gentoo box to allow for reverse
 
  tethering
 
   from my (rooted) Android phone?
  
   Many thanks for a hint,
   Helmut
 
  What do you mean with reverse tethering?
  That your mobile uses the network connection of your Gentoo box,  
or

  your
  Gentoo box the network connection of your mobile?

 My mobile should be able to use the (wired) network connection of my
 Gentoo box.

Ok, I assumed that was the case, but wanted to be sure.

  Generally, the device sharing the connection needs to play WIFI
  Access Point.

 How to do that on Gentoo?

If your Gentoo box has a wired connection and a wireless one.
The wired is currently used and the wireless is not.
Then you need to get your wireless card to function as an access  
point.
(Google for Gentoo Linux Howto WIFI Access Point or similar) and  
you should

find some information on how to do this.



I should have made it more clear.
My GenToo box doesn't have a wireless card.
I'd like to connect my mobile to the USB port of my Gentoo box and get  
access

to the (wired) network.

Thanks,
Helmut

Re: [gentoo-user] Reverse Tethering - How to?


On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 11:53:52 AM Helmut Jarausch wrote:
 On 09/17/2014 11:50:58 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
  On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 11:46:12 AM Helmut Jarausch wrote:
   On 09/17/2014 11:43:28 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 11:24:36 AM Helmut Jarausch
  
  wrote:
 Hi,
 
 how do I need to configure my Gentoo box to allow for reverse

tethering

 from my (rooted) Android phone?
 
 Many thanks for a hint,
 Helmut

What do you mean with reverse tethering?
That your mobile uses the network connection of your Gentoo box,
  
  or
  
your
Gentoo box the network connection of your mobile?
   
   My mobile should be able to use the (wired) network connection of my
   Gentoo box.
  
  Ok, I assumed that was the case, but wanted to be sure.
  
Generally, the device sharing the connection needs to play WIFI
Access Point.
   
   How to do that on Gentoo?
  
  If your Gentoo box has a wired connection and a wireless one.
  The wired is currently used and the wireless is not.
  Then you need to get your wireless card to function as an access
  point.
  (Google for Gentoo Linux Howto WIFI Access Point or similar) and
  you should
  find some information on how to do this.
 
 I should have made it more clear.
 My GenToo box doesn't have a wireless card.
 I'd like to connect my mobile to the USB port of my Gentoo box and get
 access
 to the (wired) network.

There I can not help.
I am not aware of Android supporting that option.
Linux might be able to, if the USB connection acts like a NIC. But the phone 
needs to then use the USB line for it's own internet link.

You might want to check on Android forums to see if anyone there has done it.

--
Joost

Re: [gentoo-user] Reverse Tethering - How to?

2014-09-17 Thread Stroller


On Wed, 17 September 2014, at 10:53 am, Helmut Jarausch 
jarau...@igpm.rwth-aachen.de wrote:
 … 
 My mobile should be able to use the (wired) network connection of my Gentoo 
 box.
 
 My GenToo box doesn't have a wireless card.
 I'd like to connect my mobile to the USB port of my Gentoo box and get access
 to the (wired) network.

I'm sure this must be possible.

Isn't it a standard thing to connect laptop and phone by USB and share the 
phone's 3G connection with the laptop?

This document seems to describe that setup: 
http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Android_USB_Tethering

In this case the USB is being used as an ethernet connection - you're simply 
asking for the routing to occur in the opposite direction.

Loads of hits on Google for tether android usb.

Stroller.

Re: [gentoo-user] Reverse Tethering - How to?


On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 12:05:37 PM Stroller wrote:
 On Wed, 17 September 2014, at 10:53 am, Helmut Jarausch jarau...@igpm.rwth-
aachen.de wrote:
  …
  
  My mobile should be able to use the (wired) network connection of my
  Gentoo box. 
  My GenToo box doesn't have a wireless card.
  I'd like to connect my mobile to the USB port of my Gentoo box and get
  access to the (wired) network.
 
 I'm sure this must be possible.
 
 Isn't it a standard thing to connect laptop and phone by USB and share the
 phone's 3G connection with the laptop?
 
 This document seems to describe that setup:
 http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Android_USB_Tethering
 
 In this case the USB is being used as an ethernet connection - you're simply
 asking for the routing to occur in the opposite direction.
 
 Loads of hits on Google for tether android usb.
 
 Stroller.

Stroller,

Helmut is trying to do the opposite.
He wants the mobile phone to use the internet connection of his desktop.

--
Joost

Re: [gentoo-user] Reverse Tethering - How to?

2014-09-17 Thread Mick

On Wednesday 17 Sep 2014 11:14:28 J. Roeleveld wrote:
 On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 11:53:52 AM Helmut Jarausch wrote:
  On 09/17/2014 11:50:58 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
   On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 11:46:12 AM Helmut Jarausch wrote:
On 09/17/2014 11:43:28 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
 On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 11:24:36 AM Helmut Jarausch
   
   wrote:
  Hi,
  
  how do I need to configure my Gentoo box to allow for reverse
 
 tethering
 
  from my (rooted) Android phone?
  
  Many thanks for a hint,
  Helmut
 
 What do you mean with reverse tethering?
 That your mobile uses the network connection of your Gentoo box,
   
   or
   
 your
 Gentoo box the network connection of your mobile?

My mobile should be able to use the (wired) network connection of my
Gentoo box.
   
   Ok, I assumed that was the case, but wanted to be sure.
   
 Generally, the device sharing the connection needs to play WIFI
 Access Point.

How to do that on Gentoo?
   
   If your Gentoo box has a wired connection and a wireless one.
   The wired is currently used and the wireless is not.
   Then you need to get your wireless card to function as an access
   point.
   (Google for Gentoo Linux Howto WIFI Access Point or similar) and
   you should
   find some information on how to do this.
  
  I should have made it more clear.
  My GenToo box doesn't have a wireless card.
  I'd like to connect my mobile to the USB port of my Gentoo box and get
  access
  to the (wired) network.
 
 There I can not help.
 I am not aware of Android supporting that option.
 Linux might be able to, if the USB connection acts like a NIC. But the
 phone needs to then use the USB line for it's own internet link.
 
 You might want to check on Android forums to see if anyone there has done
 it.

Unless anyone suggests differently, I have tried something similar, using a 
different device with IrDa, years ago.  As far as the Linux PC is concerned it 
needs to be able to forward packets from the Android to the ethernet NIC.  
That's a case of setting up packet forwarding as if the Linux box were a 
NATing router.  Going from memory and assuming that your Android shows up as 
usb0, when you run ifocnfig -a, you can try something like this:

ifconfig usb0 172.16.1.1 netmask 255.255.255.0
echo 1  /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward

iptables -t nat -F
iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -j MASQUERADE

Then on the Android you will need to have enabled the USB tethering or some 
such and use ifconfig or equivalent to set up an IP address within the above 
IP subnet and your PC's 172.16.1.1 address as the gateway.  I think that the 
Android may use rndis0 as a network interface but I'm not sure and don't have 
access to an android device to check.

I seem to recall tightening up the iptables rules after I got it to work, so 
that only the particular incoming device would be forwarded to the Internet, 
but details presently escape me.

HTH.
-- 
Regards,
Mick


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-user] Ansible, puppet and chef

On 17/09/2014 11:34, J. Roeleveld wrote:
 
 On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 12:19:37 PM Eray Aslan wrote:
 On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 10:43:18PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
 Puppet seems to me a good product for a large site with 1000 hosts.
 Not so much for ~20 or so.

 I find that for a few machines, puppet is overkill.  For a lot of
 machines, puppet can become unmanageable - with puppet master and
 security being the culprit.

 We have used puppet a lot but recently settled on salt (strictly
 speaking not my decision so cannot really compare it with ansible) and
 we are happy with the outcome.  You might want to consider
 app-admin/salt as well.
 
 Looks good (had a really quick look).
From what I read (and please correct me if I'm wrong), a difference between 
 salt and ansible is:
 
 Salt Requires a daemon to be installed and running on all machines
 and the versions need to be (mostly) in sync
 
 For Alan, this might work, but for my situation it wouldn't, as I'd need to 
 keep various VMs in sync with the rest where I'd prefer to simply clone them 
 and then enforce changes. Relying on SSH and powershell makes that simpler.
 
 But, it does mean that all nodes need to have incoming ports open. With Salt, 
 all nodes connect back to the master. This allows a tighter security.


I'm not too stressed either way. All my hosts run sshd anyway and the
security is not in whether tcp22 is open or not, it's in what I put in
sshd_config. With the puppet design, the puppet daemon must be running
(or a cronjob) and puppet can self host that along with nrpe, munin and
all the other crap that gets installled so I can do my job :-)


My issue with puppet is not it's network architecture but with it's
convoluted config language that I can't wrap my brains around. Plus the
re-use of similar keywords to mean quite different things meaning I have
to read 5 topics in the manual to get stuff working. Nagios btw has the
same problem hence why I'm switching to Icinga 2 which fixes Nagios's
config language once and for all.


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

[gentoo-user] Re: Reverse Tethering - How to?

Helmut Jarausch jarausch at igpm.rwth-aachen.de writes:

 how do I need to configure my Gentoo box to allow for reverse
tethering from my (rooted) Android phone?

PPP over usb is the most probable route. PPP is basically
TCP/IP (usually over a serial link/prototol_carrier).
This might help: How to set up Android ppp over usb with adb

http://www.xinotes.net/notes/note/1500/

You still ahve to set up NAT ont he linux box, probable with
iptalbes. MIcks post looks reasonable, but there may (will)
be addtional issues; just flesh them out, one at a time.

All of this over a serial (RS232_C) link between the phone
and the PC is old stuff and may best to get working first,
then migrate it over USB.


Also find a good usb_sniffer so you can ensure the bits are bidirectional
across the usb ports.

Last. There is a GentRoid project and I'm quite certain that (gentoo)
embeded dude, will be a fantastic resource, if all else fails.

Also one of the main devs for Selinux (Russell Coker) is a great
help as he has wrote of the early Selinux  and put it on an Android phone.
It takes him a while to respond, but that info might aid your google
searches for solutions too. Use Russell as a last resort.

PPP/USB is what you are talking about. USB chips confiturations
inside a specific Android phone, might be limited (locked to keep
cpu cycles down) so you might also have to find an app that allows
you to change settings on the usb port on your Android phone. You
may have to root your Android phone to get this working.


Last, you might have to tweak your gentoo linux kernel (usb, ppp,
iptables) etc etc. It'd be great when you get it working to put
something up on wiki.gentoo.org. 


good hunting!
James

PS: my challenge word, via gmane posting, today is posers
I guess gmane knows today is an *ebuild hackfest day*  for me

Re: [gentoo-user] Ansible, puppet and chef

2014-09-17 Thread Tomas Mozes


On 2014-09-17 14:07, Alan McKinnon wrote:

Nagios btw has the same problem hence why I'm switching to Icinga 2
which fixes Nagios's config language once and for all.


