[gentoo-user] How to make binary Asterisk package
How to make net-misc/asterisk-16.30.1 into binary package so I can install in on future gentoo boxes. I think asterisk ver. 16 (still in portage) is the last one still compatible with sip/iax code all future versions starting with ver.18 are converting sip => pjsip that is not compatible with older sip hardware. So if I install Gentoo on a new box and asterisk-16 is no longer in portage I would like to install asterisk from my local binary.
[gentoo-user] Re: problem installing a package that uses meson instead of the regular autotools system
On 2024-02-04, John Covici wrote:
> Hi there. I am trying to use gentoo to install an updated version of
> orca which is a screen reader for linux. They have switched overr to
> using meson build system. So, I have done this so far:
> src_prepare() {
> mkdir _build
> default
> }
>
> src_configure() {
> meson setup -D prefix=/usr _build
> meson compile -C _build
> }
>
> src_install() {
> meson install -C _build
> }
>
> Now what I have run into is the install wants to access things which
> only root can access and so perrmission is denied. Most other builds
> install into an image directory, should I change the prefix to image
> and will then the ebuild automatically install to the right place, or
> is there something else I should be doing?
>
> Thanks in advance for any suggestions.
I'm sure somebody else will have more experience and practical advice
regarding this, but one thing I noticed in the ebuild code above:
have you tried using the meson eclass?
(man meson.eclass, if you have app-doc/eclass-manpages)
--
Nuno Silva
[gentoo-user] problem installing a package that uses meson instead of the regular autotools system
Hi there. I am trying to use gentoo to install an updated version of
orca which is a screen reader for linux. They have switched overr to
using meson build system. So, I have done this so far:
src_prepare() {
mkdir _build
default
}
src_configure() {
meson setup -D prefix=/usr _build
meson compile -C _build
}
src_install() {
meson install -C _build
}
Now what I have run into is the install wants to access things which
only root can access and so perrmission is denied. Most other builds
install into an image directory, should I change the prefix to image
and will then the ebuild automatically install to the right place, or
is there something else I should be doing?
Thanks in advance for any suggestions.
--
Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is:
How do
you spend it?
John Covici wb2una
cov...@ccs.covici.com
[gentoo-user] Re: Suggestions for backup scheme?
On 2024-02-03, Wol wrote: > On 03/02/2024 16:02, Grant Edwards wrote: >> rsnapshot is an application that uses rsync to do >> hourly/daily/weekly/monthly (user-configurable) backups of selected >> directory trees. It's done using rsync to create snapshots. They are >> in-effect "incremental" backups, because the snapshots themselves are >> effectively "copy-on-write" via clever use of hard-links by rsync. A >> year's worth of backups for me is 7 daily + 4 weekly + 12 monthly >> snapshots for a total of 23 snapshots. If nothing has changed during >> the year, those 23 snapshots take up the same amount of space as a >> single snapshot. > > So as I understand it, it looks like you first do a "cp with hardlinks" > creating a complete new directory structure, but all the files are > hardlinks so you're not using THAT MUCH space for your new image? No, the first snaphost is a complete copy of all files. The snapshots are on a different disk, in a different filesystem, and they're just plain directory trees that you can brose with normal filesystem tools. It's not possible to hard-link between the "live" filesystem and the backup snapshots. The hard-links are to inodes "shared" between different snapshot directory trees. The first snapshot copies everything to the backup drive (using rsync). The next snapshot creates a second directory tree with all unchanged files hard-linked to the files that were copied as part of the first snapshot. Any changed files just-plain-copied into the second snapshot directory tree. The third snapshot does the same thing (starting with the second snapshot directory tree). Rinse and repeat. Old snapshots trees are simply removed a-la 'rm -rf" when they're no longer wanted. > So each snapshot is using the space required by the directory > structure, plus the space required by any changed files. Sort of. The backup filesystem has to contain one copy of every file so