Re: system stops
On 29/01/2019 01:17, David Christensen wrote: > On 1/28/19 10:41 AM, John Darrah wrote: >> On 1/28/2019 10:21 AM, David Christensen wrote: >>> On 1/28/19 1:18 AM, Paul Sutton wrote: On 28/01/2019 00:55, David Christensen wrote: > On 1/27/19 12:11 PM, BELAHCENE Abdelkader wrote: >> Sometimes (maybe often) when I leave the system for a times without >> touching it, when I come back, the system is frozen , juste the >> pointer of >> mouse can move, but nothing else, keyboard doesn't respond, even >> ctrl+alt+F1 , or F2, ... >> So the only thing todo is stop button. > > Install the package: > > openssh-server > > > Configure your host and/or network so that you can log in over the > network. Holding alt-sysrq (print screen key usually) and then typing RSEIUB may also restart the system but cleanly as in unmounting file systems etc. however I agree with the above option too. >>> >>> Where is that documented? >>> >> Right here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_SysRq_key > > Why RSEIUB, rather than REISUB as recommended by Wikipedia? > > > David > I remember the mnemonic as Raising Skinny Elephants Is Utterly Boring. (RSEIUB) Paul -- Paul Sutton http://www.zleap.net https://www.linkedin.com/in/zleap/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: system stops
On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 02:07:05PM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: [...] > You should read all of wikipedia before using a piece of software? Or some > selection based on words you can remember / think of? You can leave out that page on fern [1]. And that other on slime mold [2] (Uh-oh. Now everyone knows I've been procrastinating :-/ [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fern [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slime_mold -- t signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: cups "Filter failed" | filter rastertopdf stops with status 1 | local printing works; remote printing not
On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 12:08:35PM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, January 28, 2019 11:42:52 AM Jeremy Nicoll wrote: > > On Mon, 28 Jan 2019, at 15:11, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > > > Maybe I am morphing into a cat, but what does bananian mean. Googling > > > didn't help, showed me Banyan (a fruit) and talked about a website and > > > whether it is safe for children. > > > > The very first hit I get is for a linux distro. > > > > And I didn't ned to be a sophisticated Googler; I provided just one word (I > > think you can guess what it was) as the search argument. > > Ahh, ok, sorry, it looks like I lied -- I searched for [define: bananian] > using > Duck Duck Go (not google, as I had stated). I must admit I skipped ( EEEK =:-o ) the search engine myself, which would've been DuckDuckGo (y'all know: Google -- what is Google, anyway? ;-) Curious as I am, I tried define:bananian with DDG: the second hit is a Wikipedia entry for the Banana Pi, which is somehow right, but makes you think it is wrong. > None of the first 10 results had anything to do with a LInux distribution. Or they disguised as "not having anything to do..." -- if you go to that Wikipedia entry (which I'm dead sure /was/ among your first ten entries, it was second in my search), and search within the page for "bananian", you'll find (plain text facsimile): Operating system Android (Android 4.2, Android 4.4), Linux (Armbian, Bananian, Lubuntu, Raspbian, Debian GNU/Linux, Fedora, Arch Linux ARM, Gentoo, openSUSE), Berryboot, FreeBSD, OpenWrt See? There's the bananian, with a link to the original page. Now I'm not saying all of this to tease you or something, but because it illustrates (to me, at least) how difficult search actually is: That second hit would be obvious to me, because I already had that association made (bananian <--> banana pi) and some background knowledge (banana pi is a "kind of" raspberry pi). To someone who never heard of "banana pi" this second hit looks like a fluke from some over-eager text matching algorithm and thus irrelevant. Please excuse this excursion. Cheers -- t signature.asc Description: Digital signature
trying to install Debian encrypted in an existed partition, keeping the rest as it is ...