Or you can use hostgroups/templates and have all your configuration in
files and in git. Depends what you like more.

Re: [gentoo-user] Ansible, puppet and chef

2014-09-17 Thread Tomas Mozes


On 2014-09-17 10:08, Alan McKinnon wrote:


That's almost exactly the same setup I have in mind.

How complex do the playbooks get in real-life?


The common role has about 70 tasks. It does almost everything covered in
the handbook plus installs and configures additional stuff like postfix,
nrpe, etc. The dom0 role has 15 tasks including monitoring, xen, grub.
The domU role basically just configures rc.conf.

An actual web server with apache/php has just about 20 tasks. A 
load-balancer
with varnish/nginx/keepalived has just about the same. A database has 
about

30 tasks because it also configures database replication.

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge output: [ebuild UD ]

2014-09-17 Thread Alexander Kapshuk

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:

 On 17/09/14 03:01, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
 On 09/16/2014 03:14 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
 For some reason xfce-power-manager-1.3.1 does not satisfy what the local
 install needs but 1.3.0 does. So portage wants to make it so.

 Version 1.3.1 was removed from the tree, leaving only 1.3.0 to satisfy
 XFCE_PLUGINS=battery/brightness.




 That's not it. Portage doesn't work like that.

 It's because he specifically keyworded 1.3.1 in package.keywords,
 instead using something smart like:

 xfce-extra/xfce4-power-manager-

 To get latest non-live version.

I'm not necessarily after the most recent non-live version of the package.
I just didn't want lvm2 pulled in as my current setup has no use for it.

What would you recommend doing, leave things as they are, or keyword
the stanza you suggested?

Thanks.

Re: [gentoo-user] Ansible, puppet and chef

On 17/09/2014 14:46, Tomas Mozes wrote:
 On 2014-09-17 10:08, Alan McKinnon wrote:
 
 That's almost exactly the same setup I have in mind.

 How complex do the playbooks get in real-life?
 
 The common role has about 70 tasks. It does almost everything covered in
 the handbook plus installs and configures additional stuff like postfix,
 nrpe, etc. The dom0 role has 15 tasks including monitoring, xen, grub.
 The domU role basically just configures rc.conf.
 
 An actual web server with apache/php has just about 20 tasks. A
 load-balancer
 with varnish/nginx/keepalived has just about the same. A database has about
 30 tasks because it also configures database replication.



That doesn't seem too bad - almost manageable :-)

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Reverse Tethering - How to?

2014-09-17 Thread Mick

On Wednesday 17 Sep 2014 13:31:53 James wrote:
 Helmut Jarausch jarausch at igpm.rwth-aachen.de writes:
  how do I need to configure my Gentoo box to allow for reverse
 
 tethering from my (rooted) Android phone?
 
 PPP over usb is the most probable route. PPP is basically
 TCP/IP (usually over a serial link/prototol_carrier).
 This might help: How to set up Android ppp over usb with adb
 
 http://www.xinotes.net/notes/note/1500/
 
 You still ahve to set up NAT ont he linux box, probable with
 iptalbes. MIcks post looks reasonable, but there may (will)
 be addtional issues; just flesh them out, one at a time.
 
 All of this over a serial (RS232_C) link between the phone
 and the PC is old stuff and may best to get working first,
 then migrate it over USB.
 
 
 Also find a good usb_sniffer so you can ensure the bits are bidirectional
 across the usb ports.
 
 Last. There is a GentRoid project and I'm quite certain that (gentoo)
 embeded dude, will be a fantastic resource, if all else fails.
 
 Also one of the main devs for Selinux (Russell Coker) is a great
 help as he has wrote of the early Selinux  and put it on an Android phone.
 It takes him a while to respond, but that info might aid your google
 searches for solutions too. Use Russell as a last resort.
 
 PPP/USB is what you are talking about. USB chips confiturations
 inside a specific Android phone, might be limited (locked to keep
 cpu cycles down) so you might also have to find an app that allows
 you to change settings on the usb port on your Android phone. You
 may have to root your Android phone to get this working.
 
 
 Last, you might have to tweak your gentoo linux kernel (usb, ppp,
 iptables) etc etc. It'd be great when you get it working to put
 something up on wiki.gentoo.org.
 
 
 good hunting!
 James
 
 PS: my challenge word, via gmane posting, today is posers
 I guess gmane knows today is an *ebuild hackfest day*  for me

PPP would be necessary if authentication, compression, et al. is required, but 
I think that in this case none of this is necessary, at least as far as the 
Linux PC is concerned.  The incoming usb0 interface (or whatever the Android 
is recognised as) will be seen as an ethernet interface by the PC and good ol' 
NAT will forward it out via the PC's default NIC.  I could be wrong, but 
without access to Helmut's phone I can't speak with any certainty.

-- 
Regards,
Mick


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge output: [ebuild UD ]


On 17/09/14 16:16, Alexander Kapshuk wrote:
 On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
 On 17/09/14 03:01, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
 On 09/16/2014 03:14 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
 For some reason xfce-power-manager-1.3.1 does not satisfy what the local
 install needs but 1.3.0 does. So portage wants to make it so.

 Version 1.3.1 was removed from the tree, leaving only 1.3.0 to satisfy
 XFCE_PLUGINS=battery/brightness.



 That's not it. Portage doesn't work like that.

 It's because he specifically keyworded 1.3.1 in package.keywords,
 instead using something smart like:

 xfce-extra/xfce4-power-manager-

 To get latest non-live version.

 I'm not necessarily after the most recent non-live version of the package.
 I just didn't want lvm2 pulled in as my current setup has no use for it.

 What would you recommend doing, leave things as they are, or keyword
 the stanza you suggested?

 Thanks.


Notice that I said _non_-live and the  char in the line. I would
use the stanza (as you said)
because if 1.4.0 is not stabilized before something like 1.4.1 is added
to tree, and 1.4.0 gets
deleted, you are facing the same problem all over again.
As in, xfce-extra/xfce4-power-manager- with the  means I want
latest non-live version.

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge output: [ebuild UD ]

2014-09-17 Thread Alexander Kapshuk

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:

 On 17/09/14 16:16, Alexander Kapshuk wrote:
 On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org 
 wrote:
 On 17/09/14 03:01, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
 On 09/16/2014 03:14 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
 For some reason xfce-power-manager-1.3.1 does not satisfy what the local
 install needs but 1.3.0 does. So portage wants to make it so.

 Version 1.3.1 was removed from the tree, leaving only 1.3.0 to satisfy
 XFCE_PLUGINS=battery/brightness.



 That's not it. Portage doesn't work like that.

 It's because he specifically keyworded 1.3.1 in package.keywords,
 instead using something smart like:

 xfce-extra/xfce4-power-manager-

 To get latest non-live version.

 I'm not necessarily after the most recent non-live version of the package.
 I just didn't want lvm2 pulled in as my current setup has no use for it.

 What would you recommend doing, leave things as they are, or keyword
 the stanza you suggested?

 Thanks.


 Notice that I said _non_-live and the  char in the line. I would
 use the stanza (as you said)
 because if 1.4.0 is not stabilized before something like 1.4.1 is added
 to tree, and 1.4.0 gets
 deleted, you are facing the same problem all over again.
 As in, xfce-extra/xfce4-power-manager- with the  means I want
 latest non-live version.


Understood. Thanks.

[gentoo-user] Re: File system testing

J. Roeleveld joost at antarean.org writes:


  Distributed File Systems (DFS):

  Local (Device) File Systems LFS:

 Is my understanding correct that the top list all require one of 
 the bottom  list?
 Eg. the clustering FSs only ensure the files on the LFSs are 
 duplicated/spread over the various nodes?

 I would normally expect the clustering FS to be either the full layer 
 or a  clustered block-device where an FS can be placed on top.

I have not performed these installation yet. My research indicates
that first you put the Local FS on the drive, just like any installation
of Linux. Then you put the distributed FS on top of this. Some DFS might
not require a LFS, but FhGFS does and does HDFS. I will not acutally
be able to accurately answer your questions, until I start to build
up the 3 system cluster. (a week or 2 away) is my best guess.


 Otherwise it seems more like a network filesystem with caching 
 options (See  AFS).

OK, I'll add AFS. You may be correct on this one  or AFS might be both.

 I am also interested in these filesystems, but for a slightly different 
 scenario:

Ok, so I the test-dummy-crash-victim I'd be honored to have, you,
Alan, Neil, Mic  etc etc back-seat-0drive on this adventure! (The more 
I read the more it's time for burbon, bash, and a  bit of cursing
to get started...)


 - 2 servers in remote locations (different offices)
 - 1 of these has all the files stored (server A) at the main office
 - The other (server B - remote office) needs to offer all files 
 from serverA  When server B needs to supply a file, it needs to 
 check if the local copy is still the valid version. 
 If yes, supply the local copy, otherwise download 
 from server A. When a file is changed, server A needs to be updated.
 While server B is sharing a file, the file needs to be locked on server A 
 preventing simultaneous updates.

OOch, file locking (precious tells me that is alway tricky).
(pist, systemd is causing fits for the clustering geniuses;
some are espousing a variety of cgroup gymnastics for phantom kills)
Spark is fault tolerant, regardless of node/memory/drive failures
above the fault tolerance that a file system configuration many support.
If fact, files lost can be 'regenerated' but it is computationally
expensive. You have to get your file system(s) set up. Then install
mesos-0.20.0 and then spark. I have mesos mostly ready. I should
have spark in alpha-beta this weekend. I'm fairly clueless on the 
DFS/LFS issue, so a DFS that needs no LFS might be a good first choice
for testing the (3) system cluster.


 I prefer not to supply the same amount of storage at server B as 
 server A has. The remote location generally only needs access to 5% of 
 the total amount of files stored on server A. But not always the same 5%.
 Does anyone know of a filesystem that can handle this?

So in clustering, from what I have read, there are all kinds of files
passed around between the nodes and the master(s). Many are critical
files not part of the application or scientific calculations. 
So in time, I think in a clustering evironment, all you seek is
very possible, but it's a hunch, gut feeling, not fact. I'd put
raid mirros underdneath that system, if it makes sense, for now,
or just dd the stuff with a script of something kludgy (Alan is the
king of kludge)

On gentoo planet one of the devs has Consul in his overlays. Read
up on that for ideas that may be relevant to what you need.


 Joost

James

[gentoo-user] [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

This is highly off-topic, and systemd-related, so if you don't want
your breakfast with a healthy amount of flames, skip it.

iTWire posted an interview with Linus Torvalds[1], where the Big
Penguin himself gave a succinct and pretty fair opinion on systemd.
The gist of it can be resumed in two lines:

I don't personally mind systemd, and in fact my main desktop and
laptop both run it.