that there's something to hard-link to. The backup is completely stand-alone, so it doesn't make sense to talk about all of the snapshots containing only deltas. When you get to the "oldest" snapshot, there's nothing to delta "from". > [...] > > And that is why I like "ext over lvm copying with rsync" as my > strategy (not that I actually do it). You have lvm on your backup > disk. When you do a backup you do "rsync with overwrite in place", > which means rsync only writes blocks which have changed. You then > take an lvm snapshot which uses almost no space whatsoever. > > So to compare "lvm plus overwrite in place" to "rsnapshot", my > strategy uses the space for an lvm header and a copy of all blocks > that have changed. > > Your strategy takes a copy of the entire directory structure, plus a > complete copy of every file that has changed. That's a LOT more. I don't understand, are you saying that somehow your backup doesn't contain a copy of every file? -- Grant
Re: [gentoo-user] Asterisk - need some help [SOLVED]
I believe asterisk is evolving way from a "carrier" mindset more into an IT one. Losing support for ancient hardware is part of that. I no longer use IAX (used it to trunk multiple instances across vpn's - worked well.) Currently I only have a couple of now quite old Cisco phones and Jami softphones on android using SIP to a single asterisk. I incrementally upgrade asterisk mostly by a clean install carrying over config files into an LXC instance (using a golden master setup) which has been trouble free until pjsip - and thats more my fault in missing that SIP was deprecated and having to unexpectedly fault find it. The conversion script worked fine for internal extensions, but the uplink trunk required a few hours extra work until I stumbled over the correct syntax - too many options confusing things. My recommendation would be to spin up a VM and install a test instance and start afresh - older asterisk versions are usually a security risk as time goes on. BillK On 4/2/24 06:00, Thelma wrote: I think I was able solve my problem, it was as simple as disabling "jitterbuffer" in iax.conf I can hear phone voicemail request from the remote asterisk, will know 100% on Monday. Regarding Asterisk I'm on 16.30.1 ; tried emerging ver.18 but my AudioCodes box wouldn't even register to it. Conversion scrip (sip->pjsip) will not do any good if the hardware (AudioCodes boxes, Sipura and other units) are not compatible with pjsip. Is IAX is gone as well in newer versions? I have an impression this is the end of old Asterisk that Digium started; very, very sad :-/ It had good community support. Newer versions 18+ are not compatible with older hardware and learning curve/conversion is not worth it. Sangoma - community support is almost not existent, few folks just bark at you if one mention still running ver. 16 I'll hang on to 16.30.1 as long as I can. On 2/2/24 20:55, William Kenworthy wrote: In v18 sip is still present but deprecated - after this its removed. There is a conversion script (sip->pjsip) for migration. It required a few sacrificial chickens and much swearing until I got the upstream trunk to register (iinet in AU). Its all working good now, the pjsip config is more programmer friendly but also allows much more complex (read hard to follow/fault find) configuration. Note that the CLI commands are not equivalent to sip (including help, its now pjsip) with a different format. After install, but before re-configuration everything sip related disappears on restart. BillK On 3/2/24 09:42, John Covici wrote: On Fri, 02 Feb 2024 19:29:24 -0500, Thelma wrote: When did they implement switch-over from sip to pjsip? I'm using AudioCode boxes. I emerged and tried to load asterisk ver.18 but the audiocode would not register. I suppose ver.16 is the end of the line for me. On 2/2/24 16:39, William Kenworthy wrote: Yes, was caught out recently by the replacement of sip with pjsip - currently on v21.0.2 and working (sip only, simple home setup) Also had some weird problems with two versions installed (so asterisk started on old working version even though new one was installed - once I ran depclean it failed due to the sip/pjsip issue. BillK On 2/2/24 23:26, Thelma wrote: Anybody on the list using Asterisk? I need some help. Have save version of asterisk is working correctly on one computer but the other. I would use at least asterisk 18 in all cases and if you can later versions. pjsip has been the preferred version for a while, sip is still OK, however.
