Re: [Ab]use of penderel
On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 11:44:56PM +0100, Paul Makepeace wrote: > I personally don't see operating a piece of software under Debian stable > as a significant risk, especially one that is not listening on a port, > on a machine whose data everyone *ahem* has back-ups of :-) I agree. Although google quickly found me a moderately recent mailman cross site scripting bug: http://cert.uni-stuttgart.de/archive/bugtraq/2003/01/msg00247.html I presume that that those sort of bugs rapidly get fixed by updated packages on security.debian.org Nicholas Clark
Re: [Ab]use of penderel
On Mon, 2 Jun 2003, Paul Makepeace wrote:
>
And lo, it was proved once again that email sucks, and misunderstandings
happen when people like me write badly worded emails (twice, in this
case.) As I have stated many times before I is most defiantly crap.
Mark.
--
#!/usr/bin/perl -T
use strict;
use warnings;
print q{Mark Fowler, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://twoshortplanks.com/};
Re: [Ab]use of penderel
On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 09:53:08PM +, the hatter said: > That'd be handy. With mailman gone, I'm sure no one will need python any > more, anyway. We can get also get rid of sed/awk/grep/etc. Except all of > those which gnu configure and make require to actually make perl, > obviously. Ah pedantry, righteous indignation and hysterical extrapolation - all the great traits of mailing lists. [0] I've only skimmed over this thread and, as a Siesta developer, I am obviously biased so please take my comments with a pinch of whatever your fancy is. If I read it correctly Mark was suggesting moving london.pm to Siesta. Not removing Mailman. Or, in fact sed/awk/grep. Or even ls. Thus the sky will nto fall and locusts will not descend and devour our entrails. The status of Siesta is currently - * works fine as the MLM for its own mailing list * is still being worked on * has no web based interface so clearly it's not ready *just* yet to be the MLM for london.pm But, it maybe in the future. Now obviously we wouldn't be writing it if we didn't think it would be better than Mailman (where better is loosely defined as "does things which we think are important which Mailman does not and which were easier to incorporate into a totally new MLM than patch Mailman"). Some good reasons for moving over to Siesta o better support We are among you, we developers. Although Mailman support may have picked up again recently (I'm not sure, it used to be pretty terrible) we are almost certainly guaranteed to be even closer. o user configurable preferences I think this is the killer. No more whining from Randal about Reply-To munging - all he has to do is configure it not to munge for him. And if somebody hates supercite - then all you have to do is write a de-superciter et voila. Other applications include marking up a section of text as a buffy spoiler and then write a plugin which will allow people to say they don't want to receive spoilers from seasons less than $n. So basically the single most important thing about Siesta is that it stops people pissing and moaning - about the fact that a Perl mailing list is run on a Python MLM (not actually that big a deal for me), about missing features from Mailman, about reply to munging, or supercite or archive headers or a whole host of other things. And I think we all agree that's a good thing. Less moaning equals more time for 8uffy, pie and beer. -- BEGIN SHORT CONCLUSION -- For those that want the Cliff Notes version. So my reading is that Mailman is not going away and that, if l.pm ever moves to $other MLM you'll probably never even notice anyway. -- END SHORT CONCLUSION -- Simon [0] Not singling you out. I was just summing up all the good things about mailing lists. -- les singe qui dansent
Re: [Ab]use of penderel
On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 11:02:43PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote: > Whilst that doesn't cause mailman to become broken (as you point out), it > does mean that now two mailing list systems are being supported. Whilst that > support may be zero effort most of the time, as we all know the discovery of Just FYI & so everyone can sleep easily: thanks to a whole bunch of people last year penderel, python, mailman, etc are under Debian's standard package management. Patches are thus picked up automatically during debian's usual upgrade/patch-issuing cycle. I have set up the Debian security announcements to go to the (sadly underused, but at least read) internal SysOps list so several people are informed as Debian sends out security alerts. I personally don't see operating a piece of software under Debian stable as a significant risk, especially one that is not listening on a port, on a machine whose data everyone *ahem* has back-ups of :-) Paul -- Paul Makepeace ... http://paulm.com/ "If this van's a rockin', then yes, I think I will." -- http://paulm.com/toys/surrealism/
Re: [Ab]use of penderel
On Mon, 2 Jun 2003, Mark Fowler wrote: > In future I shall not bother warning people, less someone jumps down my > throat. Excellent, it'll be an even more enchanting surprise for everyone when all the other shells are pulled, and we all start using the perl shell. Vaguely more on-topic though, I disn't read it as anyone jumping down your throat, just wanting to get a better idea of how the minds that massage penedrel do their stuff. the hatter
Re: [Ab]use of penderel
On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 10:57:37PM +0100, Mark Fowler wrote: >>> Be prepared for mailman to go bye bye at some point, even if it >>> technically possible to run them at the same time. > I was mearly implying that mailman would move from being something that is > very activly supported (as it is now) to something that probably won't be > looked after as much. Cool; I got a different message from something "going bye bye" and the implication of the rest. > In future I shall not bother warning people, less someone jumps down my > throat. There's obviously a difference between telling people you are simply not personally supporting software and actually uninstalling it. Did you perceive what I said as "jumping down your throat"? It wasn't intended as that; it was intended to clarify a position on list in public that might have consequences for users of penderel down the line. Sorry that wasn't so clear. Paul -- Paul Makepeace ... http://paulm.com/ "What is the best way to tell your dad you're gay? 22 Trombones." -- http://paulm.com/toys/surrealism/
Re: [Ab]use of penderel
Am I correct in remembering Paul has root on penderel? On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 10:22:17PM +0100, Paul Makepeace wrote: > On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 10:01:53PM +0100, Michael Stevens wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 09:41:14PM +0100, Paul Makepeace wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 04:14:23PM +0100, Mark Fowler wrote: > > > > Also, bear in mind that I've made public commitments in the past to moving > > > > penderel over to siesta when it's ready. Be prepared for mailman to go > > > > bye bye at some point, even if it technically possible to run them at the > > > > same time. > I'm making the distinction between using another piece of software > (which you're advocating with sound reasons) and actually *un*installing > an existing, known working, mature piece of software others might wish > to use. Generalising, it is in effect making verboten any *class* of > software that has an instance authored by someone in London.pm. > Penderel/London.pm in my mind is an inclusive system, and this to my > mind is counter to that. I'm sure Mark will clarify here. > > It's more a point of principle operating a shared resource than wrt any > discussion/merits of particular MLM/London.pm-specific development. In my opinion I don't think what Mark said is counter to Penderel being an inclusive system. "mailing list software" will continue to be provided - it's just that it is forseen that in the near future the preferred mailing list software will switch from mailman to siesta. Whilst that doesn't cause mailman to become broken (as you point out), it does mean that now two mailing list systems are being supported. Whilst that support may be zero effort most of the time, as we all know the discovery of security holes in software can overnight turn working software into "broken" (at least, something needing active maintenance), particularly for an outward facing service such as a mailing list. Hence to me it seems prudent to encourage users to migrate over to siesta, so that mailman could be removed, reducing the number of external security risks. Nicholas Clark
Re: [Ab]use of penderel
On Mon, 2 Jun 2003, Paul Makepeace wrote:
> I'm making the distinction between using another piece of software
> (which you're advocating with sound reasons) and actually *un*installing
> an existing, known working, mature piece of software others might wish
> to use.
I was mearly implying that mailman would move from being something that is
very activly supported (as it is now) to something that probably won't be
looked after as much.
In future I shall not bother warning people, less someone jumps down my
throat.
Mark.
--
#!/usr/bin/perl -T
use strict;
use warnings;
print q{Mark Fowler, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://twoshortplanks.com/};
Re: [Ab]use of penderel
On Mon, 2 Jun 2003, Paul Makepeace wrote: > This might be an offlist sysadmin discussion but is there some > (rational) reason to uninstall some software that works, simply because > another piece of software can do something similar? One less think to think about and patch ? I wouldn't be hugely convinced by the argument in this case, it's not like an MTA that can only have one thing run on one port, and it cooperates fairly trivially with any other web server. > Should we uninstall python and ruby from penderel as well? Uninstall dc > because you can do maths in perl? That'd be handy. With mailman gone, I'm sure no one will need python any more, anyway. We can get also get rid of sed/awk/grep/etc. Except all of those which gnu configure and make require to actually make perl, obviously. the hatter
Re: [Ab]use of penderel
On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 10:01:53PM +0100, Michael Stevens wrote: > On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 09:41:14PM +0100, Paul Makepeace wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 04:14:23PM +0100, Mark Fowler wrote: > > > Also, bear in mind that I've made public commitments in the past to moving > > > penderel over to siesta when it's ready. Be prepared for mailman to go > > > bye bye at some point, even if it technically possible to run them at the > > > same time. > > > > This might be an offlist sysadmin discussion but is there some > > (rational) reason to uninstall some software that works, simply because > > another piece of software can do something similar? Should we uninstall > > python and ruby from penderel as well? Uninstall dc because you can do > > maths in perl? > > I think in the special case where you actually write the software, it > looks odd if you don't use it. I'm generalising here to assuming > london.pm is collectively writing siesta, rather than it being the hard > work of a few members, as it actually is. I'm making the distinction between using another piece of software (which you're advocating with sound reasons) and actually *un*installing an existing, known working, mature piece of software others might wish to use. Generalising, it is in effect making verboten any *class* of software that has an instance authored by someone in London.pm. Penderel/London.pm in my mind is an inclusive system, and this to my mind is counter to that. I'm sure Mark will clarify here. It's more a point of principle operating a shared resource than wrt any discussion/merits of particular MLM/London.pm-specific development. Paul -- Paul Makepeace ... http://paulm.com/ "If kitten whiskers were three feet long, then why does he look at me with those shoe-tying eyes." -- http://paulm.com/toys/surrealism/
Re: [Ab]use of penderel
On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 04:14:23PM +0100, Mark Fowler wrote: > Also, bear in mind that I've made public commitments in the past to moving > penderel over to siesta when it's ready. Be prepared for mailman to go > bye bye at some point, even if it technically possible to run them at the > same time. This might be an offlist sysadmin discussion but is there some (rational) reason to uninstall some software that works, simply because another piece of software can do something similar? Should we uninstall python and ruby from penderel as well? Uninstall dc because you can do maths in perl? Paul -- Paul Makepeace ... http://paulm.com/ "If laughter can heal, then the would would be polluted by crazy poop." -- http://paulm.com/toys/surrealism/
Re: [Ab]use of penderel
I think I've suggested that all things penderel like should be evalutated on a case by case basis. What's the mailing list for? It's for members of an investment club to talk to each other. It's like 10 people and about the same num of messages per week. Also, bear in mind that I've made public commitments in the past to moving penderel over to siesta when it's ready. Be prepared for mailman to go bye bye at some point, even if it technically possible to run them at the same time. I was thinking along the lines of a .forward file or a bit of procmail or something :-) Although if Siesta's in a useable state (and doesn't require root to run it) I'm happy to plonk a copy in my home dir and play with it. It's more the principle of the thing I was checking... Jon Mark.
