[gentoo-user] Re: Chromium no longer displays content of TLS certificate

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 08/09/17 20:05, Mick wrote:

Either chromium has stopped displaying the content of the TLS certificate of a
web site I happen to visit, or it has made it quite complicated for the user
to find it.


Go to:

  chrome://flags/#show-cert-link

Flip the flag. Restart Chromium. The certificate should now be visible 
when clicking on the "Secure" button in the URL bar.

[gentoo-user] Re: [offtopic] Copy-On-Write ?

[Kai Krakow]

Am Thu, 07 Sep 2017 17:46:27 +0200
schrieb Helmut Jarausch :

> Hi,
> 
> sorry, this question is not Gentoo specific - but I know there are
> many very knowledgeable people on this list.
> 
> I'd like to "hard-link" a file X to Y - i.e. there is no additional  
> space on disk for Y.
> 
> But, contrary to the "standard" hard-link (ln), file Y should be
> stored in a different place (inode) IF it gets modified.
> With the standard hard-link, file X is the same as Y, so any changes
> to Y are seen in X by definition.
> 
> Is this possible
> - with an ext4 FS
> - or only with a different (which) FS

You can do this with "cp --reflink=always" if the filesystem supports
it.

To my current knowledge, only btrfs (since a long time) and xfs (in
newer kernel versions) support it. Not sure if ext4 supports it or
plans support for it.

It is different to hard linking as the new file is linked by a new
inode, thus it has it's own time stamp and permissions unlike hard
links. Just contents are initially shared until you modify them. Also
keep in mind that this increases fragmentation especially when there
are a lot of small modifications.

At least in btrfs there's also a caveat that the original extents may
not actually be split and the split extents share parts of the
original extent. That means, if you delete the original later, the copy
will occupy more space than expected until you defragment the file:

File A extent map: [][22  2  2][]
File B extent map: [][22  2  2][]
Modify b:  [][22][4][2][] <- one block modified

Delete file a: [][22  2  2][] <- extent 2 still mapped
File b extent map: [][22][4][2][]

So extent 2 is still on disk in its original state [].

Defragment file b: [][2242][]
File a:[][][] <- completely gone now



-- 
Regards,
Kai

Replies to list-only preferred.

Re: [gentoo-user] [offtopic] Copy-On-Write ?

[Marc Joliet]

Am Donnerstag, 7. September 2017, 17:46:27 CEST schrieb Helmut Jarausch:
> Hi,
> 
> sorry, this question is not Gentoo specific - but I know there are many
> very knowledgeable people on this list.
> 
> I'd like to "hard-link" a file X to Y - i.e. there is no additional
> space on disk for Y.
> 
> But, contrary to the "standard" hard-link (ln), file Y should be stored
> in a different place (inode) IF it gets modified.
> With the standard hard-link, file X is the same as Y, so any changes to
> Y are seen in X by definition.
> 
> Is this possible
> - with an ext4 FS
> - or only with a different (which) FS

This has come to be referred to as reflinks (see, e.g., the cp(1) man page).  
I don't think ext4 supports them, but both btrfs and xfs do (xfs only very 
recently, though, see for example [0]).  There might be other FSs that support 
it, too (bcachefs?), but I don't know about that.

Maybe at some point ext4 will add support for it, but since I mainly use btrfs 
I don't care that much.

[0] http://strugglers.net/~andy/blog/2017/01/10/xfs-reflinks-and-deduplication/

> Many thanks for a hint,
> Helmut

HTH
-- 
Marc Joliet
--
"People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we
don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup


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

Re: [gentoo-user] [offtopic] Copy-On-Write ?

[Simon Thelen]

On 17-09-07 at 17:46, Helmut Jarausch wrote:
> Hi,
Hello,

> sorry, this question is not Gentoo specific - but I know there are many  
> very knowledgeable people on this list.
> 
> I'd like to "hard-link" a file X to Y - i.e. there is no additional  
> space on disk for Y.
> 
> But, contrary to the "standard" hard-link (ln), file Y should be stored  
> in a different place (inode) IF it gets modified.
> With the standard hard-link, file X is the same as Y, so any changes to  
> Y are seen in X by definition.

> Is this possible
> - with an ext4 FS
> - or only with a different (which) FS
You can use GNU coreutil's `cp --reflink=always'.  This will, however,
only work on filesystems which support the operation (afaik so far only
btrfs). Though other CoW filesystems (such as ZFS) have similar
capabilities with snapshotting.

The only other possibility I know of would be creating an lvm partition
for that file and using lvm snapshots.

You should also be able to implement the functionality via fuse on top
of an ext4 base if the other solutions aren't to your taste.

-- 
Simon Thelen

[gentoo-user] [offtopic] Copy-On-Write ?