I got one of those office computers I would like to recycle. It has a fat16 (as /dev/sda1) partition with some manufacturer’s selftests which I would like to keep. So, I wiped the rest of the other two partitions to install Debian encrypted, however I can’t make sense of the questions I am being asked and I can’t go passed that installation step. I could imagine I am not the only one who has tried to do something like that before. It seems the Debian encrypted installation gets a bit "temperamental" about partitions. Why would that be? Could you point me to a link explaining the installation procedures step by step when you need to keep a previous partition? I will post here how did I work myself out of that situation. Once I manage to do so. lbrtchx
Re: system stops
On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 03:58:21 AM to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 02:07:05PM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > > [...] > > > You should read all of wikipedia before using a piece of software? Or > > some selection based on words you can remember / think of? > > You can leave out that page on fern [1]. And that other on slime mold [2] That helps, thanks ;-) > (Uh-oh. Now everyone knows I've been procrastinating :-/ Uh, I won't say anything > > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fern > [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slime_mold > -- t
Re: cups "Filter failed" | filter rastertopdf stops with status 1 | local printing works; remote printing not
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 10:10:01AM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > I must admit I skipped ( EEEK =:-o ) the search engine myself, which would've > been DuckDuckGo (y'all know: Google -- what is Google, anyway? ;-) > > Curious as I am, I tried define:bananian with DDG: the second hit is a > Wikipedia entry for the Banana Pi, which is somehow right, but makes you > think it is wrong. So, what I'm hearing is that Google did a better job (returned better results) than DuckDuckGo in this case. Either that, or PEBKAC. ;-)
Re: cups "Filter failed" | filter rastertopdf stops with status 1 | local printing works; remote printing not
On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 04:10:01 AM to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 12:08:35PM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > > Ahh, ok, sorry, it looks like I lied -- I searched for [define: bananian] > > using Duck Duck Go (not google, as I had stated). > > I must admit I skipped ( EEEK =:-o ) the search engine myself, which > would've been DuckDuckGo (y'all know: Google -- what is Google, anyway? > ;-) > > Curious as I am, I tried define:bananian with DDG: the second hit is a > Wikipedia entry for the Banana Pi, which is somehow right, but makes you > think it is wrong. > > > None of the first 10 results had anything to do with a LInux > > distribution. > > Or they disguised as "not having anything to do..." -- if you go to that > Wikipedia entry (which I'm dead sure /was/ among your first ten entries, > it was second in my search), and search within the page for "bananian", > you'll find (plain text facsimile): > > Operating system > Android (Android 4.2, Android 4.4), > Linux (Armbian, Bananian, Lubuntu, Raspbian, Debian GNU/Linux, >Fedora, Arch Linux ARM, Gentoo, openSUSE), > Berryboot, FreeBSD, OpenWrt > > See? There's the bananian, with a link to the original page. Ahh, I see, but, I mainly replied to agree with your next statement: > Now I'm not saying all of this to tease you or something, but because > it illustrates (to me, at least) how difficult search actually is: +1 (or more) > That second hit would be obvious to me, because I already had that > association made (bananian <--> banana pi) and some background > knowledge (banana pi is a "kind of" raspberry pi). To someone who > never heard of "banana pi" this second hit looks like a fluke from > some over-eager text matching algorithm and thus irrelevant. > > Please excuse this excursion. No problem, instead, I thank you for actually verbalizing something that I've encountered often! (Of course, sometimes the failure of search may just be my mind set ...)