Re: [Ab]use of penderel
On Mon, 2 Jun 2003, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
> Is one allowed to run very small low traffic mailing lists from
> penderel? Come to that are there any FAQs guidelines on use of your
> trusty penderel account?
I think I've suggested that all things penderel like should be evalutated
on a case by case basis.
What's the mailing list for?
Also, bear in mind that I've made public commitments in the past to moving
penderel over to siesta when it's ready. Be prepared for mailman to go
bye bye at some point, even if it technically possible to run them at the
same time.
Mark.
--
#!/usr/bin/perl -T
use strict;
use warnings;
print q{Mark Fowler, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://twoshortplanks.com/};
[Ab]use of penderel
Is one allowed to run very small low traffic mailing lists from penderel? Come to that are there any FAQs guidelines on use of your trusty penderel account? Thanks, Jon
Re: Penderel (Was IQfC)
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 08:47:11PM +, Nicholas Clark wrote: > On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:24:03AM +, Lusercop wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:20:17AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: > > > It is probably just me, but I hate to see a computer not used to its > > > full potential and penderel is sitting unloaded for much of the day. > > > > You could do what I do with the unused CPU time on colon, and donate it > > to one Nicholas Clark and his bleadperl smoketests. (obviously you wouldn't > > necessarily want to do those, but something similar may be possible). > > Smoking CPAN might be worthwhile. When I asked Jos, I think that his answer > was that CPANPLUS has pretty much all the functionality needed build in. Just be careful of the rootkits hidden in Makefile.PLs. Oh, hold on. Wrong thread. -- Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pjcj.net
Re: Penderel (Was IQfC)
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:24:03AM +, Lusercop wrote: > On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:20:17AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: > > It is probably just me, but I hate to see a computer not used to its > > full potential and penderel is sitting unloaded for much of the day. > > You could do what I do with the unused CPU time on colon, and donate it > to one Nicholas Clark and his bleadperl smoketests. (obviously you wouldn't > necessarily want to do those, but something similar may be possible). Smoking CPAN might be worthwhile. When I asked Jos, I think that his answer was that CPANPLUS has pretty much all the functionality needed build in. Nicholas Clark -- INTERCAL better than perl? http://www.perl.org/advocacy/spoofathon/
Re: Penderel (Was IQfC)
* alex ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > An installation of subversion would be a very good thing, which was > mentioned on IRC earlier. > Well I'd like to see someone take ownership of this task, which may provide the foundation of a project i'd like to see happen. The project is stolen almost entirely from gnat and its the idea of mentoring within the Perl community. Basically I'd like to see people in London.pm who are or feel they are less experienced with Perl get teamed up with people who have more experience to work on small open source works. I'd like this to happen on a 1 to 1 basis and I'd like it to use subversion on Penderel as the repository as opposed to yet another doomed SF project. Thoughts? G. -- Greg McCarroll http://www.mccarroll.org.uk/~gem/ jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Penderel (Was IQfC)
Penderel is stable now, since putting in bits donated kindly by (oops, can't remember, sorry, kind person). There's a pending hardware upgrade too, which I paid for in advance of receiving suggested 20 quid donation for some extra accounts (5 quid for the unwaged/otherwise poor). I'll drop in the new motherboard and chip Real Soon Now. An AMD 1700+ I believe. I bought it a long time ago but the motherboard was faulty. I have long since returned to the tcr computer fayre, and replaced it for a working one. It's just not inside the computer... I offer a vague feeling that I won't get all my money back, in return for not having to document the process. If someone else wants to manage it more professionally they should feel free. There are some limits on bandwidth but the deal was that we (state51) give you (london.pm) some bandwidth and you do some interesting community things with it. The reason for my question is that I think it could be used more but don't have many good ideas myself. An installation of subversion would be a very good thing, which was mentioned on IRC earlier. alex
Re: Penderel (Was IQfC)
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 01:51:44PM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: > * Paul Makepeace ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:20:17AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: > > > I think Penderel is one of london.pm's most underused assets. Its got > > > a reasonable processor (AMD-K6/350), 1/2gig of memory and 25gig of > > > > One of the more recent possible, and certainly very real older > > reasons it is/was unused is that its hardware was tolerant of heavy use. > > A mailing list and website might not be a big deal but oh boy do people > > make a noise when they disappear. > > > > Well if we do not want to put more load on the box, should we be I think the issue is simply that there isn't a demand for it. Hardly surprising considering that most people probably have their own computers and network connections. > appealing for hardware cash in exchange for accounts. Why not get > t-shirt cash in exchange for accounts. Hell, you could even do a deal This is already in effect in fact. You can dig thru' the archives if you like, or persuade Alex to re-post it :-) Heck it may be on the site even. I'd do all this myself if I could persuade galeon to stay up for more than about three nanoseconds *grumble* > where you get a free account if you buy 5 shirts and sign the AUP > (which we should have). "Don't be bad, thanks. If you don't know what bad probably means you probably shouldn't have an account." Paul -- Paul Makepeace ... http://paulm.com/ "What is the color yellow? Tappa, tappa, tappa!" -- http://paulm.com/toys/surrealism/
Re: Penderel (Was IQfC)
* Paul Makepeace ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:20:17AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: > > I think Penderel is one of london.pm's most underused assets. Its got > > a reasonable processor (AMD-K6/350), 1/2gig of memory and 25gig of > > One of the more recent possible, and certainly very real older > reasons it is/was unused is that its hardware was tolerant of heavy use. > A mailing list and website might not be a big deal but oh boy do people > make a noise when they disappear. > Well if we do not want to put more load on the box, should we be appealing for hardware cash in exchange for accounts. Why not get t-shirt cash in exchange for accounts. Hell, you could even do a deal where you get a free account if you buy 5 shirts and sign the AUP (which we should have). Greg -- Greg McCarroll http://www.mccarroll.org.uk/~gem/ jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Penderel (Was IQfC)
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:20:17AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: > I think Penderel is one of london.pm's most underused assets. Its got > a reasonable processor (AMD-K6/350), 1/2gig of memory and 25gig of One of the more recent possible, and certainly very real older reasons it is/was unused is that its hardware was tolerant of heavy use. A mailing list and website might not be a big deal but oh boy do people make a noise when they disappear. A useful duty penderel does is providing shell accounts for travelling mongers and I've tried to be quick & helpful setting these up with a punt to Alex to collect some kind of donation to the hardware. > It is probably just me, but I hate to see a computer not used to its > full potential and penderel is sitting unloaded for much of the day. I'll install a distributed.net client immediately! :-) At the end of the day, the box has been around for ages, people know it's there, and they can email root for an account if they want it. I wouldn't personally lament that its disk or CPU wait states aren't begging for mercy 24x7. I'm curious why Alex asked the question and what kind of answer he'd like to see, or what thoughts he has on it... Paul -- Paul Makepeace ... http://paulm.com/ "If you exploded into a thousand tiny pieces, then don't bend over in the Monastery." -- http://paulm.com/toys/surrealism/
Re: Penderel (Was IQfC)
On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> It is probably just me, but I hate to see a computer not used to its
> full potential and penderel is sitting unloaded for much of the day.
Personally, I think that this is the wrong way to look at this. I prefer
instead to think that we have the extra resources should we need it to do
anything. There's no law that say we have to consume all of our
resources. I'd prefer for someone to come up with an interesting project
and then that they had the resources to do it on penderel, rather than the
other way round, where someone goes out looking for things to simply
consume the resources.
Don't think that I'm saying that you shouldn't do something with
penderel (infact I think that if you can come up with a great project it
would be wonderful) but I'm just saying I think you're coming at it from a
point of a problem that I think doesn't exist. Extra capability is good.
