Hi,
G.W. Haywood wrote:
> The system load averages are elevated to an extent,
> but 'top' doesn't show any particular processes hogging CPU.
If top does not show processes which cause visible high overall CPU load,
then this might indicate many short running processes.
You could estimate the
Mark Allums wrote:
...
> /usr/lib/gvfs/gvfsd --no-fuse
> Failed to acquire daemon name, perhaps the VFS daemon is already running?
you sound about as frustrated by this sort of thing as i
was.
you could try to find out what it is via the gio command
that is being captured and put it in your
On 2020-02-25, Mark Allums wrote:
>>
>> A tricky exercise which can depend on your DE (and maybe even your
>> graphical login manager). What have you tried so far?
>
> The things I tried are naive. I don't know, or have forgotten, where to
> put commands that run that early in the process. I
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 04:35:32AM -0600, Mark Allums wrote:
On 2/23/20 3:02 PM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
Can you repeat this, but include the output of "grep sdb1 /proc/mounts"
before the udisksctl invocation, and again after it?
Thanks.
george@martha:~$ grep sdb1 /proc/mounts
/dev/sdb1
On 2/25/20 3:43 AM, Curt wrote:
On 2020-02-25, Mark Allums wrote:
george@martha:~$ systemctl stop gvfs-daemon
Failed to stop gvfs-daemon.service: Unit gvfs-daemon.service not loaded.
You cannot stop what does not exist.
I think the systemd unit involved is
run-user-1000-gvfs.mount
On 2020-02-25, Mark Allums wrote:
>
> george@martha:~$ systemctl stop gvfs-daemon
> Failed to stop gvfs-daemon.service: Unit gvfs-daemon.service not loaded.
You cannot stop what does not exist.
I think the systemd unit involved is
run-user-1000-gvfs.mount
Try 'systemctl status
On 2/24/20 10:08 AM, David Wright wrote:
On Mon 24 Feb 2020 at 10:54:28 (-), Curt wrote:
On 2020-02-24, Mark Allums wrote:
george@martha:~$ gvfsd --no-fuse
bash: gvfsd: command not found
george@martha:~$ systemctl stop gvfsd
Failed to stop gvfsd.service: Unit
On 2020-02-24, David Wright wrote:
>
>
> which suggests a bit of misunderstanding about what gvfsd is.
> AIUI it's a daemon (hence the d), and not in anyone's PATH,
> which is why you have to find out where it's running from and
> what might be consulting the value of GVFS_DISABLE_FUSE.
> Also I
On Mon 24 Feb 2020 at 10:54:28 (-), Curt wrote:
> On 2020-02-24, Mark Allums wrote:
> >>
> >> How to set an environment variable in a DE is left as an exercise for
> >> the reader.
> >
> > The gvfsd --no-fuse doesn't do it for me.
> >
>
> That may be David's exercise then.
I think not.
On 2020-02-24, Mark Allums wrote:
>>
>> How to set an environment variable in a DE is left as an exercise for
>> the reader.
>
> The gvfsd --no-fuse doesn't do it for me.
>
That may be David's exercise then.
--
"J'ai pour me guérir du jugement des autres toute la distance qui me sépare de
On 2/23/20 3:02 PM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 09:58:10PM -0600, Mark Allums wrote:
Explain this, then:
george@martha:~$ udisksctl unmount -b /dev/sdb1
Unmounted /dev/sdb1.
george@martha:~$ sudo e2fsck -c -c -k -p -f -C 0 /dev/sdb1
/dev/sdb1 is in use.
e2fsck: Cannot
On 2/23/20 5:00 AM, Curt wrote:
I never understood the actual procedure for unmounting when gvfsd was
doing it;s thing, nor how to prevent the whole mess in the first place
(short of doing without gvfsd, et al).
Well, at any rate, I can only believe your deal here (*completely*
unrelated to
Hi,
udisksctl -b unmount /dev/sr0
seems to work for the user who has problems with sudo umount.
I write "seems" because feedback is still a bit sparse.
Unmounting by directory name turned out to be too much prone to user
error. I am not sure whether it would work on that system.
Have a nice
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 09:58:10PM -0600, Mark Allums wrote:
Explain this, then:
george@martha:~$ udisksctl unmount -b /dev/sdb1
Unmounted /dev/sdb1.
george@martha:~$ sudo e2fsck -c -c -k -p -f -C 0 /dev/sdb1
/dev/sdb1 is in use.
e2fsck: Cannot continue, aborting.
Can you repeat this, but
On 2020-02-23, Mark Allums wrote:
> On 2/22/20 8:36 AM, Curt wrote:
>> On 2020-02-22, Mark Allums wrote:
But does not require superuser, if udisks2 mounted it on your user's
behalf in the first place.
>>> Explain this, then:
>>>
>>> george@martha:~$ udisksctl unmount -b
On 2/22/20 8:36 AM, Curt wrote:
On 2020-02-22, Mark Allums wrote:
But does not require superuser, if udisks2 mounted it on your user's
behalf in the first place.
Explain this, then:
george@martha:~$ udisksctl unmount -b /dev/sdb1
Unmounted /dev/sdb1.
george@martha:~$ sudo e2fsck -c -c -k
On Saturday 22 February 2020 14:55:45 to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 01:22:38PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > I dunno, I've got years on you, and I'm not half done with what I
> > need to do yet.