Re: [gentoo-user] Asterisk - need some help [SOLVED]
I think I was able solve my problem, it was as simple as disabling "jitterbuffer" in iax.conf I can hear phone voicemail request from the remote asterisk, will know 100% on Monday. Regarding Asterisk I'm on 16.30.1 ; tried emerging ver.18 but my AudioCodes box wouldn't even register to it. Conversion scrip (sip->pjsip) will not do any good if the hardware (AudioCodes boxes, Sipura and other units) are not compatible with pjsip. Is IAX is gone as well in newer versions? I have an impression this is the end of old Asterisk that Digium started; very, very sad :-/ It had good community support. Newer versions 18+ are not compatible with older hardware and learning curve/conversion is not worth it. Sangoma - community support is almost not existent, few folks just bark at you if one mention still running ver. 16 I'll hang on to 16.30.1 as long as I can. On 2/2/24 20:55, William Kenworthy wrote: In v18 sip is still present but deprecated - after this its removed. There is a conversion script (sip->pjsip) for migration. It required a few sacrificial chickens and much swearing until I got the upstream trunk to register (iinet in AU). Its all working good now, the pjsip config is more programmer friendly but also allows much more complex (read hard to follow/fault find) configuration. Note that the CLI commands are not equivalent to sip (including help, its now pjsip) with a different format. After install, but before re-configuration everything sip related disappears on restart. BillK On 3/2/24 09:42, John Covici wrote: On Fri, 02 Feb 2024 19:29:24 -0500, Thelma wrote: When did they implement switch-over from sip to pjsip? I'm using AudioCode boxes. I emerged and tried to load asterisk ver.18 but the audiocode would not register. I suppose ver.16 is the end of the line for me. On 2/2/24 16:39, William Kenworthy wrote: Yes, was caught out recently by the replacement of sip with pjsip - currently on v21.0.2 and working (sip only, simple home setup) Also had some weird problems with two versions installed (so asterisk started on old working version even though new one was installed - once I ran depclean it failed due to the sip/pjsip issue. BillK On 2/2/24 23:26, Thelma wrote: Anybody on the list using Asterisk? I need some help. Have save version of asterisk is working correctly on one computer but the other. I would use at least asterisk 18 in all cases and if you can later versions. pjsip has been the preferred version for a while, sip is still OK, however.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Suggestions for backup scheme?
On Saturday, 3 February 2024 17:32:17 GMT Rich Freeman wrote: > On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 6:39 PM Grant Edwards wrote: > > On 2024-01-31, Rich Freeman wrote: > > > In any case, these COW filesystems, much like git, store data in a > > > way that makes it very efficient to diff two snapshots and back up > > > only the data that has changed. [...] > > > > In order to take advantage of this, I assume that the backup > > destination and source both have to be ZFS? > > So, the data needs to be RESTORED to ZFS for this to work. However, > the zfs send command serializes the data and so you can just store it > in files. Those files can only be read back into zfs. > > It is probably a bit more typical to just pipe the send command into > zfs receive (often over ssh) so that you're just directly mirroring > the filesystem, and not storing the intermediate data. > > > Do backup source and > > destination need to be in the same filesystem? Or volume? Or Pool? > > No on all of these, but they can be. > > > If you'll forgive the analogy, we'll say the the functionality of > > rsync (as used by rsnapshot) is built-in to ZFS. Is there an > > application that does with ZFS snapshots what the rsnapshot > > application itself does with rsync? > > There are a few wrappers around zfs send. I'm using > sys-fs/zfs-auto-snapshot and what looks like a much older version of: > https://github.com/psy0rz/zfs_autobackup > > > I googled for ZFS backup applications, but didn't find anything that > > seemed to be widespread and "supported" the way that rsnapshot is. > > They're less popular since many just DIY them, but honestly I think > the wrapper is a nicer solution. It will rotate backups, make sure > that snapshots aren't needed before deleting them, and so on. In > order to do an incremental backup the source/destination systems need > to have matching snapshots to base them on, so that is important if > backups are sporadic. If you're just saving all the send streams then > knowing which ones are obsolete is also important, unless you want to > have points in time. This article offers some comparison tests between ZFS, Btrfs and mdadm+dm- integrity. Although the setup and scenarios are not directly comparable with the OP's use case they provide some insight on more typical implementations where these fs excel. https://unixsheikh.com/articles/battle-testing-zfs-btrfs-and-mdadm-dm.html signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Suggestions for backup scheme?