If memory serves, in the past running distributed.net clients and their
ilk caused instability in the box (I believe at the time this was
attributed to heating issues.) Given that our website and mailing list
run on this box (which, as Dave Cantrell points out don't need to be up
all the time, but do require someone to get back up every time they fall
over) I'd rather see the sacrifice machine stability without providing
some tangible benefit.
Just my two pence worth.
Mark.
--
s'' Mark Fowler London.pm Bath.pm
http://www.twoshortplanks.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
';use Term'Cap;$t=Tgetent Term'Cap{};print$t->Tputs(cl);for$w(split/ +/
){for(0..30){$|=print$t->Tgoto(cm,$_,$y)." $w";select$k,$k,$k,.03}$y+=2}
Re: Penderel (Was IQfC)
At 18/11/2002 10:20 [], Greg McCarroll wrote: I think Penderel is one of london.pm's most underused assets. Its got a reasonable processor (AMD-K6/350), 1/2gig of memory and 25gig of free disk, which by my standards makes it a useful little machine. We probably can't use too much bandwidth on it, but is there not some other ways we can use it? It is probably just me, but I hate to see a computer not used to its full potential and penderel is sitting unloaded for much of the day. It could sit and chug on SETI units... ;-) But I agree, there must be something the box could be doing... /joel -- S. Joel Bernstein :: joel at fysh dot org :: t: 020 8458 2323 "Nobody is going to claim that Perl 6's OO is "bolted on". Well, except maybe for certain Slashdotters who don't know the difference between rational discussion and cheerleading..." -- Larry Wall
Re: Penderel (Was IQfC)
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:20:17AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: > It is probably just me, but I hate to see a computer not used to its > full potential and penderel is sitting unloaded for much of the day. You could do what I do with the unused CPU time on colon, and donate it to one Nicholas Clark and his bleadperl smoketests. (obviously you wouldn't necessarily want to do those, but something similar may be possible). -- Lusercop.net - LARTing Lusers everywhere since 2002
Penderel (Was IQfC)
* David Cantrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > In the grand scheme of things, penderel isn't actually that important. It's > nice to have, and I'm grateful to those who look after it, but I won't lose > any sleep over failures. So it runs our web site and the mailing list. > Ok, splitting off partially from the leadership question thread. I think Penderel is one of london.pm's most underused assets. Its got a reasonable processor (AMD-K6/350), 1/2gig of memory and 25gig of free disk, which by my standards makes it a useful little machine. We probably can't use too much bandwidth on it, but is there not some other ways we can use it? It is probably just me, but I hate to see a computer not used to its full potential and penderel is sitting unloaded for much of the day. G. -- Greg McCarroll http://www.mccarroll.org.uk/~gem/ jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Building Net::SSL on penderel
On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 03:46:31PM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote: > I can't build Net::SSL on penderel :-(. Just wondered if this problem > was unique to me or not. I get: > > So I'm (pessimistically) assuming something wants a particular > version/brand/flavour/political attitude of library somewhere. Yes, almost certianly Debian has only bothered installing the binaries of various SSL stuff. Ask your friendly local sysadmin (damn, that includes me) to install the relevant development stuff. ... done. > Or maybe the OpenSSL libs need a quick update? There haven't been any security updates, but it might be due a update soon. I doubt it, though. > Or maybe someone would like to install Net::SSL in /usr/lib/perl? Installed to /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.6.1/i586-linux/Net/SSL.pm as that's where CPAN shell decided it should live. Paul Makepeace will probably point out requests like this are better directed at [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- :: paul :: the future has been and gone
Building Net::SSL on penderel
I can't build Net::SSL on penderel :-(. Just wondered if this problem was unique to me or not. I get: .Can't load 'blib/arch/auto/Crypt/SSLeay/SSLeay.so' for module Crypt::SSLeay: blib/arch/auto/Crypt/SSLeay/SSLeay.so: undefined symbol: OPENSSL_free at /usr/local/lib/perl5/5.6.1/i586-linux/DynaLoader.pm line 206. at blib/lib/Crypt/SSLeay/CTX.pm line 2 So I'm (pessimistically) assuming something wants a particular version/brand/flavour/political attitude of library somewhere. Or maybe the OpenSSL libs need a quick update? Or maybe someone would like to install Net::SSL in /usr/lib/perl? -- Jonathan Peterson Technical Manager, Unified Ltd, +44 (0)20 7383 6092 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Penderel ssh
Paul Makepeace wrote: > On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 08:44:24AM +0200, Newton, Philip wrote: > > (OTOH, a published alternative admin address would be > > useful for when penderel is b0rken... sending email to root > > at brokenbox is not going to do a lot of good :) > > You can probably guess at least three of them :-) Probably... but when something is b0rken I don't necessarily want to dig through my mail archive hoping that I've kept some emails from them so that I can look up their addresses. (And at home I don't have my london-list spool available at all.) Cheers, Philip -- Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> All opinions are my own, not my employer's. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Re: Penderel ssh
On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 08:44:24AM +0200, Newton, Philip wrote: > I don't know, but for some reason I have this mental image of mail to root > landing in a file on the mail spool on the box and sitting there for an > indefinite time until someone logs in as root (which probably doesn't happen This would definitely be a very sloppy set-up. root should always be in /etc/aliases or its equivalent. In fact under some circumstances MTAs won't even deliver to root's mail spool as they'll be too low a privilege. Further, doing ordinary non-system admin tasks like reading mail as root is a sloppy practice. > (OTOH, a published alternative admin address would be useful for when > penderel is b0rken... sending email to root at brokenbox is not going to do > a lot of good :) You can probably guess at least three of them :-) There is also a mailing list sysops but that's more for internal use but certainly no-one would object to questions or suggestions there. Sending to the list about penderel issues is not a terribly effective route. A) 297 other people don't want to know about it B) a chat list isn't read as high priority as people's inbox. Paul -- Paul Makepeace ... http://paulm.com/ "If the car doesn't start in the rain, then there will be much jubilation in the streets tonight." -- http://paulm.com/toys/surrealism/
Re: Penderel ssh
Paul Makepeace wrote: > On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 07:18:39PM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote: > > Just curious. Not sure who penderel admins are, hence list post. > > Man, sometimes I wonder about you folk :-) root a' london d' > pm d' org. I don't know, but for some reason I have this mental image of mail to root landing in a file on the mail spool on the box and sitting there for an indefinite time until someone logs in as root (which probably doesn't happen all that often in normal operation) and reads his mail -- while mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" would go straight to the admin. Does mail to root get forwarded to all who have root? Or do people check root mail every day? In that case, I suppose root would be OK. (OTOH, a published alternative admin address would be useful for when penderel is b0rken... sending email to root at brokenbox is not going to do a lot of good :) Cheers, Philip -- Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> All opinions are my own, not my employer's. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Re: Penderel ssh
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 07:18:39PM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote: > Just curious. Not sure who penderel admins are, hence list post. Man, sometimes I wonder about you folk :-) root a' london d' pm d' org. /etc had a rough time (see blech's earlier post) so password problems ensued. Best thing to do at least initially is send over a SSH public key (~/.ssh/*.pub; SSHv2 preferably) and we'll sort it out. Goes for anyone else in this situation of course. Paul -- Paul Makepeace ... http://paulm.com/ "If my brain fell out, then there will be much jubilation in the streets tonight." -- http://paulm.com/toys/surrealism/
Penderel ssh
Lo, Penderel told me the host key had changed when I ssh'd to it just now, which I put down to various repairs etc. on penderel. But then penderel reckonded I didn't know my own password, which is a slanderous lie. Has someone been fiddling with ssh? Or did my account die? Or did we get hacked? Just curious. Not sure who penderel admins are, hence list post. -- Jonathan Peterson Technical Manager, Unified Ltd, +44 (0)20 7383 6092 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: penderel update
On Mon, 2002-06-03 at 09:28, Newton, Philip wrote: > A propos penderel -- the motd says that there's a local CPAN copy; however, > the directory has weird permissions something like 640 (IIRC), which is not > terribly useful since people who aren't uid/gid "cpan" can't read anything > under there. > > Is the motd premature or are the permissions wrong? oops, thanks for pointing that out... permissions are fixed, and i've symlinked it in to /usr/local/CPAN downtime for system shining is still scheduled for tomorrow (tuesday). cheers, alex
Re: penderel update
alex wrote: > perl 5.8.0 rc1 is on penderel (london.pm.org) now in > /usr/local/bin/perl5.8.0 A propos penderel -- the motd says that there's a local CPAN copy; however, the directory has weird permissions something like 640 (IIRC), which is not terribly useful since people who aren't uid/gid "cpan" can't read anything under there. Is the motd premature or are the permissions wrong? Cheers, Philip -- Philip Newton [EMAIL PROTECTED] datenrevision GmbH & Co. OHG http://www.datenrevision.de a gedas company TEL +49-40-797 007-37 Cuxhavener Str. 36, D-21149 Hamburg FAX +49-40-797 007-10
penderel update
perl 5.8.0 rc1 is on penderel (london.pm.org) now in /usr/local/bin/perl5.8.0 london.pm.org will be down sometime on tuesday -- our leader paul mison is going to install debian on it for us. the redhat install was getting long in the tooth, and wasn't looked after properly. by the way, i managed to find the guy who sold me the broken chip at the computer fair, and got it replaced. i may end up needing to use that in another machine, in which case i'll get another one next weekend. there's a few pending new account requests, i'll get around to them real soon -- feel free to bug me though! cheers, alex
Re: penderel is back
On Mon, 2002-05-20 at 12:40, alex wrote: > no new bits in yet, if anyone with good experience with hardware and CFT > would like to drop by and put them in, they're here and waiting... > otherwise i'll happily do it when i get some time, but that might not be > for a day or two. i had a go at this tonight, but the motherboard + cpu didn't work. dammit. it has the hatter's network and graphics cards in, and a new psu, so maybe it will be more stable anyway. alex
Re: penderel
alex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, 2002-05-19 at 11:39, Dave Hodgkinson wrote: > > alex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > i have bought a mobo + cpu (athlon 1800+) + fan for 140 quid from the > > > tcr computer fair. i have a spare psu that i'll put in too, just in > > > case penderel's psu is what's been mucking up all the hardware. > > > > Then get a decent, new 350W mother. > > if you have one to contribute i'd be more than happy to put it in for > you. I only have an old one which I believe might have contributed to the demise of my old mobo :( -- David Hodgkinson, Wizard for Hirehttp://www.davehodgkinson.com Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star http://www.deep-purple.com All the Purple Family Tree news http://www.slashrock.com Interim Technical Director, Web Architecture Consultant for hire
Re: penderel update
On Sun, May 19, 2002 at 03:50:52AM +0100, alex wrote:
> - as an experiment, perl 5.7.3 is now installed in
> /usr/local/perl/5.7.3/
> (you can run it via /usr/local/bin/perl5.7.3)
> is that a stupid place to put it?