>
> If everything's done before one leaves, then it gets boring,
On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 01:22:38PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
[...]
> I dunno, I've got years on you, and I'm not half done with what I need to
> do yet.
If everything's done before one leaves, then it gets boring, doesn't it?
> What I like to find is a government that uses our Constitution,
On Saturday 22 February 2020 12:03:41 to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 05:53:07PM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > > but udisksctl (or however it's called) said "all is well",
> > > so it must be either lying -- or someone else quicly
On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 05:53:07PM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > but udisksctl (or however it's called) said "all is well",
> > so it must be either lying -- or someone else quicly mounted
> > things after that.
>
> There is obvious need for a special distro
Hi,
to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> but udisksctl (or however it's called) said "all is well",
> so it must be either lying -- or someone else quicly mounted
> things after that.
There is obvious need for a special distro for age-wise challenged
people like me. Or at least some online AI which
On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 05:39:00PM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > > Or the /dev/sdb1 is still mounted elsewhere.
>
> to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > twice? (it was just umounted once, [...]
>
> Own experience with Debian 10.0 Live:
> There are two mount points of
Hi,
Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > Or the /dev/sdb1 is still mounted elsewhere.
to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> twice? (it was just umounted once, [...]
Own experience with Debian 10.0 Live:
There are two mount points of /dev/sda1 reported.
The mount point
/usr/lib/live/mount/medium
can be unmounted.
On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 09:29:51AM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > So either "udisksctl" is lying or something else is happening
> > behind the scenes (e.g. an over-eager automounter remounting
> > the file system again).
>
> Or the /dev/sdb1 is still mounted elsewhere.
twice? (it was just
On 2020-02-22, Mark Allums wrote:
>>
>> But does not require superuser, if udisks2 mounted it on your user's
>> behalf in the first place.
>>
>>
> Explain this, then:
>
> george@martha:~$ udisksctl unmount -b /dev/sdb1
> Unmounted /dev/sdb1.
> george@martha:~$ sudo e2fsck -c -c -k -p -f -C 0
> So either "udisksctl" is lying or something else is happening
> behind the scenes (e.g. an over-eager automounter remounting
> the file system again).
Or the /dev/sdb1 is still mounted elsewhere.
Stefan
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 11:47:22PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Friday 21 February 2020 22:58:10 Mark Allums wrote:
[...]
> > Explain this, then:
> >
> > george@martha:~$ udisksctl unmount -b /dev/sdb1
> > Unmounted /dev/sdb1.
> > george@martha:~$ sudo e2fsck -c -c -k -p -f -C 0 /dev/sdb1
> >
On 2020-02-22, Gene Heskett wrote:
>>
>> george@martha:~$ udisksctl unmount -b /dev/sdb1
>> Unmounted /dev/sdb1.
>> george@martha:~$ sudo e2fsck -c -c -k -p -f -C 0 /dev/sdb1
>> /dev/sdb1 is in use.
>> e2fsck: Cannot continue, aborting.
>>
>> Thnx,
>>
>> Mark
> Is there a user cd'd into it? That
On Friday 21 February 2020 22:58:10 Mark Allums wrote:
> On 2/21/20 9:23 AM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 08:53:50AM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> >> Indeed. And FWIW, you should/might be able to avoid the `sudo` by
> >> asking udisks2 to do the unmount
> >
> > Yep. It
On 2/21/20 9:23 AM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 08:53:50AM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
Indeed. And FWIW, you should/might be able to avoid the `sudo` by
asking udisks2 to do the unmount
Yep. It requires you to specify the device, rather than the filesystem
mount point:
Thomas Schmitt wrote:
...
> Does anybody here experience similar stubbornness of automounting ?
> If so: How to unmount a DVD without ejecting it ?
not having done much with DVDs recently i can't say much
about them. i can say that i really hate having something
automounted even when i tell
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 08:53:50AM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
Indeed. And FWIW, you should/might be able to avoid the `sudo` by
asking udisks2 to do the unmount
Yep. It requires you to specify the device, rather than the filesystem
mount point:
$ udisksctl unmount -b /dev/sdb1
But does
>> > $ mount | fgrep /dev/sr0
>> > /dev/sr0 on /media/ddval/ISOIMAGE type iso9660 (ro,nosuid,nodev,relatime,
>> > nojoliet,check=s,map=n, blocksize=2048,uid=1000,gid=1000,dmode=500,
>> > fmode=400,uhelper=udisks2)
>> > $ sudo umount /dev/sr0
>> > umount: /dev/sr0: not mounted
> Try instead: sudo
Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> > $ mount | fgrep /dev/sr0
> > /dev/sr0 on /media/ddval/ISOIMAGE type iso9660 (ro,nosuid,nodev,relatime,
> > nojoliet,check=s,map=n, blocksize=2048,uid=1000,gid=1000,dmode=500,
> > fmode=400,uhelper=udisks2)
> > $ sudo umount /dev/sr0
> > umount: /dev/sr0: not mounted
Try
Hi,
during a discussion on linuxquestion.org i got a (Mint) user's report
that an automounted DVD cannot be unmounted manually:
https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-general-1/compiling-xfburn-source-code-additional-packages-required-4175667265/page7.html#post6092450
> $ mount | fgrep
35 matches
Mail list logo