I post it here because several times in the last discussions about
systemd, there was people asking what opinion Linus had about systemd.
I personally don't think Linus particular opinion matters at all in
this particular issue; in general people who likes systemd will
continue to like it, and people who despises it will continue to do
so, for any good, bad, real or imaginary reason. However, I *really*
like several things Linus says in the interview; some juicy bits:

• So I think many of the original ideals of UNIX are these days
more of a mindset issue than necessarily reflecting reality of the
situation.

• There's still value in understanding the traditional UNIX do one
thing and do it well model where many workflows can be done as a
pipeline of simple tools each adding their own value, but let's face
it, it's not how complex systems really work, and it's not how major
applications have been working or been designed for a long time. It's
a useful simplification, and it's still true at *some* level, but I
think it's also clear that it doesn't really describe most of
reality.

• ...systemd is in no way the piece that breaks with old UNIX legacy.

• I'm still old-fashioned enough that I like my log-files in text,
not binary, so I think sometimes systemd hasn't necessarily had the
best of taste, but hey, details..[.]

• (About the single-point-of-failure argument) I think people are
digging for excuses. I mean, if that is a reason to not use a piece of
software, then you shouldn't use the kernel either.

• And there's a classic term for it in the BSD camps: bikeshed
painting, which is very much about how random people can feel like
they have the ability to discuss superficial issues, because everybody
feels that they can give an opinion on the color choice. So issues
that are superficial get a lot more noise. Then when it comes to
actual hard and deep technical decisions, people (sometimes) realise
that they just don't know enough, and they won't give that the same
kind of mouth-time.

It's an interesting read; I highly recommend it.

[1]
http://www.itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/65402-torvalds-says-he-has-no-strong-opinions-on-systemd
--
Canek Peláez Valdés
Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

Re: [gentoo-user] File system testing

2014-09-17 Thread Hervé Guillemet

Le 16/09/2014 21:07, James a écrit :
 
 By now many are familiar with my keen interest in clustering gentoo
 systems. So, what most cluster technologies use is a distributed file
 system on top of the local (HD/SDD) file system. Naturally not
 all file systems, particularly the distributed file systems, have
 straightforward instructions. Also, an device file system, such as
 XFS and a distibuted (on top of the device file system) combination
 may not work very well when paired. So a variety of testing is
 something I'm researching. Eliminiation of either file system
 listed below, due to Gentoo User Experience is most welcome information,
 as well as tips and tricks to setting up any file system.

Hi James,

Have you found this document :

http://hal.inria.fr/hal-00789086/PDF/a_survey_of_dfs.pdf

On a related matter, I'd like to host my own file server on a dedicated
box so that I can access my working files from serveral locations. I'd
like it to be fast and secure, and I don't mind if the files are
replicated on each workstation. What would be the better tools for this ?

-- 
Hervé

Re: [gentoo-user] File system testing

On 17 September 2014 20:10:57 CEST, Hervé Guillemet he...@guillemet.org 
wrote:
Le 16/09/2014 21:07, James a écrit :
 
 By now many are familiar with my keen interest in clustering gentoo
 systems. So, what most cluster technologies use is a distributed file
 system on top of the local (HD/SDD) file system. Naturally not
 all file systems, particularly the distributed file systems, have
 straightforward instructions. Also, an device file system, such as
 XFS and a distibuted (on top of the device file system) combination
 may not work very well when paired. So a variety of testing is
 something I'm researching. Eliminiation of either file system
 listed below, due to Gentoo User Experience is most welcome
information,
 as well as tips and tricks to setting up any file system.

Hi James,

Have you found this document :

http://hal.inria.fr/hal-00789086/PDF/a_survey_of_dfs.pdf

On a related matter, I'd like to host my own file server on a dedicated
box so that I can access my working files from serveral locations. I'd
like it to be fast and secure, and I don't mind if the files are
replicated on each workstation. What would be the better tools for this
?

AFS has caching and can survive temporary disappearance of the server.

For me, I need to be able to provide Samba filesharing on top of that layer on 
2 different locations as I don't see the network bandwidth to be sufficient for 
normal operations. (ADSL uplinks tend to be dead slow)

--
Joost
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

2014-09-17 Thread Stefan G. Weichinger

Am 17.09.2014 um 18:06 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
This is highly off-topic, and systemd-related, so if you don't want
your breakfast with a healthy amount of flames, skip it.

iTWire posted an interview with Linus Torvalds[1], where the Big
Penguin himself gave a succinct and pretty fair opinion on systemd.
The gist of it can be resumed in two lines:

I don't personally mind systemd, and in fact my main desktop and
laptop both run it.

• So I think many of the original ideals of UNIX are these days
more of a mindset issue than necessarily reflecting reality of the
situation.

• ...systemd is in no way the piece that breaks with old UNIX legacy.

• I'm still old-fashioned enough that I like my log-files in text,
not binary, so I think sometimes systemd hasn't necessarily had the
best of taste, but hey, details..[.]

• (About the single-point-of-failure argument) I think people are
digging for excuses. I mean, if that is a reason to not use a piece of
software, then you shouldn't use the kernel either.

It's an interesting read; I highly recommend it.

[1]
http://www.itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/65402-torvalds-says-he-has-no-strong-opinions-on-systemd

thanks for the pointer ;-)

Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

Am 17.09.2014 um 18:06 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
This is highly off-topic, and systemd-related, so if you don't want
your breakfast with a healthy amount of flames, skip it.

iTWire posted an interview with Linus Torvalds[1], where the Big
Penguin himself gave a succinct and pretty fair opinion on systemd.
The gist of it can be resumed in two lines:

I don't personally mind systemd, and in fact my main desktop and
laptop both run it.

• So I think many of the original ideals of UNIX are these days
more of a mindset issue than necessarily reflecting reality of the
situation.

• ...systemd is in no way the piece that breaks with old UNIX legacy.

• I'm still old-fashioned enough that I like my log-files in text,
not binary, so I think sometimes systemd hasn't necessarily had the
best of taste, but hey, details..[.]

• (About the single-point-of-failure argument) I think people are
digging for excuses. I mean, if that is a reason to not use a piece of
software, then you shouldn't use the kernel either.

It's an interesting read; I highly recommend it.

[1]
http://www.itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/65402-torvalds-says-he-has-no-strong-opinions-on-systemd

Now you use this to advertise for systemd?

Systemd fanbois are becoming more and more desperate.

Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

2014-09-17 Thread Joseph


On 09/17/14 20:36, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
[snip]


It's an interesting read; I highly recommend it.

[1] 
http://www.itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/65402-torvalds-says-he-has-no-strong-opinions-on-systemd


Now you use this to advertise for systemd?

Systemd fanbois are becoming more and more desperate.


I'll second it. 
I tried systemd and did not like it at all.


--
Joseph

Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
[snip]
 Now you use this to advertise for systemd?

 Systemd fanbois are becoming more and more desperate.

So, systemd is used (or it has been announced that is going to be
used) by default in all the major distributions, is available and
working great in Gentoo, and many Gentoo users and developers use it
happily.

So, yeah, we are *really* desperate, obviously.

Thanks for the laugh.

Regards.
-- 
Canek Peláez Valdés
Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

Am 17.09.2014 um 21:02 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
 On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
 volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
 [snip]
 Now you use this to advertise for systemd?

 Systemd fanbois are becoming more and more desperate.
 So, systemd is used (or it has been announced that is going to be
 used) by default in all the major distributions, is available and
 working great in Gentoo, and many Gentoo users and developers use it
 happily.

 So, yeah, we are *really* desperate, obviously.

 Thanks for the laugh.

 Regards.

you will stop laughing when redhatpoettering abandon systemd because it
is 'fundamentally broken' and must be replaced with something else.

Probably as soon as everybody got used to it.

And if I guess correctly, pulseaudio will be the driving force behind
it. Because history loves repetition.

[gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

Canek Peláez Valdés caneko at gmail.com writes:


 This is highly off-topic, and systemd-related, so if you don't want
 your breakfast with a healthy amount of flames, skip it.

I think this is very much on Topic.

 iTWire posted an interview with Linus Torvalds[1], where the Big
 Penguin himself gave a succinct and pretty fair opinion on systemd.
 The gist of it can be resumed in two lines:

 I don't personally mind systemd, and in fact my main desktop and
 laptop both run it.

Here I diagree. I think Linux's position is, hey it's a BIG tent;
can't we call get along? Kum_by_yah oh lord, Kum_by_yall..

Linus admits he rarely codes and does not have the skills he use to...

 I post it here because several times in the last discussions about
 systemd, there was people asking what opinion Linus had about systemd.
 I personally don't think Linus particular opinion matters at all in
 this particular issue; in general people who likes systemd will
 continue to like it, and people who despises it will continue to do
 so, for any good, bad, real or imaginary reason. However, I *really*
 like several things Linus says in the interview; some juicy bits:
 
 • So I think many of the original ideals of UNIX are these days
 more of a mindset issue than necessarily reflecting reality of the
 situation.
 
 • There's still value in understanding the traditional UNIX do one
 thing and do it well model where many workflows can be done as a
 pipeline of simple tools each adding their own value, but let's face
 it, it's not how complex systems really work, and it's not how major
 applications have been working or been designed for a long time. It's
 a useful simplification, and it's still true at *some* level, but I
 think it's also clear that it doesn't really describe most of
 reality.
 
 • ...systemd is in no way the piece that breaks with old UNIX legacy.
 
 •  I'm still old-fashioned enough that I like my log-files in text,
 not binary, so I think sometimes systemd hasn't necessarily had the
 best of taste, but hey, details..[.]
 
 • (About the single-point-of-failure argument) I think people are
 digging for excuses. I mean, if that is a reason to not use a piece of
 software, then you shouldn't use the kernel either.

Really? This is idiotic. Anything that breaks down a fault tolerant
system, has to be removed, or the system is no long fault tolerant
(pist, it a mathematical thing, no a linux/unix concept. Linus
sounds like an *idiot* here. It's not the first time, nor could anyone
in his shoes not sound like an idiot on something as fundamental as
what cgroups hopes to eventually accomplish. By the way, just for the
record, I like the theory behind systemd. It's going to take SYSTEMD
A LONG TIME to MATURE and become ROBUST.

cgroups are mature, flexible, robust, well-understood and this is
absolutely no reason in hell that folks should ever be force to pick
one of the other. If/when linx make that decision, it will be just
as catastropic as the day Sun Microsystem consolidated ownership
of most unix source licenses in a effort (conspiracy) that SCO
unix tried to finish by kill the BSD efforts. That was when most
folks on the internet migrated to Linux. I think Linux is trying
to prevent another (reverse) watershed moment.

If folks have the choice, then they will stay with Linux. If forced
many will leave. The entire affair is AVOIDABLE. systemd, in all
it's glory should never force anyone to choose. Choice is the greatest
asset of all open source. Many would say, it is the only asset of
the open source movement.