No, not really. It lets you put the 5.8 release candidates as
/usr/local/bin/perl so that everyone gets to test them. :-)
Or alternatively you replace /usr/local/bin/perl with this:
#!/usr/local/bin/perl5.7.3 -w
use strict; # Dave told us to do this.
use warnings;
my $script = shift;
my $body = do {
local (*FH, $/);
open FH, "<", $script or die "Can't open perl script \"$script\": $!";
;
};
my %hack;
$SIG{__WARN__} = sub {
(my $message = $_[0]) =~ s/\(eval 1\)/$script/g;
$message =~ s!(/loader/0x[0-9a-f]+/)(\S+) line!
exists $hack{$2} ? "$hack{$2} line" : "$1$2 line"!gme;
};
unshift @INC, sub {
my ($self, $file) = @_;
foreach my $dir (@INC) {
next if ref $dir;
my $full = "$dir/$file";
if (open my $fh, "<", $full) {
$hack{$file} = $full;
# Dave made us do this too:
my $line = "use strict; use warnings;";
# You didn't see this:
return $fh, sub {
# We really ought to (a) document or rescind this feature
# (b) if we document it, change the implementation to use filter simple
# (c) if so, check whether it falls foul of the subtle trap of
# caller-filter leaves some data in the buffer, and filter gets to see
# it in $_ for a second time.
if ($line) {
$_ = "$line $_";
undef $line;
}
};
}
}
return;
};
eval "use strict; use warnings; $body";
exit unless $@;
$@ =~ s/\(eval 1\)/$script/g;
$@ =~ s!(/loader/0x[0-9a-f]+/)(\S+) line!
exists $hack{$2} ? "$hack{$2} line" : "$1$2 line"!gme;
die $@;
__END__
The above code is a gratuitous hack, and probably doesn't work in lots of
subtle cases. The code to fake the error messages back to what you'd expect
them to be will probably fail in some weird ways.
Nicholas Clark
--
Even better than the real thing:http://nms-cgi.sourceforge.net/
Re: penderel
On Sun, 2002-05-19 at 11:39, Dave Hodgkinson wrote: > alex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > i have bought a mobo + cpu (athlon 1800+) + fan for 140 quid from the > > tcr computer fair. i have a spare psu that i'll put in too, just in > > case penderel's psu is what's been mucking up all the hardware. > > Then get a decent, new 350W mother. if you have one to contribute i'd be more than happy to put it in for you. alex
penderel is back
and this is a test message. no new bits in yet, if anyone with good experience with hardware and CFT would like to drop by and put them in, they're here and waiting... otherwise i'll happily do it when i get some time, but that might not be for a day or two. cheers people alex
Re: penderel
alex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > i have bought a mobo + cpu (athlon 1800+) + fan for 140 quid from the > tcr computer fair. i have a spare psu that i'll put in too, just in > case penderel's psu is what's been mucking up all the hardware. Then get a decent, new 350W mother. -- David Hodgkinson, Wizard for Hirehttp://www.davehodgkinson.com Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star http://www.deep-purple.com All the Purple Family Tree news http://www.slashrock.com Interim Technical Director, Web Architecture Consultant for hire
penderel update
hello - i installed a new (latest stable) apache/mod_perl, listening on http://london.pm.org:81 . please check your stuff web works with it before we switch over - as an experiment, perl 5.7.3 is now installed in /usr/local/perl/5.7.3/ (you can run it via /usr/local/bin/perl5.7.3) is that a stupid place to put it? - i'll install mysql at some point. cheers, alex
Re: penderel
On Sat, 2002-05-18 at 01:56, the hatter wrote: > It's ok, a kind (not to mention handsome, witty and modest) donor has > given some random AGP card to the cause. cheers hatter! and for the network card too. i have bought a mobo + cpu (athlon 1800+) + fan for 140 quid from the tcr computer fair. i have a spare psu that i'll put in too, just in case penderel's psu is what's been mucking up all the hardware. i'm hoping i'll be able to recoup most of that 140 quid in return for new shell account holders. so if you want a shell on penderel, blech and i agreed on a contribution of 20 pounds waged, or 5 pounds unwaged. this is rather cheap, to get as many people involved with london.pm.org as possible. i'll send a more explantory mail around about it once the machine is upgraded. cheers alex
Re: penderel
On Thu, 16 May 2002, Paul Makepeace wrote: > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 02:47:24PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote: > > > > It's a server. It needs not graphics, other than the bare minimum that > > broken PCs require before they'll boot. A shitty old Tseng ISA card > > would be sufficient. > > Do not put an ISA card in a machine. Generating ISA interrupts causes > bus slow-down IIRC and quite frankly any piece of hardware that is 10yr > old probably isn't something you want to be messing with. AGP cards > starting at 30q leaves no excuse for this recycling. It's ok, a kind (not to mention handsome, witty and modest) donor has given some random AGP card to the cause. Should anyone actually want an ISA graphics card, I quite possibly have one lying around, along with the worlds stock of ISA network cards. the hatter
Re: penderel
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 02:47:24PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote: > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 09:52:16PM +, the hatter wrote: > > I'll happily donate one of my favourite 3C905s which I seem to be > > accumulating. And I'd assume you want AGP graphics, rather than PCI ? > > It's a server. It needs not graphics, other than the bare minimum that > broken PCs require before they'll boot. A shitty old Tseng ISA card > would be sufficient. Do not put an ISA card in a machine. Generating ISA interrupts causes bus slow-down IIRC and quite frankly any piece of hardware that is 10yr old probably isn't something you want to be messing with. AGP cards starting at 30q leaves no excuse for this recycling. Paul -- Paul Makepeace ... http://paulm.com/ "What is abecaderian? Exactly!" -- http://paulm.com/toys/surrealism/
Re: Tseng ISA cards (was Re: penderel)
Andy Wardley wrote: > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 04:29:46PM +0200, Newton, Philip wrote: > > My first computer had an ET4000 which I ran at 800x600. > > Lucky bastard. My first computer did 80x25 :-) Well, OK. I should have qualified that with "my first peecee". My first computer did 40x25 "natively" in four colours^Wshades of green, though you could also go 80x25 with two (and 20x25 with sixteen, if you felt that way). 'Tweren't really a text mode, though; it always ran in graphics mode. I think it was something like 640/320/160 x 200 pixels depending on the mode (the graphics primitives gave 400 lines, but there were physically only 200). Cheers, Philip -- Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> All opinions are my own, not my employer's. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Re: Tseng ISA cards (was Re: penderel)
On Wed, 15 May 2002, David Cantrell wrote: > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 07:47:38PM +0100, Jonathan Stowe wrote: > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Newton, Philip wrote: > > > My first computer had an ET4000 which I ran at 800x600. > > My first computer had LEDs > > This 'ere puter has five LEDs. FIVE. Bloody luxury! I had to push the bits through snowstorms every day -- uphill both ways of course -- and if I wanted a display I had to figure out the configuration of the bits by sticking my finger in a specially mounted socket: "OUCH!" meant one, "no ouch" meant zero. But Ada Lovelace helped me program it, so it was okay. Hubba hubba. :) -- Chris Devers[EMAIL PROTECTED] Apache / mod_perl / http://homepage.mac.com/chdevers/resume/ "More war soon. You know how it is."-- mnftiu.cc
Re: Tseng ISA cards (was Re: penderel)
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 07:47:38PM +0100, Jonathan Stowe wrote: > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Newton, Philip wrote: > > My first computer had an ET4000 which I ran at 800x600. > My first computer had LEDs This 'ere puter has five LEDs. FIVE. Bloody luxury! -- David Cantrell|Degenerate|http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david Good advice is always certain to be ignored, but that's no reason not to give it-- Agatha Christie
Re: Tseng ISA cards (was Re: penderel)
On Wed, 15 May 2002, Newton, Philip wrote: > David Cantrell wrote: > > A shitty old Tseng ISA card would be sufficient. > > Oooh. Fond memories. > > My first computer had an ET4000 which I ran at 800x600. > My first computer had LEDs /J\
Re: Tseng ISA cards (was Re: penderel)
On Wed, 15 May 2002, Andy Wardley wrote: > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 04:29:46PM +0200, Newton, Philip wrote: > > My first computer had an ET4000 which I ran at 800x600. > > Lucky bastard. My first computer did 80x25 :-) My first computer still does 40x25 (unless you counted the quarter-block 'graphics' which doubled that). the hatter
Re: Tseng ISA cards (was Re: penderel)
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 04:29:46PM +0200, Newton, Philip wrote: > My first computer had an ET4000 which I ran at 800x600. Lucky bastard. My first computer did 80x25 :-) A
Tseng ISA cards (was Re: penderel)
David Cantrell wrote: > A shitty old Tseng ISA card would be sufficient. Oooh. Fond memories. My first computer had an ET4000 which I ran at 800x600. Cheers, Philip -- Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> All opinions are my own, not my employer's. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Re: penderel
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 09:52:16PM +, the hatter wrote: > I'll happily donate one of my favourite 3C905s which I seem to be > accumulating. And I'd assume you want AGP graphics, rather than PCI ? It's a server. It needs not graphics, other than the bare minimum that broken PCs require before they'll boot. A shitty old Tseng ISA card would be sufficient. -- David Cantrell|Degenerate|http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david Perl may be the best solution for processing a text file, but asking a group of Perl Mongers clearly isn't -- aef, in #london.pm
Re: penderel
On Tue, 2002-05-14 at 22:52, the hatter wrote: > I'll happily donate one of my favourite 3C905s which I seem to be > accumulating. And I'd assume you want AGP graphics, rather than PCI ? > I suspect I can liberate one of those too, it does require me > remembering to throw it in with the barcode readers some time in the next > couple of days though. yes please! cheers, alex
Re: penderel
On 14 May 2002, alex wrote: > you could help by bringing a graphics card or network card to the > technical meeting, if you have one spare. I'll happily donate one of my favourite 3C905s which I seem to be accumulating. And I'd assume you want AGP graphics, rather than PCI ? I suspect I can liberate one of those too, it does require me remembering to throw it in with the barcode readers some time in the next couple of days though. the hatter
penderel