Re: cups "Filter failed" | filter rastertopdf stops with status 1 | local printing works; remote printing not
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 08:20:52AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 10:10:01AM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > I must admit I skipped ( EEEK =:-o ) the search engine myself, which > > would've > > been DuckDuckGo (y'all know: Google -- what is Google, anyway? ;-) > > > > Curious as I am, I tried define:bananian with DDG: the second hit is a > > Wikipedia entry for the Banana Pi, which is somehow right, but makes you > > think it is wrong. > > So, what I'm hearing is that Google did a better job (returned better > results) than DuckDuckGo in this case. Either that, or PEBKAC. ;-) PEBMUAAC: Both of us, rhkramer and me used DuckDuckGo: My guess is that the difference lies mainly in the result interpreter's "mental context". For example I've a friend who is obsessed with those little single board thingies, so my mushy wetware has a vocabulary term for each of -pi, for some unspecified set of fruit (which definitely includes raspberries bananas and oranges, but possibly also blackberries; no rambutan [1] yet, sorry). Thus my (otherwise pretty poor) pattern matcher recongnized that Banana-Pi entry as relevant wrt "bananian", while it may have worked in a very different was for rhkramer. Me? Google? What /is/ Google, anyway? ;-) Cheers [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambutan -- t signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: cups "Filter failed" | filter rastertopdf stops with status 1 | local printing works; remote printing not
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 08:21:37AM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 04:10:01 AM to...@tuxteam.de wrote: [...] > > Now I'm not saying all of this to tease you or something, but because > > it illustrates (to me, at least) how difficult search actually is: > > +1 (or more) Glad the idea arrived intact. Thanks for your lenience :) > > That second hit would be obvious to me, because I already had that > > association made [...] > > Please excuse this excursion. > > No problem, instead, I thank you for actually verbalizing something that I've > encountered often! (Of course, sometimes the failure of search may just be > my > mind set ...) I'm still having difficulty in expressing this phenomenon (and it /is/ important to me: the one advantage Google has over DDG is that it "knows" more about you -- and that is exactly why I don't want it. This means that I've to be more aware of the interface between my mind and the search engine). Cheers -- tomás signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: trying to install Debian encrypted in an existed partition, keeping the rest as it is ...
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 07:45:40AM -0500, Albretch Mueller wrote: > I got one of those office computers I would like to recycle. It has a > fat16 (as /dev/sda1) partition with some manufacturer’s selftests > which I would like to keep. So, I wiped the rest of the other two > partitions to install Debian encrypted, however I can’t make sense of > the questions I am being asked and I can’t go passed that installation > step. > > I could imagine I am not the only one who has tried to do something > like that before. It seems the Debian encrypted installation gets a > bit "temperamental" about partitions. Why would that be? Could you > point me to a link explaining the installation procedures step by step > when you need to keep a previous partition? > > I will post here how did I work myself out of that situation. Once I > manage to do so. > > lbrtchx > I used the following two documents sometime ago to perform a similar install. Hopefully, they will be of some help to you too. https://xo.tc/setting-up-full-disk-encryption-on-debian-9-stretch.html https://gist.github.com/ppmathis/ccfbfce86484dc61834c1f17568d7b80 -- Nitebirdz
Re: Partition information as text file?
On 01/28/2019 01:43 PM, Pascal Hambourg wrote: Le 28/01/2019 à 13:48, Richard Owlett a écrit : So it looks as if df --output -x tmpfs -x devtmpfs gives you all you want (and more) with the exception of LABELs. No. The man pages states it only looks at mounted partitions due to "...nonportable intimate knowledge of file system structures]. As I only have FAT and ext partitions, what I want should be doable if not already done. The total and used/free space in ext and FAT filesystems can be computed from the output of tune2fs -l/dumpe2fs -h and fsck.dos -n. Murphy's Law has won this round, all my disks have "msdos Partition table". I get the following error message: root@fromdell:/home/richard# tune2fs -l /dev/sda tune2fs 1.43.4 (31-Jan-2017) tune2fs: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/sda Found a dos partition table in /dev/sda Additionally, all my machines have legacy BIOS. I assume "fsck.dos" is a typo as [https://dyn.manpages.debian.org/jump?suite=stretch&binarypkg=dosfstools§ion=8&language=en&q=fsck.dos] yields "Sorry, the manpage “fsck.dos” was not found!" Thanks for trying. What bugs me is Gparted [though it does not output text] reports used/unused space on each partition/file system.
Re: Partition information as text file?