On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 6:39 PM Grant Edwards wrote: > > On 2024-01-31, Rich Freeman wrote: > > > In any case, these COW filesystems, much like git, store data in a > > way that makes it very efficient to diff two snapshots and back up > > only the data that has changed. [...] > > In order to take advantage of this, I assume that the backup > destination and source both have to be ZFS? So, the data needs to be RESTORED to ZFS for this to work. However, the zfs send command serializes the data and so you can just store it in files. Those files can only be read back into zfs. It is probably a bit more typical to just pipe the send command into zfs receive (often over ssh) so that you're just directly mirroring the filesystem, and not storing the intermediate data. > Do backup source and > destination need to be in the same filesystem? Or volume? Or Pool? No on all of these, but they can be. > If you'll forgive the analogy, we'll say the the functionality of > rsync (as used by rsnapshot) is built-in to ZFS. Is there an > application that does with ZFS snapshots what the rsnapshot > application itself does with rsync? There are a few wrappers around zfs send. I'm using sys-fs/zfs-auto-snapshot and what looks like a much older version of: https://github.com/psy0rz/zfs_autobackup > > I googled for ZFS backup applications, but didn't find anything that > seemed to be widespread and "supported" the way that rsnapshot is. They're less popular since many just DIY them, but honestly I think the wrapper is a nicer solution. It will rotate backups, make sure that snapshots aren't needed before deleting them, and so on. In order to do an incremental backup the source/destination systems need to have matching snapshots to base them on, so that is important if backups are sporadic. If you're just saving all the send streams then knowing which ones are obsolete is also important, unless you want to have points in time. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Suggestions for backup scheme?
On 03/02/2024 16:02, Grant Edwards wrote: rsnapshot is an application that uses rsync to do hourly/daily/weekly/monthly (user-configurable) backups of selected directory trees. It's done using rsync to create snapshots. They are in-effect "incremental" backups, because the snapshots themselves are effectively "copy-on-write" via clever use of hard-links by rsync. A year's worth of backups for me is 7 daily + 4 weekly + 12 monthly snapshots for a total of 23 snapshots. If nothing has changed during the year, those 23 snapshots take up the same amount of space as a single snapshot. So as I understand it, it looks like you first do a "cp with hardlinks" creating a complete new directory structure, but all the files are hardlinks so you're not using THAT MUCH space for your new image? Then rsync copies and replaces any files that have been modified? So each snapshot is using the space required by the directory structure, plus the space required by any changed files. My understanding of ZFS is that it has built-in snapshot functionality that provides something similar to what is done by rsync by its use of hard-links. In my current setup, there's an application called rsnapshot that manages/controls the snapshots by invoking rsync in various ways. My question was about the existence of a similar application that can be used with ZFS's built-in snapshot support to provide a similar backup scheme. ZFS is a "copy on write" filesystem, I believe. So any changed blocks are rewritten to new blocks, the live snapshot is updated, and if the original block is required by older snapshots it is retained, else it is freed. And then you can push a snapshot to another disk. I think ZFS also has "dedupe on write", so if you're regularly pushing snapshots you're not wasting space with duplicate data. And that is why I like "ext over lvm copying with rsync" as my strategy (not that I actually do it). You have lvm on your backup disk. When you do a backup you do "rsync with overwrite in place", which means rsync only writes blocks which have changed. You then take an lvm snapshot which uses almost no space whatsoever. So to compare "lvm plus overwrite in place" to "rsnapshot", my strategy uses the space for an lvm header and a copy of all blocks that have changed. Your strategy takes a copy of the entire directory structure, plus a complete copy of every file that has changed. That's a LOT more. If my hard disk changes by lets say 0.1% a day, and I take daily snapshots, that's three years before I need to start deleting backups assuming I'm actually using half my disk (and with terabyte disks, both the amount of change, and the amount of disk used, is likely to be a lot less than those figures). Cheers, Wol
[gentoo-user] Re: [SOLVED?] Upgrade old laptop kernel 5.15.69 ==> 6.6.13; no console
On Sat, Feb 03, 2024 at 10:18:41AM +, Michael wrote > Try > switching to [*] the following: > > # CONFIG_SYSFB_SIMPLEFB is not set > > # CONFIG_DRM_SIMPLEDRM is not set > > # CONFIG_FB_SIMPLE is not set > > Then hopefully you'll get a console kicking in. It teased me. Text console present first part of bootup with the fast-scrolling output, then it disappears. It may be a kernel bug that's solved in the 6.7.x series, so I'll revert the changes and wait fpr a 6.7.x kernel to show up in "emerge --sync". See... https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f39-kernel-6-6-x-no-video-on-intel-integrated-graphics/98360 ] I was filling out the details for a bug report. Under the description, ] it asked if I have tried rawhide. I installed 6.7.0-0.rc4.35.fc40 and ] it fixed the issue! > Also, unless you use an initrd don't forget any firmware blobs which > may be be needed by your graphics card and while you're at it add > your CPU microcode there too. The graphics is a bog standard Intel i915 integrated chip that's been running on the laptop for years without blobs. -- Roses are red Roses are blue Depending on their velocity Relative to you
[gentoo-user] Re: Suggestions for backup scheme?