thanks very much to tantrix for getting penderel fired up again to try to stop it from crashing again i'm going to replace a lot of the hardware. on saturday i'll buy: . a cheap athlon mx chip . a motherboard . a graphics card . a network card . a case (probably with psu, although i have one spare if not) at the moment penderel is using state51's graphics and network card so that needs to be replaced anyway i'm hoping to spend no more than 200 quid, hopefully more like 150 quid. you could help by bringing a graphics card or network card to the technical meeting, if you have one spare. current root users are: paul mison, paul makepeace and myself. i'd like to see it kept that way for a while until things are stable. if you don't have a shell on penderel but would like one, please let me know and we'll sort something out. cheers, alex
Re: penderel
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Any OS, however, that doesn't run well in 128Mb is a broken OS in my > opinion, and that 128Mb should include X. Yes, Mac OS X, I'm criticising > you twice in the same sentence there. Although, to be fair, it does sound like their memory management needs more than a little work... http://www.darwinfo.org/devlist.php3?number=14964 > ...but I have 512M and staring at the spinning beachball of death happens a lot more often than is reasonable. My current favourite is opening a directory containing 5 700M .mov/.avi's in Graphic Convertor's browser and the G4 swapping for nigh on 10 minutes (thrashing the disk!), then kernel panicking. "The World's Most Advanced OS", indeed. Perhaps not "The World's Most Useful OS" though. Bah, must stop ranting about OSX before 8am. -- rob partington % [EMAIL PROTECTED] % http://lynx.browser.org/
Re: penderel
On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, David Cantrell wrote: > Any OS, however, that doesn't run well in 128Mb is a broken OS in my > opinion, and that 128Mb should include X. Yes, Mac OS X, I'm criticising > you twice in the same sentence there. It's only a matter of time, I was still stunned by deadrat when it wouldn't even boot from an install floppy, because it only had 16MB. > > I was quite surprised that 9 ran on sun4m as the first beta was sun4u > > only but the beta refresh doesn't have that restriction. Hurrah once more. > > Shame they dropped Solaris 9/x86 though. > > This must be a definition of "shame" that I'm not familiar with. Solaris > for x86 is nasty. Taking it out and shooting it is more humane than it > deserves. Now, I'm normally pretty harsh in my criticism of x86 bitty- > boxes, but Solaris for x86 is so awful that it defiles even those > abominations. Last I heard, solaris x86 wasn't exactly dropped, more that it wasn't a priority. Maybe when the 64 bit intel stuff becomes widely prevelant, it'll become more of a priority again. There are good reasons for running solaris x86, but they're not my reasons, and are becoming less reasonable each day that linux and the *BSDs exist. the hatter
Re: penderel
On Wed, 2002-04-10 at 20:36, David Cantrell wrote: > AIUI, 2.6 ran nicely in 64Mb, 7 was bearable, but 8 unacceptably bad. > Those are for running as a workstation with X and stuff, so on a server, > 64Mb may be acceptable. Well I'm not using it as a workstation, it'd be unbearably slow with any amount of memory (yes I have used SS5's as workstations but that was then and this is now). > Any OS, however, that doesn't run well in 128Mb is a broken OS in my > opinion, and that 128Mb should include X. Yes, Mac OS X, I'm criticising > you twice in the same sentence there. I reckon about 256Mb minimum for Mac OS/X 10.1 but then I have 384Mb in my Powermac G3/300 and it's all needed if I have to run a Classic app like Microsoft Office 98. > I am rather surprised that they're still supporting older Sparcs. It's > jolly decent of them. Don't suppose you know if they still support 4c > and 4d machines do you? Neither 8 or 9 run on sun4c. I've run Solaris 8 on a sun4d box (SS1000E) so I'm sure it runs on sun4d , I've no idea I'm afraid about the 9 beta. Regards Clive -- Clive Hills | Unemployed Solaris/Linux sysadmin | e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Crayford| Universe/Reality/Pick DBA | t: 01322 550166 Kent UK | Looking for work in City/West End | t: 07997 013387
Re: penderel
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 07:16:07PM +0100, Clive Hills wrote: > I've only got 64Mb of ram on the SS5/170 that I'm running 9 on and it > seems no better and no worse than Solaris 8 on that platform. As always > I'm sure that it would be happier with at least 128Mb. AIUI, 2.6 ran nicely in 64Mb, 7 was bearable, but 8 unacceptably bad. Those are for running as a workstation with X and stuff, so on a server, 64Mb may be acceptable. Any OS, however, that doesn't run well in 128Mb is a broken OS in my opinion, and that 128Mb should include X. Yes, Mac OS X, I'm criticising you twice in the same sentence there. > I was quite surprised that 9 ran on sun4m as the first beta was sun4u > only but the beta refresh doesn't have that restriction. I am rather surprised that they're still supporting older Sparcs. It's jolly decent of them. Don't suppose you know if they still support 4c and 4d machines do you? > Shame they dropped Solaris 9/x86 though. This must be a definition of "shame" that I'm not familiar with. Solaris for x86 is nasty. Taking it out and shooting it is more humane than it deserves. Now, I'm normally pretty harsh in my criticism of x86 bitty- boxes, but Solaris for x86 is so awful that it defiles even those abominations. -- Lord Protector David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david WARNING! People in front of screen are stupider than they appear -- Tanuki the Raccoon-dog, in the Monastery
Re: penderel
On Wed, 2002-04-10 at 18:20, the hatter wrote: > I knew sol8 did, but if 9 seems to as well, then I'm both slightly > surprised, and rather happy. Any idea what the minimum ram necessary is ? > or how much have you got, and does it seem to have any big speed problems > in places that you'd attribute to lack of memory ? I've only got 64Mb of ram on the SS5/170 that I'm running 9 on and it seems no better and no worse than Solaris 8 on that platform. As always I'm sure that it would be happier with at least 128Mb. I was quite surprised that 9 ran on sun4m as the first beta was sun4u only but the beta refresh doesn't have that restriction. Shame they dropped Solaris 9/x86 though. Regards Clive -- Clive Hills | Unemployed Solaris/Linux sysadmin | e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Crayford| Universe/Reality/Pick DBA | t: 01322 550166 Kent UK | Looking for work in City/West End | t: 07997 013387
Re: penderel
On 10 Apr 2002, Clive Hills wrote: > On Wed, 2002-04-10 at 18:10, Steve Mynott wrote: > > I think Solaris 8 doesn't even run on pre-Ultra hardware (or is > > supported on?) > > > > In fact Solaris 8 runs quite happily (FSVO happy) on sun4m and sun4d > hardware. In fact the beta refresh of Solaris 9 will run on sun4m too > which is handy since I don't have any sun4u hardware at home at the > moment. I knew sol8 did, but if 9 seems to as well, then I'm both slightly surprised, and rather happy. Any idea what the minimum ram necessary is ? or how much have you got, and does it seem to have any big speed problems in places that you'd attribute to lack of memory ? the hatter
Re: penderel
On Wed, 2002-04-10 at 18:10, Steve Mynott wrote: > I think Solaris 8 doesn't even run on pre-Ultra hardware (or is > supported on?) > In fact Solaris 8 runs quite happily (FSVO happy) on sun4m and sun4d hardware. In fact the beta refresh of Solaris 9 will run on sun4m too which is handy since I don't have any sun4u hardware at home at the moment. Regards Clive -- Clive Hills | Unemployed Solaris/Linux sysadmin | e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Crayford| Universe/Reality/Pick DBA | t: 01322 550166 Kent UK | Looking for work in City/West End | t: 07997 013387
Re: penderel
Dominic Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Not to mention the fact that Solaris runs like crap on all > pre-Ultrasparc hardware. I think Solaris 8 doesn't even run on pre-Ultra hardware (or is supported on?) > If you desperately wanted a Sun operating system, you could go for > SunOS 4.1.4, but that's been unsupported for nearly 10 years now. > > Debian or NetBSD would be a far better choice, for the same reason > that you wouldn't try to run windows XP on a Pentium 90. NetBSD or OpenBSD are probably best for a lowend Sparc and the closest to the traditional BSD-based SunOS 4. According to the (possibly biased and probably outdated) NetBSD/Sparc FAQ Why is NetBSD so much faster than SparcLinux on sun4c? The memory management hardware on sun4c machines (SPARCstation 1, 1+, 2, IPC, IPX, SLC, ELC and clones) is not handled particularly well by Linux. Until Linux reworks their MMU code NetBSD will be very much faster on this hardware. YMMV -- Steve Mynott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: penderel
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 12:44:05PM -0500, anathema wrote: > the hatter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Bring it along tonight (or give us a URL for it) and we can do some > >statistically significant research on the matter. > > Research? I think that may be a euphemism... :-) -- David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/ "Take myself, subtract films, and the remainder is zero" - Akira Kurosawa
Re: penderel
the hatter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Bring it along tonight (or give us a URL for it) and we can do some >statistically significant research on the matter. Research? -- http://www.the-anathema.org Free Tibet! With purchase of second Tibet of equal or greater value. Limit two Tibets per customer. - ModernHumorist.com
Re: penderel
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, anathema wrote: > David H. Adler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > My only real experience with Sun boxen has been in porn. > >> Sounds like a sound recruitment strategy, little will attract people to > >> new technologies than good, wholesome, life-giving porn. > >Mmm... porn... > > You've see the porn, sweety. Would it work as recruitment stuff for Sun > engineers? :) Bring it along tonight (or give us a URL for it) and we can do some statistically significant research on the matter. the hatter
Re: penderel
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 09:10:28PM -0500, anathema wrote: > David H. Adler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > My only real experience with Sun boxen has been in porn. > >> Sounds like a sound recruitment strategy, little will attract people to > >> new technologies than good, wholesome, life-giving porn. > >Mmm... porn... > > You've see the porn, sweety. Would it work as recruitment stuff for Sun > engineers? :) I appear completely unable to come up with an appropriate way to answer that in a public forum. That, of course, could be considered a "yes". :-) dha -- David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/ "This is Mace's planet. We Just Live here."