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 08:30:13AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote: > I assume "fsck.dos" is a typo as > [https://dyn.manpages.debian.org/jump?suite=stretch&binarypkg=dosfstools§ion=8&language=en&q=fsck.dos] > yields > "Sorry, the manpage “fsck.dos” was not found!" You have the manpages on your box, hopefully. Try "man -k fsck", and you'll get: tomas@trotzki:~$ man -k fsck dosfsck (8) - check and repair MS-DOS filesystems e2fsck (8) - check a Linux ext2/ext3/ext4 file system e2fsck.conf (5) - Configuration file for e2fsck exfatfsck (8)- check an exFAT file system fsck (8) - check and repair a Linux filesystem fsck.cramfs (8) - fsck compressed ROM file system fsck.exfat (8) - check an exFAT file system fsck.ext2 (8)- check a Linux ext2/ext3/ext4 file system fsck.ext3 (8)- check a Linux ext2/ext3/ext4 file system fsck.ext4 (8)- check a Linux ext2/ext3/ext4 file system fsck.fat (8) - check and repair MS-DOS filesystems fsck.hfs (8) - HFS file system consistency check fsck.hfsplus (8) - HFS file system consistency check fsck.minix (8) - check consistency of Minix filesystem fsck.msdos (8) - check and repair MS-DOS filesystems fsck.nfs (8) - Dummy fsck.nfs script that always returns success. fsck.vfat (8)- check and repair MS-DOS filesystems git-fsck (1) - Verifies the connectivity and validity of the objects in the database git-fsck-objects (1) - Verifies the connectivity and validity of the objects in the database hpfsck (1) - check integrity of an HFS+ volume So I'd try fsck.fat or similar (/if/ it has to be fat, that is) > Thanks for trying. That's how we advance, after all :) > What bugs me is Gparted [though it does not output text] reports > used/unused space on each partition/file system. I can't grok this one: shouldn't gparted report on it? Or you don't expect the free space to be there? Cheers -- t > > > > > > > signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Installation Debian 9.7 HP 240G laptop
Hello everyone, I'm trying to install debian using the debian 9.7 64 bits non-free firmware iso in a HP 240G laptop, with 120Gb SSD and 4Gb of RAM. The non-free firmware is needed by the Realtek network adapters I'm using a 8Gb pendrive for usb booting and have already tried with a 16Gb pendrive The instalation fails in the end, when triyng to configure package manager, using the cli installer, the error messages are: fclose: No space left in the disk libkmod: kmod_load_new_from_loaded could not open /proc/modules: No such file or directory error: could not get a list of modules: No such file or directory grep: /proc/meminfo: no such file or directory Cannot determine system memory It says there is no space left in the disk, but there is nothing in the disk. I've selected automatic partiotining in a clean disk. Thank you in advance!
Re: Partition information as text file?
On 01/29/2019 08:37 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 08:30:13AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote: I assume "fsck.dos" is a typo as [https://dyn.manpages.debian.org/jump?suite=stretch&binarypkg=dosfstools§ion=8&language=en&q=fsck.dos] yields "Sorry, the manpage “fsck.dos” was not found!" You have the manpages on your box, hopefully. Try "man -k fsck", and you'll get: [snip sample output] I avoid using "man" as I find the HTML of online pages friendlier. Also in the past I was reading man pages more frequently to chose whether or not to install a particular package than to explore what an installed package could do for me. I didn't know of the "-k" option. I haven't come across an equivalent function online. I may not use "man" to read, but "man -k" should be very useful for deciding which online pages I wish to read. So I'd try fsck.fat or similar (/if/ it has to be fat, that is) Thanks for trying. That's how we advance, after all :) What bugs me is Gparted [though it does not output text] reports used/unused space on each partition/file system. I can't grok this one: shouldn't gparted report on it? Or you don't expect the free space to be there? Gparted displays the desired data in the GUI, but I see no way to get that information as a text stream. I need a text file for my application. Thanks
Re: Partition information as text file?