On 2024-02-03, Michael wrote: >> If you'll forgive the analogy, we'll say the the functionality of >> rsync (as used by rsnapshot) is built-in to ZFS. > > Broadly and rather loosely yes, by virtue of the COW and snapshot fs > architecture and the btrfs/zfs send-receive commands. > >> Is there an application that does with ZFS snapshots what the >> rsnapshot application itself does with rsync? > > COW filesystems do not need a 3rd party application. Really? I can edit a configuration file and then ZFS will provide me with daily/weekly/monthly/yearly snapshots of (say) /home, /etc, and /usr/local on an external hard drive? > They come with their own commands which can be called manually, or > scripted for convenience and automation. Yes, I know that. AFAICT, they provide commands that do pretty much what rsync does in my current backup scheme. It's the automation provided by rsnapshot that I'm asking about. > Various people have created their own scripts and applications, e.g. > > https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/696513/best-strategy-to-backup-btrfs-root-filesystem > >> I googled for ZFS backup applications, but didn't find anything that >> seemed to be widespread and "supported" the way that rsnapshot is. > > There must be quite a few scripts out there, but can't say what support they > may receive. Random search revealed: > > https://www.zfsnap.org/ > > https://github.com/shirkdog/zfsbackup > > https://gbyte.dev/blog/simple-zfs-snapshotting-replicating-backup-rotating-convenience-bash-script Yes, there seem to be a lot of bare-bones homebrewed scripts like those. That is the sort of what I was looking for but they all seem a bit incomplete and unsupported compared rsnapshot. I can install rsnapshot with a simple "emerge rsnapshot", edit the config file, set up the crontab entries, and Bob's your uncle: rsnapshot bugfixes and updates get installed by the usual Gentoo update process, and backups "just happen". -- Grant
[gentoo-user] Re: Suggestions for backup scheme?
On 2024-02-02, Mark Knecht wrote: > On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 4:39 PM Grant Edwards > wrote: > >> >> I googled for ZFS backup applications, but didn't find anything that >> seemed to be widespread and "supported" the way that rsnapshot is. > > I'm not exactly sure I'm following your thoughts above but rsnapshot is an application that uses rsync to do hourly/daily/weekly/monthly (user-configurable) backups of selected directory trees. It's done using rsync to create snapshots. They are in-effect "incremental" backups, because the snapshots themselves are effectively "copy-on-write" via clever use of hard-links by rsync. A year's worth of backups for me is 7 daily + 4 weekly + 12 monthly snapshots for a total of 23 snapshots. If nothing has changed during the year, those 23 snapshots take up the same amount of space as a single snapshot. My understanding of ZFS is that it has built-in snapshot functionality that provides something similar to what is done by rsync by its use of hard-links. In my current setup, there's an application called rsnapshot that manages/controls the snapshots by invoking rsync in various ways. My question was about the existence of a similar application that can be used with ZFS's built-in snapshot support to provide a similar backup scheme. > have you investigated True-NAS? It is Open ZFS based and > does support snapshots. I'm aware of True-NAS, but I'm not looking for NAS. I was asking abouth methods to backup one local disk to another local disk. -- Grant
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Suggestions for backup scheme?