 • And there's a classic term for it in the BSD camps: bikeshed
 painting, which is very much about how random people can feel like
 they have the ability to discuss superficial issues, because everybody
 feels that they can give an opinion on the color choice. So issues
 that are superficial get a lot more noise. Then when it comes to
 actual hard and deep technical decisions, people (sometimes) realise
 that they just don't know enough, and they won't give that the same
 kind of mouth-time.

Retarded comparision of vi vs emac and antoher application. systemd
vs the traditional cgroups is an the lowest level of the kernel.
Think aobut it by going to 'make menuconfig' in your local source dir.
Look at the myriad of low level choices we have. Why the hell is
systemd so special that it cannot stand up to other solutions and
competition?


 It's an interesting read; I highly recommend it.

I agree. He sound more idiodic than Obama and his red line. We
all know how that turned out.

CHOICE is EVERYTHING!

My decision to run a lightweight desktop (lxde, lxqt) and have
a mesos/spark cluser across several machines is my choice.
Others like KDE becoming the cluster. CHOICE. Exclude cgroups
and it will split the community, imho. That said, we all already
split across windows, mac, androi, linux, bsd, etc etc so
it really does not matter at all, imho.

But comparing fights over editors and applications to

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: File system testing


On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 03:55:56 PM James wrote:
 J. Roeleveld joost at antarean.org writes:
   Distributed File Systems (DFS):
  
   Local (Device) File Systems LFS:
  Is my understanding correct that the top list all require one of
  the bottom  list?
  Eg. the clustering FSs only ensure the files on the LFSs are
  duplicated/spread over the various nodes?
  
  I would normally expect the clustering FS to be either the full layer
  or a  clustered block-device where an FS can be placed on top.
 
 I have not performed these installation yet. My research indicates
 that first you put the Local FS on the drive, just like any installation
 of Linux. Then you put the distributed FS on top of this. Some DFS might
 not require a LFS, but FhGFS does and does HDFS. I will not acutally
 be able to accurately answer your questions, until I start to build
 up the 3 system cluster. (a week or 2 away) is my best guess.

Playing around with clusters is on my list, but due to other activities having 
a higher priority, I haven't had much time yet.

  Otherwise it seems more like a network filesystem with caching
  options (See  AFS).
 
 OK, I'll add AFS. You may be correct on this one  or AFS might be both.

Personally, I would read up on these and see how they work. Then, based 
on that, decide if they are likely to assist in the specific situation you are 
interested in.
AFS, NFS, CIFS,... can be used for clusters, but, apart from NFS, I wouldn't 
expect much performance out of them.
If you need it to be fault-tolerant and not overly rely on a single point of 
failure, I wouldn't be using any of these. Only AFS, from my original 
investigation, showed some fault-tolerence, but needed too many 
resources (disk-space) on the clients.

  I am also interested in these filesystems, but for a slightly different
 
  scenario:
 Ok, so I the test-dummy-crash-victim I'd be honored to have, you,
 Alan, Neil, Mic  etc etc back-seat-0drive on this adventure! (The more
 I read the more it's time for burbon, bash, and a  bit of cursing
 to get started...)

Good luck and even though I'd love to join in with the testing, I simply do 
not have the time to keep up. I would probably just slow you down.

  - 2 servers in remote locations (different offices)
  - 1 of these has all the files stored (server A) at the main office
  - The other (server B - remote office) needs to offer all files
  from serverA  When server B needs to supply a file, it needs to
  check if the local copy is still the valid version.
  If yes, supply the local copy, otherwise download
  from server A. When a file is changed, server A needs to be updated.
  While server B is sharing a file, the file needs to be locked on server A
  preventing simultaneous updates.
 
 OOch, file locking (precious tells me that is alway tricky).

I need it to be locked on server A while server B has a proper write-lock to 
avoid 2 modifications to compete with each other.

 (pist, systemd is causing fits for the clustering geniuses;
 some are espousing a variety of cgroup gymnastics for phantom kills)

phantom kills?

 Spark is fault tolerant, regardless of node/memory/drive failures
 above the fault tolerance that a file system configuration many support.
 If fact, files lost can be 'regenerated' but it is computationally
 expensive.

Too much for me.

 You have to get your file system(s) set up. Then install
 mesos-0.20.0 and then spark. I have mesos mostly ready. I should
 have spark in alpha-beta this weekend. I'm fairly clueless on the
 DFS/LFS issue, so a DFS that needs no LFS might be a good first choice
 for testing the (3) system cluster.

That, or a 4th node acting like a NAS sharing the filesystem over NFS.

  I prefer not to supply the same amount of storage at server B as
  server A has. The remote location generally only needs access to 5% 
of
  the total amount of files stored on server A. But not always the same 
5%.
  Does anyone know of a filesystem that can handle this?
 
 So in clustering, from what I have read, there are all kinds of files
 passed around between the nodes and the master(s). Many are critical
 files not part of the application or scientific calculations.
 So in time, I think in a clustering evironment, all you seek is
 very possible, but it's a hunch, gut feeling, not fact. I'd put
 raid mirros underdneath that system, if it makes sense, for now,
 or just dd the stuff with a script of something kludgy (Alan is the
 king of kludge)

Hmm... mirroring between servers. Always an option, except it will not work 
for me in this case:
1) Remote location will have a domestic ADSL line. I'll be lucky if it has a 
500kbps uplink
2) Server A, currently, has around 7TB of current data that also needs to 
be available on the remote site.

With a 8mbps downlink, waiting for a file to be copied to the remote site is 
acceptable. After modifications, the new version can be copied back to 
serverA slowly during network-idle-time or when server A

Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
 Am 17.09.2014 um 21:02 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
 On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
 volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
 [snip]
 Now you use this to advertise for systemd?

 Systemd fanbois are becoming more and more desperate.
 So, systemd is used (or it has been announced that is going to be
 used) by default in all the major distributions, is available and
 working great in Gentoo, and many Gentoo users and developers use it
 happily.

 So, yeah, we are *really* desperate, obviously.

 Thanks for the laugh.

 Regards.

 you will stop laughing when redhatpoettering abandon systemd because it
 is 'fundamentally broken' and must be replaced with something else.

 Probably as soon as everybody got used to it.

 And if I guess correctly, pulseaudio will be the driving force behind
 it. Because history loves repetition.

Sure Volker, whatever you say. I'm willing to bet the future stability
of my desktop and server machines that your doomsday-scenario will not
happen. Actually, I'm already betting on it.

What are you willing to bet?

Again, thanks for the laughs. You are a funny guy.

Regards.
-- 
Canek Peláez Valdés
Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

2014-09-17 Thread Rich Freeman

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:28 PM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
 Linus should make a clear, leadership statement that there will
 always be a path for folks to use another mechanism besides systemd
 in the linux kernel;  This does not have to be a systemd vs cgroups
 discussion, but it being presented this way. A  clear statement
 of multiplicity will put this issue to rest once and for all. By not stating
 clearly was is obvious, many technically astute folks are looking for
 options. Surely a fork is emminent and it will most likely be
 the best thing to happen to linux, as the entire kernel development
 process has become tainted by those with billions of dollars.

Uh, the only thing the Linux kernel does is spawn a single process as
PID 1 and offer a VERY STABLE system call interface for that and
future processes to make requests.  Nobody is going to break sysvinit
if that happens to be the thing you tell Linux to execute as PID 1.

Whether anybody else actually supports sysvinit is a different matter.
I'm sure it will be around in Gentoo for a long time, and those with
official Gentoo support contracts will get the same care they are used
to.  :)

--
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: File system testing

2014-09-17 Thread Alec Ten Harmsel

As far as HDFS goes, I would only set that up if you will use it for
Hadoop or related tools. It's highly specific, and the performance is
not good unless you're doing a massively parallel read (what it was
designed for). I can elaborate why if anyone is actually interested.

We use Lustre for our high performance general storage. I don't have any
numbers, but I'm pretty sure it is *really* fast (10Gbit/s over IB
sounds familiar, but don't quote me on that).

 Personally, I would read up on these and see how they work. Then,
 based on that, decide if they are likely to assist in the specific
 situation you are interested in.

Always good advice.

Alec

Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

Am 17.09.2014 um 21:52 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
 On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
 volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
 Am 17.09.2014 um 21:02 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
 On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
 volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
 [snip]
 Now you use this to advertise for systemd?

 Systemd fanbois are becoming more and more desperate.
 So, systemd is used (or it has been announced that is going to be
 used) by default in all the major distributions, is available and
 working great in Gentoo, and many Gentoo users and developers use it
 happily.

 So, yeah, we are *really* desperate, obviously.

 Thanks for the laugh.

 Regards.
 you will stop laughing when redhatpoettering abandon systemd because it
 is 'fundamentally broken' and must be replaced with something else.

 Probably as soon as everybody got used to it.

 And if I guess correctly, pulseaudio will be the driving force behind
 it. Because history loves repetition.
 Sure Volker, whatever you say. I'm willing to bet the future stability
 of my desktop and server machines that your doomsday-scenario will not
 happen. Actually, I'm already betting on it.

 What are you willing to bet?

 Again, thanks for the laughs. You are a funny guy.

 Regards.

I am not betting anything.

But I want you to think about something:

devfs was the best thing since sliced bread.
As soon as everybody used it, it was broken and replaced.

hal was the best thing since sliced bread.
As soon as everybody used it, it was broken and abandoned.

*kit?
The same.

[gentoo-user] why the sudden need for glamor in xf86-video-intel

2014-09-17 Thread gottlieb

Today

EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS=--ask --deep --tree --verbose --jobs --load-average=5
emerge  --keep-going --update --changed-use @world

generated

Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild   R] x11-drivers/xf86-video-intel-2.21.15  USE=dri glamor* sna 
udev -uxa -xvmc 1,932 kB
[ebuild  N ]  x11-libs/glamor-0.6.0  USE=xv -gles -static-libs 419 kB
[ebuild   R]   media-libs/mesa-10.0.4  USE=classic egl gallium gbm* llvm 
nptl -bindist -debug -gles1 -gles2 -llvm-shared-libs -opencl -openvg -osmesa 
-pax_kernel -pic -r600-llvm-compiler (-selinux) -vdpau -wayland -xa -xvmc 
ABI_X86=(64) (-32) (-x32) VIDEO_CARDS=intel (-freedreno) -i915 -i965 -ilo 
-nouveau -r100 -r200 -r300 -r600 -radeon -radeonsi -vmware 6,636 kB

Total: 3 packages (1 new, 2 reinstalls), Size of downloads: 8,986 kB

The following USE changes are necessary to proceed:
 (see package.use in the portage(5) man page for more details)
# required by x11-libs/glamor-0.6.0
# required by x11-drivers/xf86-video-intel-2.21.15[glamor]
# required by @selected
# required by @world (argument)
=media-libs/mesa-10.0.4 gbm

So now xf86-video-intel needs glamor.  What changed?
This is a server so it did an rsync during the night, but the ebuild is
old.

thanks,
allan

[gentoo-user] Re: File system testing

Alec Ten Harmsel alec at alectenharmsel.com writes:


 As far as HDFS goes, I would only set that up if you will use it for
 Hadoop or related tools. It's highly specific, and the performance is
 not good unless you're doing a massively parallel read (what it was
 designed for). I can elaborate why if anyone is actually interested.