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 09:22:42AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote: > On 01/29/2019 08:37 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > >On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 08:30:13AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote: > > > >>I assume "fsck.dos" is a typo as > >>[https://dyn.manpages.debian.org/jump?suite=stretch&binarypkg=dosfstools§ion=8&language=en&q=fsck.dos] > >> yields > >>"Sorry, the manpage “fsck.dos” was not found!" > > > >You have the manpages on your box, hopefully. Try "man -k fsck", and you'll > >get: > >[snip sample output] > > I avoid using "man" as I find the HTML of online pages friendlier. Mileages tend to vary wildly. Me, I don't like HTML very much. The heavy handed markup tends to interfere with the "text-ness" I appreciate in documentation. > Also in the past I was reading man pages more frequently to chose > whether or not to install a particular package than to explore what > an installed package could do for me. > > I didn't know of the "-k" option. I haven't come across an > equivalent function online. I may not use "man" to read, but "man > -k" should be very useful for deciding which online pages I wish to > read. See also "apropos". > >>What bugs me is Gparted [though it does not output text] reports > >>used/unused space on each partition/file system. > > > >I can't grok this one: shouldn't gparted report on it? Or you don't > >expect the free space to be there? > > Gparted displays the desired data in the GUI, but I see no way to > get that information as a text stream. I need a text file for my > application. Aha. Now I understood. But am not versed enough in gparted to be able to help you :-/ Cheers -- t signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: cups "Filter failed" | filter rastertopdf stops with status 1 | local printing works; remote printing not
On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 08:40:04 AM to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > I'm still having difficulty in expressing this phenomenon (and it /is/ > important to me: the one advantage Google has over DDG is that it "knows" > more about you -- and that is exactly why I don't want it. This means > that I've to be more aware of the interface between my mind and the > search engine). +1
Re: Partition information as text file?
Hi, Richard Owlett wrote: > Gparted displays the desired data in the GUI, but I see no way to get that > information as a text stream. Well, it seems to inquire the info by filesystem specific means. The method is obviously named set_used_sectors(). See e.g. https://github.com/GNOME/gparted/blob/master/src/ext2.cc#L147 https://github.com/GNOME/gparted/blob/master/src/fat16.cc#L129 https://github.com/GNOME/gparted/blob/master/src/xfs.cc#L89 There are several source files from btrfs.cc to xfs.cc. One could harvest hints about which man pages to read in order to create some program which knows the inquiry commands for all filesystems which Gparted knows. (I dimly remember to have seen such inquiry/management program names in replies to this thread.) Have a nice day :) Thomas
Re: Installation Debian 9.7 HP 240G laptop
Hi, had a similar problem with a Medion notebook. Solution was, in BIOS switch UEFI to ON (yes, weired!), then do an automatical installation and partition of the full hard drive and let the installer do everything, If debian is starting well, you can repartition with gparted later. Hope, this helps. Good luck! Hans signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Partition information as text file?
+1 On 1/29/19 7:22 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: Gparted displays the desired data in the GUI, but I see no way to get that information as a text stream. I need a text file
Re: Partition information as text file?
On Tue, 29 Jan 2019, Richard Owlett wrote: > Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 10:22:42 > From: Richard Owlett > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Subject: Re: Partition information as text file? > Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 15:23:04 + (UTC) > Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org > > On 01/29/2019 08:37 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 08:30:13AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote: > > > >> I assume "fsck.dos" is a typo as > >> [https://dyn.manpages.debian.org/jump?suite=stretch&binarypkg=dosfstools§ion=8&language=en&q=fsck.dos] > >> yields > >> "Sorry, the manpage ?fsck.dos? was not found!" > > > > You have the manpages on your box, hopefully. Try "man -k fsck", and you'll > > get: > > [snip sample output] > > I avoid using "man" as I find the HTML of online pages friendlier. Also in the > past I was reading man pages more frequently to chose whether or not to > install a particular package than to explore what an installed package could > do for me. > > I didn't know of the "-k" option. I haven't come across an equivalent function > online. I may not use "man" to read, but "man -k" should be very useful for > deciding which online pages I wish to read. > > > > > So I'd try fsck.fat or similar (/if/ it has to be fat, that is) > > > >> Thanks for trying. > > > > That's how we advance, after all :) > > > >> What bugs me is Gparted [though it does not output text] reports > >> used/unused space on each partition/file system. > > > > I can't grok this one: shouldn't gparted report on it? Or you don't > > expect the free space to be there? > > Gparted displays the desired data in the GUI, but I see no way to get that > information as a text stream. I need a text file for my application. > > Thanks > clipit may be able to snag this information for you then dump it to a text file for you. Not as elegant as a script though. > > > > --
Re: Partition information as text file?