Re: penderel
David H. Adler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > My only real experience with Sun boxen has been in porn. >> Sounds like a sound recruitment strategy, little will attract people to >> new technologies than good, wholesome, life-giving porn. >Mmm... porn... You've see the porn, sweety. Would it work as recruitment stuff for Sun engineers? :) -- http://www.the-anathema.org Free Tibet! With purchase of second Tibet of equal or greater value. Limit two Tibets per customer. - ModernHumorist.com
Re: penderel
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 11:48:50PM +, the hatter wrote: > On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, anathema wrote: > > > the hatter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > My only real experience with Sun boxen has been in porn. > > Sounds like a sound recruitment strategy, little will attract people to > new technologies than good, wholesome, life-giving porn. Mmm... porn... dha, well *someone* had to say it... -- David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/ They would have done better with an axe! - George Westinghouse on the first electric chair demo
Re: penderel
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, anathema wrote: > the hatter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > My only real experience with Sun boxen has been in porn. Sounds like a sound recruitment strategy, little will attract people to new technologies than good, wholesome, life-giving porn. the hatter
Re: penderel
the hatter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: My only real experience with Sun boxen has been in porn. Did you know hexdrivers could do that? -- http://www.the-anathema.org Free Tibet! With purchase of second Tibet of equal or greater value. Limit two Tibets per customer. - ModernHumorist.com
Re: penderel
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, anathema wrote: > the hatter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Anyway, I'm sure most of the current admin-folk > >would like some experience on a real OS. > > Mee-ow! :) Less "miaw", more "get off my bridge". But really, any clueful linux admin is capable of fixing most problems on solaris, and of figuring out the majority of others just by using their powers of observation, it's rare to need a proper, dyed-in-the-wool sun engineer type to fix a borken box. And what aspiring sysadmin would turn down the chance to get some experience on a new platform ?. I like linux (so much so that I build a PLC using it, which still runs predominantly on linux) and had no desire to use solaris commercially though, until we could afford big sun kit, and needed the power and scalability. But I don't run linux on my sun boxen, or on my psion, and have no desire to run solaris (or epoc, for that matter) on my x86 hardware. Though if through some magic, I could replace all my x86 hardware with sun hardware of equal power, I'd do it in an instant, and run linux on some of them. God(dess) how I hate having to fiddle with ibm-compat hardware, it is to hardware what windows is to OSs, in terms of weird incompatabilities and unhelpful error reporting. the hatter
Re: penderel
the hatter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Anyway, I'm sure most of the current admin-folk >would like some experience on a real OS. Mee-ow! :) -- http://www.the-anathema.org Free Tibet! With purchase of second Tibet of equal or greater value. Limit two Tibets per customer. - ModernHumorist.com
Re: Penderel
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 05:36:13PM +0200, Newton, Philip wrote: > Neil Ford wrote: > > If you do decide to replace the motherboard and processor, I have a > > spare case with processor, mobo, memory and CD that could be used as > > a staging post whilst new components are fitted to pendrel. > > Intel or AMD? > AMD K62 350 if my memory serves me correctly. Unfortunately all the higher spec kit has already been reallocated. Neil. -- Neil C. Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Penderel
Neil Ford wrote: > If you do decide to replace the motherboard and processor, I have a > spare case with processor, mobo, memory and CD that could be used as > a staging post whilst new components are fitted to pendrel. Intel or AMD? Cheers, Philip -- Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> All opinions are my own, not my employer's. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Re: Penderel - Thread herding, Was: penderel
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 02:56:02PM +, the hatter wrote: > I'm actually vaguely surprised that we can't between us come up with a > fairly nippy and nice peecee. You're new here aincha :-) > > lets not do this debate at all, linux admin experience is in the most > > supply in this group, so lets just go with it and debian is the best > > distro for non-pee cee architectures (bar YD on macs) > I'll bow to your superior knowledge of linux on non-peecee thingies > though, though given that you only need a small amount of sysadmins, I'm > not convinced that there's much value in having more cooks waiting by the > kitchen doors. The value is in that these sysadmins aren't being paid. Sometimes they go on holiday without having the decency to hire - out of their own pockets - a temporary replacement. Sometimes they go out and get drunk instead of slaving over a hot terminal. Sometimes they just can't be arsed and decide to play GTA3 instead. Having a redundant array of inexpensive sysadmins is a Good Thing. -- Lord Protector David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david The test of the goodness of a thing is its fitness for use. If it fails on this first test, no amount of ornamentation or finish will make it any better, it will only make it more expensive, more foolish. -- Frank Pick, lecture to the Design and Industries Assoc, 1916
Re: penderel
David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 01:03:12PM +, the hatter wrote: > > > or you can run solaris with its good breeding on sparc, which > > loves the hardware. > > Thankyou for volunteering to admin it. Not to mention the fact that Solaris runs like crap on all pre-Ultrasparc hardware. If you desperately wanted a Sun operating system, you could go for SunOS 4.1.4, but that's been unsupported for nearly 10 years now. Debian or NetBSD would be a far better choice, for the same reason that you wouldn't try to run windows XP on a Pentium 90. -Dom (must get the sparcstation 2 up and running again) -- | Semantico: creators of major online resources | | URL: http://www.semantico.com/ | | Tel: +44 (1273) 72 | | Address: 33 Bond St., Brighton, Sussex, BN1 1RD, UK. |
Re: Penderel - Thread herding, Was: penderel
* the hatter ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > We could sort all of those bits, if we pull out the existing smaller disk > and replace it with a single, larger one, using the cradle from the > existing one, and thus no ventilation problems (which may be an issie with > 2 disks, as they're mounted one on top of the other, in a case just about > high enough to do so) > sounds good, now it just remains to do this all hd herding and for someone to commit to spending a few hours transferring the system over (don't look at me, i'm just the catalyst) > > [buying a new pee cee] > I'm actually vaguely surprised that we can't between us come up with a > fairly nippy and nice peecee. Just on my own, I could blag a case (1U, or we'd most likely end up back here, in my experience of cobbled together pc's they tend to need a lot of scrutiny of parts and a fair amount of love - otherwise you end up with strange mobo/memory/hd problems > > > [solaris vs. debian] > > > though, though given that you only need a small amount of sysadmins, I'm i'm also guessing the people who are in the building have more linux admin experience than solaris, anyway its a good solution, we dont need to find a license, debian has all the joys of auto update so we wont get haxxored, etc. etc. > > [ups + money] > > Coincidentally, I might even be able to do a good deal on a recycled UPS > (subject to small donations to the cake fund) > lets leave this issue until we have sold penderel Greg -- Greg McCarroll http://217.34.97.146/~gem/
Re: Penderel - Thread herding, Was: penderel
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Greg McCarroll wrote: > [internal mounting] > [offers of scsi bits and bobs] > [ventilation] We could sort all of those bits, if we pull out the existing smaller disk and replace it with a single, larger one, using the cradle from the existing one, and thus no ventilation problems (which may be an issie with 2 disks, as they're mounted one on top of the other, in a case just about high enough to do so) > [buying a new pee cee] > > a new PC may be close to no money, but not exactly no money, as > opposed to this SS10 that is no money, bar the usual beer tax I'm actually vaguely surprised that we can't between us come up with a fairly nippy and nice peecee. Just on my own, I could blag a case (1U, or normal midi tower), a motherboard, a P3, small amounts of ram, floppy, cd, some HD or another, network cards, etc, etc. I'd be surprised if there wasn't someone on here who could find some bigger dimms or a larger HD, or more HDs. > [solaris vs. debian] > > lets not do this debate at all, linux admin experience is in the most > supply in this group, so lets just go with it and debian is the best > distro for non-pee cee architectures (bar YD on macs) I'll bow to your superior knowledge of linux on non-peecee thingies though, though given that you only need a small amount of sysadmins, I'm not convinced that there's much value in having more cooks waiting by the kitchen doors. > [ups + money] > > lets see if we find a mug^H^H^H person of excellent taste to buy the > beast first and see how much cash we raise Coincidentally, I might even be able to do a good deal on a recycled UPS (subject to small donations to the cake fund) the hatter
Penderel - Thread herding, Was: penderel