[Helmut Jarausch]

Hi,

sorry, this question is not Gentoo specific - but I know there are many  
very knowledgeable people on this list.


I'd like to "hard-link" a file X to Y - i.e. there is no additional  
space on disk for Y.


But, contrary to the "standard" hard-link (ln), file Y should be stored  
in a different place (inode) IF it gets modified.
With the standard hard-link, file X is the same as Y, so any changes to  
Y are seen in X by definition.


Is this possible
- with an ext4 FS
- or only with a different (which) FS

Many thanks for a hint,
Helmut

Re: [gentoo-user] Chromium no longer displays content of TLS certificate

[Mick]

On Friday, 8 September 2017 18:15:41 BST Todd Goodman wrote:
> Go to the menu -> More Tools -> Developer Tools, then Security tab and
> then View Certificate button
> 
> Todd

Thank you Todd.  It beats me why Chromium devs have made checking the contents 
of a certificate more remote/obscure than it previously was.  Non-dev users 
also need to check the contents of a certificate ...

-- 
Regards,
Mick

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Chromium no longer displays content of TLS certificate

[Todd Goodman]

Go to the menu -> More Tools -> Developer Tools, then Security tab and
then View Certificate button

Todd


On 09/08/2017 01:05 PM, Mick wrote:
> Either chromium has stopped displaying the content of the TLS certificate of 
> a 
> web site I happen to visit, or it has made it quite complicated for the user 
> to find it.
>
> Chromium would allow the certificate to be displayed by clicking on the 
> 'Secure' symbol on the left of the address bar.  However, when I click on it 
> now all I see is an acknowledgment this is a secure connection and some site 
> specific settings regarding e.g. javascript, et al.  I cannot find a way to 
> display the certificate.
>
> Would you know where in Chromium the site certificate is now available?  
>
>  Installed versions:  61.0.3163.79(17:04:58 09/08/17)(cups hangouts pic 
> proprietary-codecs pulseaudio suid system-ffmpeg system-icu -component-build -
> custom-cflags -gnome-keyring -kerberos -neon -selinux -system-libvpx 
> -tcmalloc 
> -test -widevine L10N="en-GB -am -ar -bg -bn -ca -cs -da -de -el -es -es-419 -
> et -fa -fi -fil -fr -gu -he -hi -hr -hu -id -it -ja -kn -ko -lt -lv -ml -mr -
> ms -nb -nl -pl -pt-BR -pt-PT -ro -ru -sk -sl -sr -sv -sw -ta -te -th -tr -uk -
> vi -zh-CN -zh-TW")

[gentoo-user] Chromium no longer displays content of TLS certificate

[Mick]

Either chromium has stopped displaying the content of the TLS certificate of a 
web site I happen to visit, or it has made it quite complicated for the user 
to find it.

Chromium would allow the certificate to be displayed by clicking on the 
'Secure' symbol on the left of the address bar.  However, when I click on it 
now all I see is an acknowledgment this is a secure connection and some site 
specific settings regarding e.g. javascript, et al.  I cannot find a way to 
display the certificate.

Would you know where in Chromium the site certificate is now available?  

 Installed versions:  61.0.3163.79(17:04:58 09/08/17)(cups hangouts pic 
proprietary-codecs pulseaudio suid system-ffmpeg system-icu -component-build -
custom-cflags -gnome-keyring -kerberos -neon -selinux -system-libvpx -tcmalloc 
-test -widevine L10N="en-GB -am -ar -bg -bn -ca -cs -da -de -el -es -es-419 -
et -fa -fi -fil -fr -gu -he -hi -hr -hu -id -it -ja -kn -ko -lt -lv -ml -mr -
ms -nb -nl -pl -pt-BR -pt-PT -ro -ru -sk -sl -sr -sv -sw -ta -te -th -tr -uk -
vi -zh-CN -zh-TW")
-- 
Regards,
Mick

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

Re: [gentoo-user] What do you think about Firefox 57?

[taii...@gmx.com]

To me it seems as though it is more so a political change not so much a 
change done for some technical improvement (there aren't any).


Mozilla is closer and closer with google, as evidenced by making 
telemetry opt-out rather than opt-in [1] and all the "safe" browsing and 
downloading "features" which sends a list and hashes of all the files 
you download to google for inspection.


This is going to break a variety of beloved addons as the new method 
can't support heavy modification of firefox.



[1] as if anyone WANTS to be spied on, the average user has no idea what 
telemetry is and or would believe mozillas bullshit reasoning of "we do 
this to make the browser better, trust us!" I myself have noticed it 
mysteriously turned back on a variety of times similar to windows not to 
mention the annoying practice of allowing addons to randomly open 
windows every update without permission (10 addons 10 windows to inform 
of random changes no one cares about, and now my ISP knows what addons I 
use as it loads their websites - yay)