Acutally, from my research and my goal (one really big scientific simulation
running constantly). Many folks are recommending to skip Hadoop/HDFS all
together and go straight to mesos/spark. RDD (in-memory)  cluster calculations
are at the heart of my needs. The opposite end of the spectrum, loads
of small files and small apps; I dunno about, but, I'm all ears.
In the end, my (3) node scientific cluster will morph and support
the typical myriad  of networked applications, but I can take
a few years to figure that out, or just copy what smart guys like
you and joost do.


 We use Lustre for our high performance general storage. I don't have any
 numbers, but I'm pretty sure it is *really* fast (10Gbit/s over IB
 sounds familiar, but don't quote me on that).

AT Umich, you guys should test the FhGFS/btrfs combo. The folks 
at UCI swear about it, although they are only publishing a wee bit.
(you know, water cooler gossip).. Surely the Wolverines do not
want those californians getting up on them?

Are you guys planning a mesos/spark test? 

  Personally, I would read up on these and see how they work. Then,
  based on that, decide if they are likely to assist in the specific
  situation you are interested in.

It's a ton of reading. It's not apples-to-apple_cider type of reading.
My head hurts.


I'm leaning to  DFS/LFS

(2)  Luster/btrfs  and FhGFS/btrfs

Thoughts/comments?

James

Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

On Sep 18, 2014 2:37 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com
wrote:

Am 17.09.2014 um 18:06 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
This is highly off-topic, and systemd-related, so if you don't want
your breakfast with a healthy amount of flames, skip it.

iTWire posted an interview with Linus Torvalds[1], where the Big
Penguin himself gave a succinct and pretty fair opinion on systemd.
The gist of it can be resumed in two lines:

I don't personally mind systemd, and in fact my main desktop and
laptop both run it.

• So I think many of the original ideals of UNIX are these days
more of a mindset issue than necessarily reflecting reality of the
situation.

• ...systemd is in no way the piece that breaks with old UNIX legacy.

• I'm still old-fashioned enough that I like my log-files in text,
not binary, so I think sometimes systemd hasn't necessarily had the
best of taste, but hey, details..[.]

• (About the single-point-of-failure argument) I think people are
digging for excuses. I mean, if that is a reason to not use a piece of
software, then you shouldn't use the kernel either.

It's an interesting read; I highly recommend it.

[1]
http://www.itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/65402-torvalds-says-he-has-no-strong-opinions-on-systemd

Now you use this to advertise for systemd?

Systemd fanbois are becoming more and more desperate.

Oh give it a rest volker. its been obvious for years on this list that when
it really came down to it, many systemd critics (and i airquote that
because the amount of critical thinking is imaginary) were almost entirely
devoid of technical arguments when or even background knowledge, to the
point of embarassing themselves on the amount of unix knowledge they
purport to know.

theres been a terrible history of being blatantly ignorant about what a
software does and yet running the mouth about why its wrong, as if you had
a better idea on how to coordinate hundreds of disparate develeoper
projects on how to run their own ships. blatantly refusing to give a crap
what an init thingy is, or showing a hilarious understanding of what fhs
is supposed to do or solve, to downright manufacturing what the /usr split
was supposed to be about, or denying that boot up race conditions were a
thing... the list goes on and it only betrays the haters' biases.

fact of the matter is running to Linus' latest flame on udev or systemd or
fhs etc has been a standard go-to for haters t bring up for years past...
and now that Linus is like well its okay blablabla now the systemd peeps
are desperate?

no, you are. go read yourself some fucking man pages, maybe youll learn a
little unix.

Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
 Am 17.09.2014 um 21:52 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
 On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
 volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
 Am 17.09.2014 um 21:02 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
 On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
 volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
 [snip]
 Now you use this to advertise for systemd?

 Systemd fanbois are becoming more and more desperate.
 So, systemd is used (or it has been announced that is going to be
 used) by default in all the major distributions, is available and
 working great in Gentoo, and many Gentoo users and developers use it
 happily.

 So, yeah, we are *really* desperate, obviously.

 Thanks for the laugh.

 Regards.
 you will stop laughing when redhatpoettering abandon systemd because it
 is 'fundamentally broken' and must be replaced with something else.

 Probably as soon as everybody got used to it.

 And if I guess correctly, pulseaudio will be the driving force behind
 it. Because history loves repetition.
 Sure Volker, whatever you say. I'm willing to bet the future stability
 of my desktop and server machines that your doomsday-scenario will not
 happen. Actually, I'm already betting on it.

 What are you willing to bet?

 Again, thanks for the laughs. You are a funny guy.

 Regards.

 I am not betting anything.

I figured it.

 But I want you to think about something:

 devfs was the best thing since sliced bread.
 As soon as everybody used it, it was broken and replaced.

 hal was the best thing since sliced bread.
 As soon as everybody used it, it was broken and abandoned.

 *kit?
 The same.

Yeah. So it happened with XFree86, aRts, esd, gnome-vfs, DCOP,
sendmail, and it will happen again with dbus (I'm willing to bet it
will be replaced, at least in Linux, with kdbus). And, BTW, it's
happening with SysV being replaced in Linux with systemd.

It happens all the time. It's a good thing. And it happened for *VERY*
different reasons in each case. Also, the transition has been
sometimes somewhat difficult (HAL comes to mind), but most of the
times really easy: we used devfs when I switched to Gentoo more than
10 years ago, and I don't remember being difficult the switch to udev.
XFree86 = X.org was also basically trivial.

Of course systemd can be replaced; if something cooler gets written,
we'll switch to it. But given the team behind systemd, and the design
it has, it's gonna be very difficult.

Using Linus words, you are making excuses. You can compare systemd to
HAL, but doing so only shows that you don't know the code, the design,
and the history behind both projects.

Regards.
-- 
Canek Peláez Valdés
Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

[gentoo-user] Re: File system testing

J. Roeleveld joost at antarean.org writes:

 AFS has caching and can survive temporary disappearance of the server.

Excellent for low bandwidth connections. Most DFS have mechanisms to 
deal with transient failures, but not as generaous on the time-scale
as AFS. I believe, if I recall correctly, these hi-latency, low bandwith
recovery mechanism keen design paramters, at least bake in the
CMU develop cycples, for AFS?

While attractive  for your situation, these features might actually
be detrimental to a hi_performance distributed cluster's needs for
a DFS?


 For me, I need to be able to provide Samba filesharing on top of that 
 layer on 2 different locations as I don't  see the network bandwidth to 
 be sufficient for normal operations. (ADSL uplinks tend to be dead slow)

Yea, I'm not going to be testing OpenAFS for my needs, unless I read
some compelling publish data on it's applicability to high end
clusters best choice as a DFS.

It's probably great for SETI etc etc.


James

[gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

Rich Freeman rich0 at gentoo.org writes:


 Uh, the only thing the Linux kernel does is spawn a single process as
 PID 1 and offer a VERY STABLE system call interface for that and
 future processes to make requests.  Nobody is going to break sysvinit
 if that happens to be the thing you tell Linux to execute as PID 1.

OK, where are your performance studies on how wonderful systemd is?
Simple (2) identical system except for systemd only on one. Run a
wide variety of tests, publish the data. 

Publish perfomanced metrics; Choice; Unreasonable?



 Whether anybody else actually supports sysvinit is a different matter.
 I'm sure it will be around in Gentoo for a long time, and those with
 official Gentoo support contracts will get the same care they are used
 to.  :)

I'm not sure if this is a threat, a promise or are you just trash talkin
with me now?

Besides, there is another thing you are not considering. The world of
embedded linux  user linux. So, the embedded designers are all 
wonderfully in line with systemd?  Have you been to any of those
forums? They live by cgroups, because a few folks showed them how
to minimize embedded systems with age old state diagrams. Have you
offered them the systemd or highway plan yet?


It's not me, Rich, it lots of other technically astute folks that
are not happy. I just want choice. I hope systemd is wildly successful,
but I'm old school, so you and others are going to have to show me.



James

Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

2014-09-17 Thread Mick

On Wednesday 17 Sep 2014 22:03:14 Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
 Yeah. So it happened with XFree86, aRts, esd, gnome-vfs, DCOP,
 sendmail,

Aheam!  Excuse me, but there's nothing wrong with sendmail!  :-p

-- 
Regards,
Mick


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

On Sep 18, 2014 5:19 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:

 Rich Freeman rich0 at gentoo.org writes:


  Uh, the only thing the Linux kernel does is spawn a single process as
  PID 1 and offer a VERY STABLE system call interface for that and
  future processes to make requests.  Nobody is going to break sysvinit
  if that happens to be the thing you tell Linux to execute as PID 1.

 OK, where are your performance studies on how wonderful systemd is?
 Simple (2) identical system except for systemd only on one. Run a
 wide variety of tests, publish the data.

 Publish perfomanced metrics; Choice; Unreasonable?


The classic open source answer to being told to do a lot of work on
publicly available data is

do it yourself, youre not paying my bills you entitled .
(paraphrased from code talks)



  Whether anybody else actually supports sysvinit is a different matter.
  I'm sure it will be around in Gentoo for a long time, and those with
  official Gentoo support contracts will get the same care they are used
  to.  :)

 I'm not sure if this is a threat, a promise or are you just trash talkin
 with me now?

 Besides, there is another thing you are not considering. The world of
 embedded linux  user linux. So, the embedded designers are all
 wonderfully in line with systemd?  Have you been to any of those
 forums? They live by cgroups, because a few folks showed them how
 to minimize embedded systems with age old state diagrams. Have you
 offered them the systemd or highway plan yet?

last i checked, systemd uses cgroups - its a central part of the service
management bits. so what the frack are you on about?


 It's not me, Rich, it lots of other technically astute folks that
 are not happy. I just want choice. I hope systemd is wildly successful,
 but I'm old school, so you and others are going to have to show me.



 James

[gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com writes:


  Publish perfomanced metrics; Choice; Unreasonable?
 The classic open source answer to being told to do a lot of 
 work on publicly available data is

I'm sorry, I must have missed your link to the published data?
Sure it exist and I have just missed it? 


James

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

On Sep 18, 2014 5:36 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:

 Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com writes:


   Publish perfomanced metrics; Choice; Unreasonable?
  The classic open source answer to being told to do a lot of
  work on publicly available data is

 I'm sorry, I must have missed your link to the published data?
 Sure it exist and I have just missed it?



Make it yourself you entitled dickwad. this is what you get for being
polite to idiots.

[gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com writes:


  Publish perfomanced metrics; Choice; Unreasonable?