On Friday, 2 February 2024 23:39:18 GMT Grant Edwards wrote: > On 2024-01-31, Rich Freeman wrote: > > Honestly, at this point I would not run any storage I cared about on > > anything but zfs. There are just so many benefits. > > > > [...] > > > > In any case, these COW filesystems, much like git, store data in a > > way that makes it very efficient to diff two snapshots and back up > > only the data that has changed. [...] > > In order to take advantage of this, I assume that the backup > destination and source both have to be ZFS? Do backup source and > destination need to be in the same filesystem? Or volume? Or Pool? > (I'm not clear on how those differ exactly.) Or can the backup > destination be "unrelated" to the backup source? The primary source of > failure in my world is definitely hardware failure of the disk drive, > so my backup destination is always a separate physical (usually > external) disk drive. TBH using ext4/xfs/f2fs/etc. on the host plus an incremental backup method on any other fs of choice on external storage is IMHO a better method for a laptop. Unless your data is changing continuously and you need incremental backups every 5 minutes what you use is well suited to your use case. > If you'll forgive the analogy, we'll say the the functionality of > rsync (as used by rsnapshot) is built-in to ZFS. Broadly and rather loosely yes, by virtue of the COW and snapshot fs architecture and the btrfs/zfs send-receive commands. > Is there an > application that does with ZFS snapshots what the rsnapshot > application itself does with rsync? COW filesystems do not need a 3rd party application. They come with their own commands which can be called manually, or scripted for convenience and automation. Various people have created their own scripts and applications, e.g. https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/696513/best-strategy-to-backup-btrfs-root-filesystem > I googled for ZFS backup applications, but didn't find anything that > seemed to be widespread and "supported" the way that rsnapshot is. > > -- > Grant There must be quite a few scripts out there, but can't say what support they may receive. Random search revealed: https://www.zfsnap.org/ https://github.com/shirkdog/zfsbackup https://gbyte.dev/blog/simple-zfs-snapshotting-replicating-backup-rotating-convenience-bash-script signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrade old laptop kernel 5.15.69 ==> 6.6.13; no console
On Saturday, 3 February 2024 09:23:15 GMT netfab wrote: > Le 03/02/24 à 03:06, Walter Dnes a tapoté : > > I got linux-6.1.57-gentoo kernel built and working, but > > > > linux-6.6.13-gentoo still comes up with no console. Here's my latest > > .config attempt for 6.6.13 attached. Any ideas? > > You should try to enable an early framebuffer driver, CONFIG_FB_VESA=y > for example. See: > > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Framebuffer#DRM_framebuffer_drivers It could well be more than 15-20 years since I had VESA FB enabled and not once since then, without any detriment to a console coming up at boot. Try switching to [*] the following: # CONFIG_SYSFB_SIMPLEFB is not set # CONFIG_DRM_SIMPLEDRM is not set # CONFIG_FB_SIMPLE is not set Then hopefully you'll get a console kicking in. Also, unless you use an initrd don't forget any firmware blobs which may be be needed by your graphics card and while you're at it add your CPU microcode there too. Currently you only show the firmware for your wireless: # Firmware loader # CONFIG_FW_LOADER=y CONFIG_EXTRA_FIRMWARE="iwlwifi-6000-4.ucode" Then, if you still fail to get a console, connect over ssh to check what dmesg reports for any hints of missing drivers. HTH. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrade old laptop kernel 5.15.69 ==> 6.6.13; no console
Le 03/02/24 à 03:06, Walter Dnes a tapoté : > I got linux-6.1.57-gentoo kernel built and working, but > linux-6.6.13-gentoo still comes up with no console. Here's my latest > .config attempt for 6.6.13 attached. Any ideas? > You should try to enable an early framebuffer driver, CONFIG_FB_VESA=y for example. See: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Framebuffer#DRM_framebuffer_drivers
Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrade old laptop kernel 5.15.69 ==> 6.6.13; no console
I got linux-6.1.57-gentoo kernel built and working, but linux-6.6.13-gentoo still comes up with no console. Here's my latest .config attempt for 6.6.13 attached. Any ideas? -- Roses are red Roses are blue Depending on their velocity Relative to you config.gz Description: application/gzip