ok, to try and steer us back on track [do we want to do this?] yes people are using the box and are also annoyed at the downtime [internal mounting] great, then lets just bung the scsi inside, unless ventilation is a problem (see below) [buying a new pee cee] a new PC may be close to no money, but not exactly no money, as opposed to this SS10 that is no money, bar the usual beer tax [solaris vs. debian] lets not do this debate at all, linux admin experience is in the most supply in this group, so lets just go with it and debian is the best distro for non-pee cee architectures (bar YD on macs) [ups + money] lets see if we find a mug^H^H^H person of excellent taste to buy the beast first and see how much cash we raise [perl version] stick with the stable debian version and lets set up some sort of testing environment that we all can benefit with - please renaime this thread to penderel - multiple perl versions, or some such [naming] the person who installs the box can choose the new name, its their priveledge [offers of scsi bits and bobs] thank you all, but we probably dont need them yet - we dont use that much FS so far [conversion] i have absolute confidence that dave can handle this with a little assistance [parallel running] if state 51 dont object this sounds like an excellent idea [ventilation] i don't know about this, i've never owned an SS series machine -- Greg McCarroll http://217.34.97.146/~gem/
Re: penderel
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, David Cantrell wrote: > On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 01:03:12PM +, the hatter wrote: > > > or you can run solaris with its good breeding on sparc, which > > loves the hardware. > > Thankyou for volunteering to admin it. That's no problem at all[0]. Just get the box to me some time, I'll config it all at home (which is currently drowning in old 19" sun monitors, if anyone wants one) and drop it off at state51 or at work, whichever is less hassle. Anyway, I'm sure most of the current admin-folk would like some experience on a real OS. the hatter [0] Some conditions may apply
Re: penderel
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Richard Clamp wrote:
> I'd suggest that the system perl (/usr/bin/perl) be left to the mercy
> of the distribution, and that multiple /usr/local/perl5.* installs are
> probably going to scratch the widest selection of itches[1].
Now this would be a top idea. I don't test my modules against old
versions of perl because I don't have the tuits to install them. However,
if some kind soul feels like installing them on a box that I have an
account on then that'd be wonderful.
I don't need hosting. I don't need shell access or mail forwarding. What
I *do* need however is a box that has lots of perls set up (and
maintained) by clueful people to test stuff against.
Later.
Mark.
--
s'' Mark Fowler London.pm Bath.pm
http://www.twoshortplanks.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
';use Term'Cap;$t=Tgetent Term'Cap{};print$t->Tputs(cl);for$w(split/ +/
){for(0..30){$|=print$t->Tgoto(cm,$_,$y)." $w";select$k,$k,$k,.03}$y+=2}
Re: penderel
Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 04:41:15AM -0800, Paul Makepeace wrote: > > Paul (who definitely would like to see a more maintainable OS running > > there *psst* debian *psst* :-) > > Which reminds me of a question... > I have a Redhat box at work (not my choice of distribution). > What's the Redhat equivalent of apt-get update; apt-get upgrade? > [ie I want all the lastest bugs, rather than the good old fashioned bugs] up2date -- Dave Hodgkinson, Wizard for Hire http://www.davehodgkinson.com Editor-in-chief, The Highway Starhttp://www.thehighwaystar.com Interim Technical Director, Web Architecture Consultant for hire
Re: penderel
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 01:03:12PM +, the hatter wrote: > or you can run solaris with its good breeding on sparc, which > loves the hardware. Thankyou for volunteering to admin it. -- Grand Inquisitor Reverend David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david Educating this luser would be something to frustrate even the unflappable Yoda and make him jam a lightsaber up his arse while screaming "praise evil, the Dark Side is your friend!". -- Derek Balling, in the Monastery
Re: penderel
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 04:41:15AM -0800, Paul Makepeace wrote: > Quite honestly, I think you could be underestimating the hassle involved > with a reinstall and copy-over onto a different architecture. I've gone from Irix to Linux, from Deadrat to Deviant, with mostly no problems. Just takes a bit of time. I like to have both boxes off the public network whilst doing it, so that stuff like mail spools isn't changing underneath me as I copy data from one to t'other. > My suggestion -- if you really want to use a "new" machine -- would be > to build a complete new machine, have both online simultaneously and > transition services piecemeal. Yes, that's what I prefer to do. I still like to take both boxes offline for transferring certain services, like mail. Doing the whole lot in one go is doable but unpleasant. It *requires* good documentation of the old machine, to make sure all the right packages get installed on the new one. -- David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david Us Germans take our humour very seriously -- German cultural attache talking to the Today Programme, about the German supposed lack of a sense of humour, 29 Aug 2001
Re: penderel
Simon Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Could you not mount the HD internally ? > > Research indicates the SS10 can take two drives internally. I admit my > reasearch is probably incomplete. Make sure that there's plenty of ventilation in that case, they can get rather warm. Hot disks == good doorstops. -Dom -- | Semantico: creators of major online resources | | URL: http://www.semantico.com/ | | Tel: +44 (1273) 72 | | Address: 33 Bond St., Brighton, Sussex, BN1 1RD, UK. |
Re: penderel
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Simon Wilcox wrote: > Could you not mount the HD internally ? > > Research indicates the SS10 can take two drives internally. I admit my > reasearch is probably incomplete. Assuming it's the same in that respect as an SS20, then yes, 2 internal bays, though you need the sun-style mountings to wrap round the generic drive, so that it seats and locks properly. If there's already a big IDE drive that was overlooked, then we might just have to make use of several of the offers of HDs to get the same capacity in scsi-only. Not trying to start a holy war, but I agree with whoever suggested not putting debian on it, simply because it's crusty old sparc hardware - you can get a much faster peecee for close to no money, which will make the changeover trivial, or you can run solaris with its good breeding on sparc, which loves the hardware. the hatter
Re: penderel
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 04:41:15AM -0800, Paul Makepeace wrote: > Paul (who definitely would like to see a more maintainable OS running > there *psst* debian *psst* :-) Which reminds me of a question... I have a Redhat box at work (not my choice of distribution). What's the Redhat equivalent of apt-get update; apt-get upgrade? [ie I want all the lastest bugs, rather than the good old fashioned bugs] This is Deadrat 7.2, if that makes a difference. (Or do I live dangerously and install a nicer OS on the spare 3G partition, using the same /home?) Nicholas Clark
Re: penderel
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Greg McCarroll wrote: > If the above assumptions are true, I propose we strip Penderel of its > scsi drive (9gb) and flog Penderel on ebay to some lucky punter. We > can then buy a scsi housing (if we have enough cash left over we could > also buy an ups, if not lets buy drinks for the people who have helped > admin it) and put said 9gb drive into it. Then we will take Dave's > SS10 and install sparc linux [1] on it and attach the 9gb drive, so > the internal SS10 drive (4Gb) will do / and the (9Gb) will do > /home. We are currently at about 5Gb disk usage in home, but i'd be > amazed if we really need more than 9Gb of space on the machine - > unless someone is intending to use it as a backup server. I've got a spare 18GB SCA drive which the SS10 might like as its internal disk (another one is destined for my SS20, and another is already happily rehomed in random other sun kit of a friends) if now might be a good time to mention it. If you're interested, I can bring it along tomorrow night. the hatter
Re: penderel
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 12:10:24PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote: > Assumption 1 : Penderel is a sick puppy, it has something wrong with > the mobo or memory or whatever. If it's not software then I'm pretty sure it's the motherboard/CPU. The memory is branded and consistent. > If the above assumptions are true, I propose we strip Penderel of its > scsi drive (9gb) and flog Penderel on ebay to some lucky punter. We There are more filesystems than you might think, $ df -H FilesystemSize Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda6 3.7G 1.8G 1.7G 51% / /dev/sda1 7.9M 6.7M 877k 89% /boot /dev/sda7 510M 26M 457M 6% /oldhome /dev/hda1 39G 5.7G 31G 16% /home $ Quite honestly, I think you could be underestimating the hassle involved with a reinstall and copy-over onto a different architecture. I dunno, maybe you have done this a lot and know it back-to-front. I do i386 copies a lot and even with the same architecture it's not pleasant. Just IME, YEMV. My suggestion -- if you really want to use a "new" machine -- would be to build a complete new machine, have both online simultaneously and transition services piecemeal. To be honest, for the cost of little more than a SCSI housing you could buy an AMD+mobo (that would run rings around any sparc machine you could get hold of, FWIW). Anyway, do as you will... Paul (who definitely would like to see a more maintainable OS running there *psst* debian *psst* :-) -- Paul Makepeace ... http://paulm.com/ "What is a trouble avoided? Strawberry pie without the filipinos." -- http://paulm.com/toys/surrealism/