On Mon 28 Jan 2019 at 06:48:00 (-0600), Richard Owlett wrote: > On 01/27/2019 03:26 PM, David Wright wrote: > > On Sat 26 Jan 2019 at 15:10:55 (-0600), Richard Owlett wrote: > > > On 01/26/2019 01:32 PM, Felix Miata wrote: > > > > Richard Owlett composed on 2019-01-26 08:32 (UTC-0600): > > > > > > > > > I am attempting to create a spreadsheet to document the content of > > > > > multiple disks of multiple machines. > > > > > > > > > Gparted displays the desired information. > > > > > *HOWEVER* I see no way to capture the information. > > > > > > > > > At the command line using "lsblk -o NAME,FSTYPE,LABEL /dev/sdb" gives > > > > > most of the desired information. > > > > > > > > > It omits partition size, used space, and unused space. > > > > > > > > > Suggestions? > > […] > > > > Sometimes I append output from lsblk or parted -l. > > > > > > > > hdparm and smartctl might also provide some of what you're looking for. > > > > > > I'll attempt to redefine my problem. > > > > > > I have: > > >multiple machines > > > each having > > >multiple disks > > > each having > > >multiple partitions. > > > > > > I wish to inventory the above "conglomeration". > > > > > > I wish to to answer the question(s): > > >How big is each > > >How much is available > > > > It appears that you're really interested in the filesystems' > > information rather than the partitions', with the exception of the > > filesystem LABELs, which you have said elsewhere you use as > > indications of the filesystems' contents. > > That's likely. There are some terminology issues I'll have to follow > up on so that I'll use terms in ways compatible to others. > > > > > So it looks as if df --output -x tmpfs -x devtmpfs gives you all > > you want (and more) with the exception of LABELs. > > No. The man pages states it only looks at mounted partitions due to > "...nonportable intimate knowledge of file system structures]. Then mount them. As readonly if preferred. > As I > only have FAT and ext partitions, what I want should be doable if not > already done. Then do it. All the tools are in the thread, if not in this post. > > It seems sensible > > to use lsblk -o NAME,LABEL -l to get these because AFAICT it > > automatically handles the business of selecting e2label/dosfslabel/etc > > as appropriate and gets them all in a heap. > > > > With judicious use of head, tail and sort, it would be fairly simple > > to get the two listings to correspond well enough for entry into a > > spreadsheet (I don't know what you meant by 'generic'), making > > final adjustments (df omits the device and partitions like swap) to > > line things up. > > I'm going to have to reread this thread. There is something in the > back of mind hinting at a solution. It will require some scripting to > pull pieces together, but that was assumed to be likely anyway. BTW you could read man man. Cheers, David.
Re: Partition information as text file?
Le 29/01/2019 à 15:30, Richard Owlett a écrit : On 01/28/2019 01:43 PM, Pascal Hambourg wrote: The total and used/free space in ext and FAT filesystems can be computed from the output of tune2fs -l/dumpe2fs -h and fsck.dos -n. all my disks have "msdos Partition table". Irrelevant. I get the following error message: root@fromdell:/home/richard# tune2fs -l /dev/sda tune2fs 1.43.4 (31-Jan-2017) tune2fs: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/sda Found a dos partition table in /dev/sda You must specify the partition containing the filesystem, not the whole disk. Additionally, all my machines have legacy BIOS. Irrelevant. I assume "fsck.dos" is a typo as Yes, my mistake. I meant fsck.fat or fsck.msdos.
Application running over Debian and GPL
If i develop a application (in c or php) and install on Debian (GPL license) and distribuite this solution (my app + debian) how a appliance (both installed in a hardware) and sell this appliance (harware + debian + my app). The my app is necessarily a app GPL and i need provide the source code to my client or i can keep my app proprietary and not provide the source code from my app? In this environment no provide the source code is a violation from GPL?