 The classic open source answer to being told to do a lot of 
 work on publicly available data 

Ah, here is some of the tesing you are referring to?

http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-March/017570.html

Surely there is more? Please explian your position
with published data and comments, as I am listening to you!

comparitivly,
James

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 5:46 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:

 Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com writes:


   Publish perfomanced metrics; Choice; Unreasonable?

  The classic open source answer to being told to do a lot of
  work on publicly available data

 Ah, here is some of the tesing you are referring to?

 http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-March/017570.html

 Surely there is more? Please explian your position
 with published data and comments, as I am listening to you!


My position is that you're an idiot and a troll.

The code is out there. Freely available. Both systemd and sysvinit. If you
wanted to measure both, you could, literally, in the time it took since you
first posted in this thread till now you could have measured several times
and left mean comments about whichever system you hated the most.

You're the only one in this thread that's imposing on everyone to produce
anything. You're the only one in this thread that SHOULD be producing
anything. That's how open source works and that's how it's supposed to
work. We're not your unpaid researchers.

-- 
This email is:[ ] actionable   [ ] fyi[ ] social
Response needed:  [ ] yes  [ ] up to you  [ ] no
Time-sensitive:   [ ] immediate[ ] soon   [ ] none

Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

Am 17.09.2014 um 23:03 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
 On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
 volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
 Am 17.09.2014 um 21:52 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
 On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
 volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
 Am 17.09.2014 um 21:02 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
 On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
 volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
 [snip]
 Now you use this to advertise for systemd?

 Systemd fanbois are becoming more and more desperate.
 So, systemd is used (or it has been announced that is going to be
 used) by default in all the major distributions, is available and
 working great in Gentoo, and many Gentoo users and developers use it
 happily.

 So, yeah, we are *really* desperate, obviously.

 Thanks for the laugh.

 Regards.
 you will stop laughing when redhatpoettering abandon systemd because it
 is 'fundamentally broken' and must be replaced with something else.

 Probably as soon as everybody got used to it.

 And if I guess correctly, pulseaudio will be the driving force behind
 it. Because history loves repetition.
 Sure Volker, whatever you say. I'm willing to bet the future stability
 of my desktop and server machines that your doomsday-scenario will not
 happen. Actually, I'm already betting on it.

 What are you willing to bet?

 Again, thanks for the laughs. You are a funny guy.

 Regards.
 I am not betting anything.
 I figured it.

 But I want you to think about something:

 devfs was the best thing since sliced bread.
 As soon as everybody used it, it was broken and replaced.

 hal was the best thing since sliced bread.
 As soon as everybody used it, it was broken and abandoned.

 *kit?
 The same.
 Yeah. So it happened with XFree86, aRts, esd, gnome-vfs, DCOP,
 sendmail, and it will happen again with dbus (I'm willing to bet it
 will be replaced, at least in Linux, with kdbus). And, BTW, it's
 happening with SysV being replaced in Linux with systemd.

 It happens all the time. It's a good thing. And it happened for *VERY*
 different reasons in each case. Also, the transition has been
 sometimes somewhat difficult (HAL comes to mind), but most of the
 times really easy: we used devfs when I switched to Gentoo more than
 10 years ago, and I don't remember being difficult the switch to udev.
 XFree86 = X.org was also basically trivial.

 Of course systemd can be replaced; if something cooler gets written,
 we'll switch to it. But given the team behind systemd, and the design
 it has, it's gonna be very difficult.

 Using Linus words, you are making excuses. You can compare systemd to
 HAL, but doing so only shows that you don't know the code, the design,
 and the history behind both projects.

 Regards.

there was no breakage with xfree-to-xorg. True. But hal, yes. No upower
breakage. *kit breakage. The list is too long to ignore.

Arts was not something whole systems depended upon. And whatever
gnome-thingy you depend upon, you are fucked, because those guys are
infected with the same mindset. As soon as the bugs are ironed out and
everybody is using it: abandom it for something else.

That has nothing to do with 'improvement', or 'development' it is just
stupid.

AFAIR dcop was replaced, because of the freedesktop-gnome guys. Not
because anything was wrong with it. And look where it got us. No
improvement at all.

Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

Am 17.09.2014 um 22:58 schrieb Mark David Dumlao:

On Sep 18, 2014 2:37 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann
volkerar...@googlemail.com mailto:volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:

Am 17.09.2014 um 18:06 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
This is highly off-topic, and systemd-related, so if you don't want
your breakfast with a healthy amount of flames, skip it.

iTWire posted an interview with Linus Torvalds[1], where the Big
Penguin himself gave a succinct and pretty fair opinion on systemd.
The gist of it can be resumed in two lines:

I don't personally mind systemd, and in fact my main desktop and
laptop both run it.

• So I think many of the original ideals of UNIX are these days
more of a mindset issue than necessarily reflecting reality of the
situation.

• ...systemd is in no way the piece that breaks with old UNIX
legacy.

• I'm still old-fashioned enough that I like my log-files in text,
not binary, so I think sometimes systemd hasn't necessarily had the
best of taste, but hey, details..[.]

• (About the single-point-of-failure argument) I think people are
digging for excuses. I mean, if that is a reason to not use a piece of
software, then you shouldn't use the kernel either.

It's an interesting read; I highly recommend it.

[1]
http://www.itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/65402-torvalds-says-he-has-no-strong-opinions-on-systemd

Now you use this to advertise for systemd?

Systemd fanbois are becoming more and more desperate.

Oh give it a rest volker. its been obvious for years on this list that
when it really came down to it, many systemd critics (and i airquote
that because the amount of critical thinking is imaginary) were almost
entirely devoid of technical arguments when or even background
knowledge, to the point of embarassing themselves on the amount of
unix knowledge they purport to know.

theres been a terrible history of being blatantly ignorant about what
a software does and yet running the mouth about why its wrong, as if
you had a better idea on how to coordinate hundreds of disparate
develeoper projects on how to run their own ships. blatantly refusing
to give a crap what an init thingy is, or showing a hilarious
understanding of what fhs is supposed to do or solve, to downright
manufacturing what the /usr split was supposed to be about, or denying
that boot up race conditions were a thing... the list goes on and it
only betrays the haters' biases.

fact of the matter is running to Linus' latest flame on udev or
systemd or fhs etc has been a standard go-to for haters t bring up for
years past... and now that Linus is like well its okay blablabla now
the systemd peeps are desperate?

no, you are. go read yourself some fucking man pages, maybe youll
learn a little unix.

oh give it a rest Mark. Its been obvious for years on this list that
systemd fanbois are constantly advocating their crap. From 'it boots so
much faster' to 'Linus does not hate it'.

Do we really have to endure it?

With all the fuckups that had happened in the past and the systemd-devs
were unable to admit?

Seriously, keep the kindergarten away, ok? There are enough mailing
lists where you can pat each others back and tell yourselves how great
systemd is. You don't need to advertise it EVERYWHERE.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

Am 17.09.2014 um 23:42 schrieb Mark David Dumlao:


 On Sep 18, 2014 5:36 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com
 mailto:wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
 
  Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com http://gmail.com writes:
 
 
Publish perfomanced metrics; Choice; Unreasonable?
   The classic open source answer to being told to do a lot of
   work on publicly available data is
 
  I'm sorry, I must have missed your link to the published data?
  Sure it exist and I have just missed it?
 
 

 Make it yourself you entitled dickwad. this is what you get for being
 polite to idiots.


well, you claim there is data. So provide at least a set of search terms
to find it.

Also some comparism of code size systemd vs init+ lets say metalog.

Also, some explanation why it is a good idea to read the kernel command
line and reuse commands from there. Like 'debug'.

[gentoo-user] copy file and preserve ownership

2014-09-17 Thread Joseph


I like to use meld to copy file but meld does now preserve ownership of the 
file that it copy.
rsyc does but how do I use rysnc to copy let say file that are newer then 
certain date ?

I was trying to use:
find /home/myuser/oldir/* -mtime -60 -exec cp {} /home/myuser/newdir/ \;

but cp does not preserve file ownership either.

I was planning on copying hylafax-files (faxes) from one server to another and most of those 
files have ownership uucp:60002 or uucp:uucp

--
Joseph

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 6:41 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann 
volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:

  Am 17.09.2014 um 23:42 schrieb Mark David Dumlao:


 On Sep 18, 2014 5:36 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
 
  Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com writes:
 
 
Publish perfomanced metrics; Choice; Unreasonable?
   The classic open source answer to being told to do a lot of
   work on publicly available data is
 
  I'm sorry, I must have missed your link to the published data?
  Sure it exist and I have just missed it?
 
 

 Make it yourself you entitled dickwad. this is what you get for being
 polite to idiots.


 well, you claim there is data. So provide at least a set of search terms
 to find it.


There is the code and his system, and it's all the data he needs.


 Also some comparism of code size systemd vs init+ lets say metalog.

 Also, some explanation why it is a good idea to read the kernel command
 line and reuse commands from there. Like 'debug'.


You're just as bad as him. No seriously, people like to talk about how high
the signal to noise ratio of the gentoo mailing list is, and it would be
much higher if not for trolls like you putting in so much noise and
distraction. Canek has been patient as all heck for so many years now, even
down to the point of manning up and providing public ebuilds for systemd
integration, even an overlay that allowed sysvinit and systemd to integrate
better, while you naysayers whine more and more about how he practically
doesn't cook breakfast for you. Separating init functions from openrc?
Canek's helped a big deal with that. It's a disgrace and you really ought
to be ashamed of yourself for harassing someone who _actually provided
code_ while you just piled more and more bullshit on his plate.

And now here he is again, being patient to a fault, pointing out that one
of the excuses we've seen again, and again, and again, and again hoisted on
him - that Linus doesn't like something therefore its bad - is actually
false, again providing sources to back up what he's saying while you piddle
your Unix plattitudes, and now what? Harass him to do even more unpaid
research again?

I hate to see people abused like this. He won't swear so I'm going to do it
for him since I've gotten sick of this circle-jerking mailing list.

Stop being a jerk and acting like it's cool.

He wants data? It's not hard to produce it. Install systemd and sysvinit
side by side (something Canek helped become possible), boot once to openrc
and boot another to systemd. If there's no difference, YOU publish it and
be open to public scrutiny, not him.
-- 
This email is:[ ] actionable   [ ] fyi[ ] social
Response needed:  [ ] yes  [ ] up to you  [ ] no
Time-sensitive:   [ ] immediate[ ] soon   [ ] none

[gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com writes:


perfomanced metrics; Choice; Unreasonable?


  work on publicly available data

  Ah, here is some of the tesing you are referring
to?http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-March/017570.html

 My position is that you're an idiot and a troll.
 
 The code is out there. Freely available. Both systemd and sysvinit. If 
 you wanted to measure both, you could, literally, in the time it 
 took since you first posted in this thread till now you could 
 have measured several times and left mean comments about whichever 
 system you hated the most.