Re: penderel
Mike Jarvis wrote: > Will the new box be named Yorke? That would tend to reduce confusion, wouldn't it? Or we'd have to talk about "old" and "new" penderel... and from what I gather on the list, PO has rather fallen out of favour as a meeting place now anyway, hasn't it? Cheers, Philip -- Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> All opinions are my own, not my employer's. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Re: penderel
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 01:37:24PM +0200, Newton, Philip wrote: > not). I was thinking of maybe installing a new perl of my own anyway (it's > 5.7.2 or something like that at the moment), or perhaps I'll just use the > system perl (which will be, what -- 5.6.1? 5.8.0? something else?) I'd suggest that the system perl (/usr/bin/perl) be left to the mercy of the distribution, and that multiple /usr/local/perl5.* installs are probably going to scratch the widest selection of itches[1]. Of course then there's still the question of which perl to link mod_perl against, if that's deemed desirable. [1] I'll cough to a slight amount of bias since this is typically how I run my machines. -- Richard Clamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
RE: penderel
Although I've a) never contributed anything b) prob not 'up' enough to contribute anything c) have never bin to a social/tech meeting I can a) donate an external SCSI if wanted HTIOU D > -Original Message- > From: greg > Sent: 03 April 2002 12:10 > To: london.pm > Cc: greg > Subject: penderel > > > > Ok, so it may be hearsay but i believe Penderel has had more problems, > so I have a proposal, but lets start with the assumptions i am making > ... > > Assumption 1 : Penderel is a sick puppy, it has something wrong with > the mobo or memory or whatever. > > Assumption 2 : We can't be bothered constantly sending brave soldiers > like Paul M (x2), Jo, Alex, etc. (sorry if i have > forgotten anyone) to persuade it to work. > > Assumption 3 : People still want to use the server. > > Assumption 4 : No one is doing intel specific work on it. > > Assumption 5 : Dave Cantrell's kind offer still stands. > > Assumption 6 : State 51 are still happy to host. > > If the above assumptions are true, I propose we strip Penderel of its > scsi drive (9gb) and flog Penderel on ebay to some lucky punter. We > can then buy a scsi housing (if we have enough cash left over we could > also buy an ups, if not lets buy drinks for the people who have helped > admin it) and put said 9gb drive into it. Then we will take Dave's > SS10 and install sparc linux [1] on it and attach the 9gb drive, so > the internal SS10 drive (4Gb) will do / and the (9Gb) will do > /home. We are currently at about 5Gb disk usage in home, but i'd be > amazed if we really need more than 9Gb of space on the machine - > unless someone is intending to use it as a backup server. > > Thoughts? > > Greg > > [1] which has been demonstrated to be stable on plough and we have > experience of. > > p.s. please try and avoid bringing this down into a debate over linux > vs bsd, or /usr vs /var partitioning etc. > > -- > Greg McCarroll http://217.34.97.146/~gem/ Visit our website at http://www.ubswarburg.com This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version. This message is provided for informational purposes and should not be construed as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any securities or related financial instruments.
Re: penderel
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 12:10:24PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote: > > Ok, so it may be hearsay but i believe Penderel has had more problems, > so I have a proposal, but lets start with the assumptions i am making > > Thoughts? Will the new box be named Yorke? -- mike It's tricky to rock a rhyme, to rock a rhyme that's right on time, it's tricky
Re: penderel
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 01:37:24PM +0200, Newton, Philip wrote: > Greg McCarroll wrote: > > Assumption 4 : No one is doing intel specific work on it. > but it shouldn't be anything a recompile wouldn't cure (at least I hope > not). I was thinking of maybe installing a new perl of my own anyway (it's > 5.7.2 or something like that at the moment), or perhaps I'll just use the > system perl (which will be, what -- 5.6.1? 5.8.0? something else?) 5.005, as that's what debian-stable uses. I'd put a later version in /usr/local > * Who would be the new admin(s)? I assume the same as now. Once the machine is set up, it's no different from any other Linux box to admin. In the unlikely event that any Sparc- specific problems do arise, then I'm already one of the admins anyway. -- David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david Pressure was growing last night for the global "war on terror" to be broadened to take in a wide range of other 'rogue emotions' including horror, shock and a general feeling of bewilderment about the state of the world.-- The Brains Trust
Re: penderel
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 12:10:24PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote: > admin it) and put said 9gb drive into it. Then we will take Dave's > SS10 and install sparc linux [1] on it and attach the 9gb drive, so > the internal SS10 drive (4Gb) will do / and the (9Gb) will do > /home. We are currently at about 5Gb disk usage in home, but i'd be > amazed if we really need more than 9Gb of space on the machine - > unless someone is intending to use it as a backup server. > > Thoughts? Good idea. I don't think that anyone's tested 5.7.3 on Sparc linux yet. There are plenty of people testing on x86 Linux, and enough on Solaris. (Let alone "really" test. Where "really" has all sorts of combinations of 64 bit integers, long doubles, 64 bit pointers, perl malloc etc) (I don't think that this was quite the sort of thought that Greg was soliciting) Nicholas Clark
Re: penderel
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Greg McCarroll wrote: > > Ok, so it may be hearsay but i believe Penderel has had more problems, > so I have a proposal, but lets start with the assumptions i am making > ... [snip assumptions] > If the above assumptions are true, I propose we strip Penderel of its > scsi drive (9gb) and flog Penderel on ebay to some lucky punter. We > can then buy a scsi housing (if we have enough cash left over we could > also buy an ups, if not lets buy drinks for the people who have helped > admin it) and put said 9gb drive into it. Then we will take Dave's > SS10 and install sparc linux [1] on it and attach the 9gb drive, so > the internal SS10 drive (4Gb) will do / and the (9Gb) will do > /home. We are currently at about 5Gb disk usage in home, but i'd be > amazed if we really need more than 9Gb of space on the machine - > unless someone is intending to use it as a backup server. Could you not mount the HD internally ? Research indicates the SS10 can take two drives internally. I admit my reasearch is probably incomplete. > Thoughts? JFDI and beers all round ! Simon. -- "I'm a one-man idiot"
Re: penderel
Greg McCarroll wrote: > Assumption 3 : People still want to use the server. Yes, as far as I'm concerned. > Assumption 4 : No one is doing intel specific work on it. Not really. I do have binaries and *.so lying around (such as Perl XS stuff) but it shouldn't be anything a recompile wouldn't cure (at least I hope not). I was thinking of maybe installing a new perl of my own anyway (it's 5.7.2 or something like that at the moment), or perhaps I'll just use the system perl (which will be, what -- 5.6.1? 5.8.0? something else?) > If the above assumptions are true, I propose we strip Penderel of > its scsi drive (9gb) and flog Penderel on ebay to some lucky punter. > We can then buy a scsi housing (if we have enough cash left over > we could also buy an ups, if not lets buy drinks for the people who > have helped admin it) and put said 9gb drive into it. Sounds good -- especially the bit about buying drinks for the current admins. If possible, do that in addition to the UPS thingy. > Thoughts? * Who would be the new admin(s)? * If the money from flogging penderel isn't enough, are you going to solicit contribution/shares/whatever the way you did a while back for the original penderel? Cheers, Philip -- Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> All opinions are my own, not my employer's. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
penderel
Ok, so it may be hearsay but i believe Penderel has had more problems, so I have a proposal, but lets start with the assumptions i am making ... Assumption 1 : Penderel is a sick puppy, it has something wrong with the mobo or memory or whatever. Assumption 2 : We can't be bothered constantly sending brave soldiers like Paul M (x2), Jo, Alex, etc. (sorry if i have forgotten anyone) to persuade it to work. Assumption 3 : People still want to use the server. Assumption 4 : No one is doing intel specific work on it. Assumption 5 : Dave Cantrell's kind offer still stands. Assumption 6 : State 51 are still happy to host. If the above assumptions are true, I propose we strip Penderel of its scsi drive (9gb) and flog Penderel on ebay to some lucky punter. We can then buy a scsi housing (if we have enough cash left over we could also buy an ups, if not lets buy drinks for the people who have helped admin it) and put said 9gb drive into it. Then we will take Dave's SS10 and install sparc linux [1] on it and attach the 9gb drive, so the internal SS10 drive (4Gb) will do / and the (9Gb) will do /home. We are currently at about 5Gb disk usage in home, but i'd be amazed if we really need more than 9Gb of space on the machine - unless someone is intending to use it as a backup server. Thoughts? Greg [1] which has been demonstrated to be stable on plough and we have experience of. p.s. please try and avoid bringing this down into a debate over linux vs bsd, or /usr vs /var partitioning etc. -- Greg McCarroll http://217.34.97.146/~gem/