Re: Application running over Debian and GPL
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 07:39:09PM -0200, Sileno de Oliveira Brito wrote: >If i develop a application (in c or php) and install on Debian (GPL >license) and distribuite this solution (my app + debian) how a appliance >(both installed in a hardware) and sell this appliance (harware + debian + >my app). The my app is necessarily a app GPL and i need provide the source >code to my client or i can keep my app proprietary and not provide the >source code from my app? >In this environment no provide the source code is a violation from GPL? Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and this does not constitute legal advice. Based on your description, it sounds like you are creating an aggregate work. If you created a derivative work of a GPL work, then you would be bound by the terms of the GPL in terms of releasing source code modifications. I recommend that you consult with a lawyer or other suitable expert to determine if your project is in fact considered or not considered a derivative work in your legal jurisdiction. Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sánchez
Re: Application running over Debian and GPL
Sileno de Oliveira Brito writes: > If i develop a application (in c or php) and install on Debian (GPL > license) and distribuite this solution (my app + debian) how a > appliance (both installed in a hardware) and sell this appliance > (harware + debian + my app). The my app is necessarily a app GPL and i > need provide the source code to my client> or i can keep my app > proprietary and not provide the source code from my app? This is similar to an embedded system that uses the Linux kernel, init, some utilities, busy box, and a closed-source application. There are lots of those around. The application is not a derivative of any of the GPL stuff. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Elmwood, WI USA
Re: Application running over Debian and GPL
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 07:39:09PM -0200, Sileno de Oliveira Brito wrote: > If i develop a application (in c or php) and install on Debian (GPL > license) and distribuite this solution (my app + debian) how a appliance > (both installed in a hardware) [...] This is what is known as "mere aggregation" [1], and yes, you can combine proprietary software with free software in this way. You still have to watch out for which libraries you link with (LGPL is compatible with proprietary, GPL isn't: for example, libc is LGPL, but libreadline is GPL) and which code you might use in your own code base. Read the licenses. When push comes to shove, ask a lawyer. The GNU pages [2] on licenses is pretty good. It is written from GNU's point of view, but it's well done over all. Cheers [1] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.en.html [2] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/ -- t signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: trying to install Debian encrypted in an existed partition, keeping the rest as it is ...
On 1/29/19, Nitebirdz wrote: > I used the following two documents sometime ago to perform a similar > install. Hopefully, they will be of some help to you too. > > https://xo.tc/setting-up-full-disk-encryption-on-debian-9-stretch.html > > https://gist.github.com/ppmathis/ccfbfce86484dc61834c1f17568d7b80 As you could see, they both describe a Debian stretch -Full Disk Encryption- type of installation. I will try to think it through again when I find some time I still don't get why would Debian become so temperamental about partitions when you try to install it encrypted thanks lbrtchx
Re: trying to install Debian encrypted in an existed partition, keeping the rest as it is ...
On Tue 29 Jan 2019 at 18:15:23 (-0500), Albretch Mueller wrote: > On 1/29/19, Nitebirdz wrote: > > I used the following two documents sometime ago to perform a similar > > install. Hopefully, they will be of some help to you too. > > > > https://xo.tc/setting-up-full-disk-encryption-on-debian-9-stretch.html > > > > https://gist.github.com/ppmathis/ccfbfce86484dc61834c1f17568d7b80 > > As you could see, they both describe a Debian stretch -Full Disk > Encryption- type of installation. I will try to think it through again > when I find some time I can see that with the first version, because it chose to use "Guided - use entire disk"; though I don't know why the installer doesn't offer the combination of the first option "Guided - use the largest continuous free space" and the later one with "… set up encrypted LVM". However, the second method uses manual partitioning of the disks with gdisk, so I don't see why sda should not contain a(nother) FAT partition which is ignored. If the sda partition numbers are all increased by one, which command is it that would prevent the method from working? > I still don't get why would Debian become so temperamental about > partitions when you try to install it encrypted Cheers, David.