This like compares kdbus to a test code ibench. It already done.
Since you are so wise and I so, well limited, why don't you
explain how the upcoming kdbus is giong to be faster?

Speed in the kernel is important?


 You're the only one in this thread that's imposing on everyone 
 to produce anything. You're the only one in this thread that 
 SHOULD be producing anything. That's how open source works and 
 that's how it's supposed to work. We're not your unpaid researchers.

I'm sorry, Volker pointed out that the pro systemd folks came to
gentoo-user, waiving linux's dirty panties around. We ask a few
simple questions, now you result to name calling?

Benchmarking lowlevel effects in the kernel is not new. Important
changes are frequently marketed to the rest of the technical user
community, by  gee guys look how fast kdbus is going to be

So, take your panties off, and show us just how fast you are?
systemd + kdbus?


Other *udev projects you would recommend?
I accept your sceptre, but you must illuminate things a bit.


hugs and kisses?
James

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

2014-09-17 Thread Rich Freeman

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 5:18 PM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
 Rich Freeman rich0 at gentoo.org writes:
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:28 PM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com
wrote:

 Linus should make a clear, leadership statement that there will
 always be a path for folks to use another mechanism besides systemd
 in the linux kernel; This does not have to be a systemd vs cgroups
 discussion, but it being presented this way. A clear statement of
 multiplicity will put this issue to rest once and for all. By not
 stating clearly was is obvious, many technically astute folks are
 looking for options. Surely a fork is emminent and it will most
 likely be the best thing to happen to linux, as the entire kernel
 development process has become tainted by those with billions of
 dollars.

 Uh, the only thing the Linux kernel does is spawn a single process as
 PID 1 and offer a VERY STABLE system call interface for that and
 future processes to make requests.  Nobody is going to break sysvinit
 if that happens to be the thing you tell Linux to execute as PID 1.

 OK, where are your performance studies on how wonderful systemd is?
 Simple (2) identical system except for systemd only on one. Run a
 wide variety of tests, publish the data.

 Publish perfomanced metrics; Choice; Unreasonable?

What does your reply have to do with my email?  You asked for a clear
statement from Linus that there will always be a way to boot linux
without systemd.  I simply stated that this was nonsensical, because
there is nothing specific to any init implementation in linux.  Linux
is a kernel, and it launches exactly one process.  All the stuff
you're arguing about happens in userspace.  Sure, sooner or later
kdbus is likely to be added to the kernel, but just like dbus nobody
has to use it, and I'm sure like anything else in the kernel you won't
have to build it if you don't want it.

I really could care less about impressing you with systemd metrics.
If you want to believe that it has no value, fine.


 Whether anybody else actually supports sysvinit is a different matter.
 I'm sure it will be around in Gentoo for a long time, and those with
 official Gentoo support contracts will get the same care they are used
 to.  :)

 I'm not sure if this is a threat, a promise or are you just trash talkin
 with me now?

Hint, the :) means that I'm joking.  My point is that nothing is
going to break sysvinit, but that doesn't mean that somebody is going
to build a fancy Linux system for you based on it.  The fact is that
nobody is paying a dime to use Gentoo linux, and whether sysvinit is
or isn't supported, in practice the amount of guaranteed support
you're going to get for it either way is zero.

Nobody is threatening to kill your kitten.  Nobody is offering to feed
it forever, either.  There are plenty of Gentoo devs who prefer
sysvinit, so I doubt it will go away anytime soon.  Gentoo is about
choice.  But, over the years there have also been plenty of choices
that went away.  If you REALLY care about sysvinit then you should
consider contributing more than emails.


 Besides, there is another thing you are not considering. The world of
 embedded linux  user linux. So, the embedded designers are all
 wonderfully in line with systemd?  Have you been to any of those
 forums? They live by cgroups, because a few folks showed them how
 to minimize embedded systems with age old state diagrams. Have you
 offered them the systemd or highway plan yet?

So, the only widespread consumer devices that I'm aware of that run
Gentoo derivatives run neither sysvinit nor systemd - they run
upstart, despite upstart not even being in the portage tree, or a
single upstart configuration script.  Heck, they probably sell more
devices running upstart than there are devices running Ubuntu.

Sure, that isn't really what I'd call embedded, but my point is that
people doing embedded work are going to tailor whatever they have to
in order to get the results they want.  I wouldn't be surprised if
many of embedded devices don't even run sysvinit.  Gentoo is a great
starting point for an embedded system precisely because it is so
adaptable, but we don't have any configurations that I'd really call
plug and play for the embedded world, nor do I think such a
one-size-fits-all configuration is even possible when you're concerned
about every byte of RAM or milliwatt of power.

 It's not me, Rich, it lots of other technically astute folks that
 are not happy. I just want choice.

Sure, and I'd like a pony.  The fact is that on Gentoo you have
choice.  You may or may not have it forever, but nobody is paying for
Gentoo so nobody can count on ANYTHING in Gentoo being around forever.
You'll have it as long as somebody cares to support it.  We allow
proxy maintainers - that somebody could even be you.

Nobody owes anybody a roadmap for a community-based distro.  If you
want somebody to owe you something then use a distro that is
commercially supported.  Of course, if your

[gentoo-user] Re: copy file and preserve ownership

2014-09-17 Thread Jouni Kosonen

Joseph wrote:

 I like to use meld to copy file but meld does now preserve ownership of
 the file that it copy. rsyc does but how do I use rysnc to copy let say
 file that are newer then certain date ?
 
 I was trying to use:
 find /home/myuser/oldir/* -mtime -60 -exec cp {} /home/myuser/newdir/ \;
 
 but cp does not preserve file ownership either.
 
 I was planning on copying hylafax-files (faxes) from one server to another
 and most of those files have ownership uucp:60002 or uucp:uucp
 

From man cp:
...

   -p same as --preserve=mode,ownership,timestamps

   --preserve[=ATTR_LIST]
  preserve the specified attributes (default: mode,ownership,
  timestamps), if possible additional attributes: context, 
  links, xattr, all


Might I suggest a pattern here? ;-)
---
Jouni

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 7:11 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:

 Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com writes:
  You're the only one in this thread that's imposing on everyone
  to produce anything. You're the only one in this thread that
  SHOULD be producing anything. That's how open source works and
  that's how it's supposed to work. We're not your unpaid researchers.

 I'm sorry, Volker pointed out that the pro systemd folks came to
 gentoo-user, waiving linux's dirty panties around. We ask a few
 simple questions, now you result to name calling?


There is no gentoo-user separate from pro systemd folks. You made that
up. pro systemd folks have been part of gentoo user for years and years
now, and they've been harassed repeatedly with simple loaded questions
based on wrong assumptions for years and years now.

You know all those bits I mentioned to Volker about people getting FHS
wrong, or not bothering to read man pages, or not giving a crap what an
init thingy was and throwing public tantrums on it? I didn't make those
up. They're here, on this list, and I've had to wade in that crap for a few
years, and even in those threads where I only intended to give practical
advice like if you want to load udev earlier, you could write an init
script for it... or something to that effect. Only to be heaped by
plateful after plateful of vitriolic, _technically empty_ crap and
callbacks to Unix platitudes half the sayers don't even understand that
well.

Fact of the matter is systemd isn't invading gentoo, it's part of it now,
and has been for quite a while. All those big changes many people have been
sore about on this list could have been turned into complete non-problems
if we took all the smart-brains time spent arguing this point to instead
write integration packages the way Canek did.
-- 
This email is:[ ] actionable   [ ] fyi[ ] social
Response needed:  [ ] yes  [ ] up to you  [ ] no
Time-sensitive:   [ ] immediate[ ] soon   [ ] none

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: copy file and preserve ownership

2014-09-17 Thread Joseph


On 09/18/14 02:14, Jouni Kosonen wrote:

Joseph wrote:


I like to use meld to copy file but meld does now preserve ownership of
the file that it copy. rsyc does but how do I use rysnc to copy let say
file that are newer then certain date ?

I was trying to use:
find /home/myuser/oldir/* -mtime -60 -exec cp {} /home/myuser/newdir/ \;

but cp does not preserve file ownership either.

I was planning on copying hylafax-files (faxes) from one server to another
and most of those files have ownership uucp:60002 or uucp:uucp



From man cp:
...

  -p same as --preserve=mode,ownership,timestamps

  --preserve[=ATTR_LIST]
 preserve the specified attributes (default: mode,ownership,
 timestamps), if possible additional attributes: context,
 links, xattr, all


Might I suggest a pattern here? ;-)
---
Jouni


Thank, missed that :-/

--
Joseph

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

2014-09-17 Thread Alec Ten Harmsel

Mark David Dumlao wrote:
 The code is out there. Freely available. Both systemd and sysvinit.
 If you wanted to measure both, you could, literally, in the time it
 took since you first posted in this thread till now you could have
 measured several times and left mean comments about whichever
 system you hated the most.

Unfortunately, the systemd guys keep screaming that systemd is faster,
and burden of proof is on the party that's claiming something. It's not
James'/Volker's responsibility to prove that systemd isn't faster.

That said, you guys need to stop flaming. If anything, it's easy to
dislike SysVInit because the init scripts it uses are piles of bash,
compared to a Systemd init script that has a handful of systemd config.

Is systemd starting to encompass too much? I think so, but who cares? If
we want an init manager that reads systemd-like files but doesn't do
anything else (hostnamectl, logging, udev, etc.), I guess we'll have to
make one.

Alec

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

2014-09-17 Thread Rich Freeman

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Alec Ten Harmsel
a...@alectenharmsel.com wrote:
 Mark David Dumlao wrote:
 The code is out there. Freely available. Both systemd and sysvinit.
 If you wanted to measure both, you could, literally, in the time it
 took since you first posted in this thread till now you could have
 measured several times and left mean comments about whichever
 system you hated the most.

 Unfortunately, the systemd guys keep screaming that systemd is faster,
 and burden of proof is on the party that's claiming something. It's not
 James'/Volker's responsibility to prove that systemd isn't faster.


I think Mark fully appreciates that if he wants to change your mind
he's going to have to work hard to do it.

I just don't think he really cares.

The argument about whether systemd is better/worse than sysvinit was a
debate back in 2012-2013.  Just about anybody actually contributing to
distros has moved on since then.  That doesn't mean that there is 100%
agreement on anything, just that at this point it seems unlikely that
things are going to change much either way on that front.  A few
distros are likely to avoid systemd, and the vast majority are in the
process of adopting it.

With Gentoo you can run whatever you want for PID 1, just as you can
use whatever bootloader, kernel, syslog, etc you want.  Not all the
init options have equal support - upstart isn't even in the tree and
few packages supply scripts for runit.  But, nobody is going to get in
anybody's way if they want to introduce upstart, etc.

The fact is among those actually contributing to projects like openrc,
udev, eudev, and systemd everybody tends to get along just fine.
There is plenty of interest in finding common ground and collaborating
so that anybody switching from one to another can do so easily, and so
that these projects don't diverge where it isn't intended.  It seems
like the heaviest fighting seems to involve folks who don't contribute
to any of these.

--
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] why the sudden need for glamor in xf86-video-intel

2014-09-17 Thread gottlieb

On Wed, Sep 17 2014, Neil Bothwick wrote:

 On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 16:51:17 -0400, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote:

 The following USE changes are necessary to proceed:
  (see package.use in the portage(5) man page for more details)
 # required by x11-libs/glamor-0.6.0
 # required by x11-drivers/xf86-video-intel-2.21.15[glamor]
 # required by @selected
 # required by @world (argument)
 =media-libs/mesa-10.0.4 gbm
 
 So now xf86-video-intel needs glamor.  What changed?
 This is a server so it did an rsync during the night, but the ebuild is
 old.

 xorg-server gained a glamor USE flag, which appears to be enabled by
 default in at least the profiles I am using. You are free to turn it off
 if you know you don't need it.

Thank you.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:

 On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Alec Ten Harmsel
 a...@alectenharmsel.com wrote:
  Mark David Dumlao wrote:
  The code is out there. Freely available. Both systemd and sysvinit.
  If you wanted to measure both, you could, literally, in the time it
  took since you first posted in this thread till now you could have
  measured several times and left mean comments about whichever
  system you hated the most.
 
  Unfortunately, the systemd guys keep screaming that systemd is faster,
  and burden of proof is on the party that's claiming something. It's not
  James'/Volker's responsibility to prove that systemd isn't faster.
 

 I think Mark fully appreciates that if he wants to change your mind
 he's going to have to work hard to do it.

 I just don't think he really cares.

 The argument about whether systemd is better/worse than sysvinit was a
 debate back in 2012-2013.  Just about anybody actually contributing to
 distros has moved on since then.  That doesn't mean that there is 100%
 agreement on anything, just that at this point it seems unlikely that
 things are going to change much either way on that front.  A few
 distros are likely to avoid systemd, and the vast majority are in the
 process of adopting it.


Yeah Rich gets it. systemd guys keep screaming that systemd is faster
seems to imply that most of us give a tweet  what PID1 you're running. When
we don't. Most often what happens is some news on systemd developments
comes up, people say yay!, and other people say you're destroying Linux
and gonna doom us all and they act all righteous when we say uh, what?
like it matters to us what you're running.

Fact is if it's _you_ that seems to give a tweet about systemd speed, so
it's on _you_ to measure it, I don't really care what you think. The fact
that you think pid1's speed or resource usage might be a big deal is very
indicative on how badly informed you are in the first place.

It reminds me a lot of how some communities treat Gentoo users, asking them
to off the bat produce speed benchmarks comparing them to Arch or whatnot.
As if the Gentoo users gave a tweet about what other users run on their
machines in their own time... no, they very largely don't and there's no
good reason for them to be convincing other people about it.
-- 
This email is:[ ] actionable   [ ] fyi[ ] social
Response needed:  [ ] yes  [ ] up to you  [ ] no
Time-sensitive:   [ ] immediate[ ] soon   [ ] none

[gentoo-user] Is systemd-journald a complete replacement for sysklogd?

2014-09-17 Thread walt

I'm trying to track down a bad bug in dhcpcd-6.4.4, so (unlike most days ;) I'm
paying close attention to the output of journalctl.

The confusing part is that the output of journalctl is *very* different 
depending
on whether dhcpcd starts correctly during boot. Or not.

I think I may be shooting myself in the usual foot by continuing to use sysklogd
along with systemd (using my own custom *.service script to start sysklogd).

If journald is really a complete syslog replacement then I'll dump my old kludge
and be very happy to do it.

Canek, maybe?  Anyone?

Re: [gentoo-user] Is systemd-journald a complete replacement for sysklogd?

2014-09-17 Thread Nilesh Govindrajan

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 8:26 AM, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote:
 I'm trying to track down a bad bug in dhcpcd-6.4.4, so (unlike most days ;) 
 I'm
 paying close attention to the output of journalctl.

 The confusing part is that the output of journalctl is *very* different 
 depending
 on whether dhcpcd starts correctly during boot. Or not.

 I think I may be shooting myself in the usual foot by continuing to use 
 sysklogd
 along with systemd (using my own custom *.service script to start sysklogd).

 If journald is really a complete syslog replacement then I'll dump my old 
 kludge
 and be very happy to do it.

 Canek, maybe?  Anyone?





journalctl -f -u dhcpcd

should help you with that. That's what I use to hunt down bugs in configuration.

Re: [gentoo-user] Is systemd-journald a complete replacement for sysklogd?

It is, but.

You'll have to get used to running and searching via journalctl instead of
processing the logs directly.
Journal is not persistent across reboots by default, but you can
reconfigure it to be. (just create /var/log/journal)
Last I recall you won't get fine-grained per-daemon space controls on the
logs, just a system-wide size and retention time for all journal entries.

Usually that's enough, but if all else fails you can fallback to another
logger.

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:56 AM, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote:

 I'm trying to track down a bad bug in dhcpcd-6.4.4, so (unlike most days
 ;) I'm
 paying close attention to the output of journalctl.

 The confusing part is that the output of journalctl is *very* different
 depending
 on whether dhcpcd starts correctly during boot. Or not.

 I think I may be shooting myself in the usual foot by continuing to use
 sysklogd
 along with systemd (using my own custom *.service script to start
 sysklogd).

 If journald is really a complete syslog replacement then I'll dump my old
 kludge
 and be very happy to do it.

 Canek, maybe?  Anyone?







-- 
This email is:[ ] actionable   [ ] fyi[ ] social
Response needed:  [ ] yes  [ ] up to you  [ ] no
Time-sensitive:   [ ] immediate[ ] soon   [ ] none

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

2014-09-17 Thread Alec Ten Harmsel


On 09/17/2014 10:40 PM, Mark David Dumlao wrote:

 Fact is if it's _you_ that seems to give a tweet about systemd speed,
 so it's on _you_ to measure it, I don't really care what you think. The
 fact that you think pid1's speed or resource usage might be a big deal
 is very indicative on how badly informed you are in the first place.

I don't care about systemd speed. I really am completely ambivalent
about PID1; I've run Upstart, I've run systemd, I've run OpenRC, and
they all work fine. All I'm saying is that a common point in the systemd
community seems to be its awesome performance (unless I'm reading the
wrong documentation and conversations), and burden of proof is on the
party making the claim.

But also, caring about speed and resource usage are important. If one of
the three PID1s I've mentioned took 30 seconds to boot my system, I
would not use it. If it took 10% of my RAM, I would not use it. Lucky
for us, all three are fast enough and have a small enough footprint that
it doesn't matter which is used.

Alec

Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd


On 17/09/14 23:43, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
 Am 17.09.2014 um 21:52 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
 On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
 volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
 Am 17.09.2014 um 21:02 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
 On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
 volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
 [snip]
 Now you use this to advertise for systemd?

 Systemd fanbois are becoming more and more desperate.
 So, systemd is used (or it has been announced that is going to be
 used) by default in all the major distributions, is available and
 working great in Gentoo, and many Gentoo users and developers use it
 happily.

 So, yeah, we are *really* desperate, obviously.

 Thanks for the laugh.

 Regards.
 you will stop laughing when redhatpoettering abandon systemd because it
 is 'fundamentally broken' and must be replaced with something else.

 Probably as soon as everybody got used to it.

 And if I guess correctly, pulseaudio will be the driving force behind
 it. Because history loves repetition.
 Sure Volker, whatever you say. I'm willing to bet the future stability
 of my desktop and server machines that your doomsday-scenario will not
 happen. Actually, I'm already betting on it.

 What are you willing to bet?

 Again, thanks for the laughs. You are a funny guy.

 Regards.
 I am not betting anything.

 But I want you to think about something:

 devfs was the best thing since sliced bread.
 As soon as everybody used it, it was broken and replaced.

There was no problem with this development.


 hal was the best thing since sliced bread.
 As soon as everybody used it, it was broken and abandoned.

That's untrue. HAL was responsibly replaced with UDisks.
As in, when Gentoo got rid of sys-apps/hal, we made sure everything was
ported to UDisks or that unported applications that were removed with
sys-apps/hal, had a direct replacement available.
It was a logical development, that's all.

 *kit?
 The same.




FUD.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd


On 18/09/14 03:12, Alec Ten Harmsel wrote:
 Mark David Dumlao wrote:
 The code is out there. Freely available. Both systemd and sysvinit.
 If you wanted to measure both, you could, literally, in the time it
 took since you first posted in this thread till now you could have
 measured several times and left mean comments about whichever
 system you hated the most.
 Unfortunately, the systemd guys keep screaming that systemd is faster,
 and burden of proof is on the party that's claiming something. It's not
 James'/Volker's responsibility to prove that systemd isn't faster.

 That said, you guys need to stop flaming. If anything, it's easy to
 dislike SysVInit because the init scripts it uses are piles of bash,
 compared to a Systemd init script that has a handful of systemd config.

 Is systemd starting to encompass too much? I think so, but who cares? If
 we want an init manager that reads systemd-like files but doesn't do
 anything else (hostnamectl, logging, udev, etc.), I guess we'll have to
 make one.

 Alec


Notably Gentoo has never used entire SysV, only the init part, not the
/etc.d/rc.d part
So this POSIX sh script's are coming from dedicated *Gentoo* project,
which is sys-apps/openrc

Just clarifying

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd


On 18/09/14 07:52, Samuli Suominen wrote:
 Notably Gentoo has never used entire SysV, only the init part, not the
 /etc.d/rc.d part

I meant /etc/rc.d of course. Typing error. Sorry.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd

On 18/09/2014 02:12, Alec Ten Harmsel wrote:
 Mark David Dumlao wrote:
 The code is out there. Freely available. Both systemd and sysvinit.
 If you wanted to measure both, you could, literally, in the time it
 took since you first posted in this thread till now you could have
 measured several times and left mean comments about whichever
 system you hated the most.
 
 Unfortunately, the systemd guys keep screaming that systemd is faster,
 and burden of proof is on the party that's claiming something. It's not
 James'/Volker's responsibility to prove that systemd isn't faster.
 
 That said, you guys need to stop flaming. If anything, it's easy to
 dislike SysVInit because the init scripts it uses are piles of bash,
 compared to a Systemd init script that has a handful of systemd config.
 
 Is systemd starting to encompass too much? I think so, but who cares? If
 we want an init manager that reads systemd-like files but doesn't do
 anything else (hostnamectl, logging, udev, etc.), I guess we'll have to
 make one.

or trim it back. Conceptually, it shouldn't be too hard to remove those
extra services leaving only an init manager.

Reading posts over the years (I don't use systemd) most of that stuff
can be disabled by config in systemd anyway




-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] copy file and preserve ownership