Re: Application running over Debian and GPL
Sileno de Oliveira Brito wrote: > If i develop a application (in c or php) and install on Debian (GPL > license) and distribuite this solution (my app + debian) how a appliance > (both installed in a hardware) and sell this appliance (harware + debian + > my app). The my app is necessarily a app GPL and i need provide the source > code to my client or i can keep my app proprietary and not provide the > source code from my app? > > In this environment no provide the source code is a violation from GPL? You will definitely need to provide the Debian source code for the Debian packages that you ship. You may or may not need to provide your application's source code, depending on how it works with Linux. It is certainly possible to develop an application which is not a GPL derivative work. You should consult a lawyer with experience in GPL and other intellectual property issues. -dsr-
Re: Partition information as text file?
On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 01:30, Richard Owlett wrote: > On 01/28/2019 01:43 PM, Pascal Hambourg wrote: > > > > The total and used/free space in ext and FAT filesystems can be computed > > from the output of tune2fs -l/dumpe2fs -h and fsck.dos -n. > > I assume "fsck.dos" is a typo as > [https://dyn.manpages.debian.org/jump?suite=stretch&binarypkg=dosfstools§ion=8&language=en&q=fsck.dos] > yields > "Sorry, the manpage “fsck.dos” was not found!" In case you are not aware, here's a way to investigate that ... $ apt-file search fsck.dos gave no output, so I broadened the net ... $ apt-file search fsck | grep dos dosfstools: /sbin/dosfsck dosfstools: /sbin/fsck.fat dosfstools: /sbin/fsck.msdos dosfstools: /sbin/fsck.vfat dosfstools: /usr/share/doc/dosfstools/ChangeLog.dosfsck dosfstools: /usr/share/doc/dosfstools/README.dosfsck dosfstools: /usr/share/man/man8/dosfsck.8.gz dosfstools: /usr/share/man/man8/fsck.fat.8.gz dosfstools: /usr/share/man/man8/fsck.msdos.8.gz dosfstools: /usr/share/man/man8/fsck.vfat.8.gz manpages-fr-extra: /usr/share/man/fr/man8/dosfsck.8.gz manpages-fr-extra: /usr/share/man/fr/man8/fsck.msdos.8.gz manpages-pl: /usr/share/man/pl/man8/dosfsck.8.gz manpages-pl: /usr/share/man/pl/man8/fsck.msdos.8.gz Maybe it's a typo mixup of 'dosfsck' and 'fsck.msdos', which are both symlinks to the same executable ... $ ls -l /sbin/dosfsck lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 2017-01-25 10:48 /sbin/dosfsck -> fsck.fat $ ls -l /sbin/fsck.msdos lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 2017-01-25 10:48 /sbin/fsck.msdos -> fsck.fat
Re: trying to install Debian encrypted in an existed partition, keeping the rest as it is ...
On 1/29/19, David Wright wrote: > However, the second method uses manual partitioning of the disks with > gdisk, so I don't see why sda should not contain a(nother) FAT > partition which is ignored. I don't see why either. Also, given the fact that so many, entirely fine computers (with 4+ Gibs RAM!) are being discarded/discontinued on a yearly basis (mostly for software related issues or just because they are "old"), why shouldn't people keep the a very small (less than 64Mbs) diagnostic partition from the manufacturer on sda1 and use the rest of the space for the installation? Is it because the unencrypted root partition wants to sit on sda1? At the very least the Debian installer should explicitly tell you: "no, you can't install and encrypted volume on just a partition (hopefully: 'because . . .')" > If the sda partition numbers are all > increased by one How do you do that? and, can you revert the partition numbers back if the need arises? I think most probably that won't be the solution and/or may create other problems. > which command is it that would prevent the > method from working? How could you find out about it? lbrtchx
Re: trying to install Debian encrypted in an existed partition, keeping the rest as it is ...
use case: Say, you have a computer preinstalled with Windows, on which you would like to install a Debian Linux base. You would: 1) resize the larger, Windows proper (/dev/sda3) partition 2) install Linux encrypted in the created space, with 3) what you need to start it up (the /root partition) on a pen drive So, other people may be able to use that box just fine under Windows and you would do your thing. If for whatever reason you disown that computer, you would just delete that partition. Your own data you will keep on a USB pen or microdrive. Any step by step procedures? lbrtchx
