[gentoo-user] Re: Software to keep track of stocks
On Tue, 20 Jan 2015 18:20:18 -0700, Joseph wrote: > I've tried to setup some stocks in GnuCash but it does not list TSX What > alternatives are to keep track of stocks under Linux. GnuCash uses Finance-Quote to get its stock quotes, and it looks like Finance-Quotes also includes a source for TSX stock. So it seems like things should work with GnuCash. Hans
Re: [gentoo-user] SMART drive test results, 2.0 for same drive as before.
Dale, As a double check I always like to test "failing" drives with Spinrite: https://www.grc.com/sr/spinrite.htm If that software can't recover/access any bits of the drive - it's pretty much a toaster in my book! Robert On 20 January 2015 at 17:58, Dale wrote: > Howdy, > > This is concerning a hard drive I had issues with a while back. I been > using it to do backups with as a test if nothing else. Anyway, it seems > to have issues once again. > > root@fireball / # smartctl -l selftest /dev/sdd > smartctl 6.3 2014-07-26 r3976 [x86_64-linux-3.16.3-gentoo] (local build) > Copyright (C) 2002-14, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke, > www.smartmontools.org > > === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === > SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1 > Num Test_DescriptionStatus Remaining > LifeTime(hours) LBA_of_first_error > # 1 Extended offlineCompleted: read failure 40% > 21406 4032272464 > # 2 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 21387 - > # 3 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 21363 - > # 4 Extended offlineCompleted: read failure 40% > 21343 4032272464 > # 5 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 21315 - > # 6 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 21291 - > # 7 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 21267 - > # 8 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 21243 - > # 9 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 21219 - > #10 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 21195 - > #11 Extended offlineCompleted: read failure 40% > 21174 4032272464 > #12 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 21147 - > #13 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 21123 - > #14 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 21099 - > #15 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 21075 - > #16 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 21051 - > #17 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 21026 - > #18 Extended offlineCompleted: read failure 40% > 21005 4032267424 > #19 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 20978 - > #20 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 20954 - > #21 Short offline Completed without error 00% > 20930 - > > root@fireball / # > > More info: > > ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE > UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE > 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 116 099 006Pre-fail > Always - 114620384 > 3 Spin_Up_Time0x0003 092 092 000Pre-fail > Always - 0 > 4 Start_Stop_Count0x0032 100 100 020Old_age > Always - 39 > 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 053 051 036Pre-fail > Always - 62752 > 7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x000f 080 060 030Pre-fail > Always - 102219639 > 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 076 076 000Old_age > Always - 21403 > 10 Spin_Retry_Count0x0013 100 100 097Pre-fail > Always - 0 > 12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 020Old_age > Always - 40 > 183 Runtime_Bad_Block 0x0032 100 100 000Old_age > Always - 0 > 184 End-to-End_Error0x0032 100 100 099Old_age > Always - 0 > 187 Reported_Uncorrect 0x0032 100 100 000Old_age > Always - 0 > 188 Command_Timeout 0x0032 100 100 000Old_age > Always - 0 0 0 > 189 High_Fly_Writes 0x003a 100 100 000Old_age > Always - 0 > 190 Airflow_Temperature_Cel 0x0022 068 063 045Old_age > Always - 32 (Min/Max 23/36) > 191 G-Sense_Error_Rate 0x0032 100 100 000Old_age > Always - 0 > 192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0032 100 100 000Old_age > Always - 11 > 193 Load_Cycle_Count0x0032 001 001 000Old_age > Always - 276725 > 194 Temperature_Celsius 0x0022 032 040 000Old_age > Always - 32 (0 17 0 0 0) > 197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0012 088 088 000Old_age > Always - 1984 > 198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0010 088 088 000Old_age > Offline - 1984 > 199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count0x003e 200 200 000Old_age > Always - 0 > 240 Head_Flying_Hours 0x 100 253 000Old_age > Offline - 18810h+14m+31.520s > 241 Total_LBAs_Written 0x 100 253 000Old_age > Offline - 110684232213092 > 242 Total_LBAs_Read 0x 100 253 000Old_age > Offline - 92603114597547 > >
[gentoo-user] Open Question: The feasibility of a complete portage binhost
So I've been thinking crazy thoughts.
Theoretically it can't be that hard to do a complete package binhost for gentoo.
To be clear, when i say complete, Im referring to building, all
versions of all ebuilds marked stable or unstable on amd64, with every
combination of use flags.
This pretty much boils down to bytes and bytes of storage + compute
resources. Both of which are easily available to me. So I began
pondering and here I am, thinking to myself "is this really all there
is too it"?
Does it really come down to CPU cycles and repeatedly running through
the following commands for each combination of ebuild, version and use
flags
emerge --emptytree --onlydeps ${name}
emerge --emptytree --buildpkgonly --buildpkg
[gentoo-user] Download of source for file-5.22 blocked by firewall?
Hi all, Ok, new one to me... I'm performing some updates after a hiatus of a couple of months, and the second package to be installed was file-5.22. I have my firewall locked down pretty tight, controlling even outbound access, and when portage tries to download the source for this file it is being blocked by the firewall: kernel: [6185615.878195] (fw>): IN= OUT=enp2s0 SRC=###.###.###.### DST=38.117.134.18 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=64958 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=52338 DPT=65369 WINDOW=14600 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 I've never had a problem like this and have had the same firewall rules for a very long time. Here is what I have for portage access: # allow outbound subversion access for portage / layman -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 3690 -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 56160 -j ACCEPT # allow outbound access to git repos -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 9418 -j ACCEPT Have there been some additions that I need to add? Other ideas why I'm unable to update file? Thanks
[gentoo-user] Open Question: The feasibility of a complete portage binhost
So I've been thinking crazy thoughts.
Theoretically it can't be that hard to do a complete package binhost for gentoo.
To be clear, when i say complete, Im referring to building, all
versions of all ebuilds marked stable or unstable on amd64, with every
combination of use flags.
This pretty much boils down to bytes and bytes of storage + compute
resources. Both of which are easily available to me. So I began
pondering and here I am, thinking to myself "is this really all there
is too it"?
Does it really come down to CPU cycles and repeatedly running through
the following commands for each combination of ebuild, version and use
flags
emerge --emptytree --onlydeps ${name}
emerge --emptytree --buildpkgonly --buildpkg ${name}
Obviously running them in a clean environment each time, either by
chroot or other means.
Then just storing the giant binhost somewhere suitable such as an AWS
s3 bucket setup to work via HTTP so the normal tools work fine with
it.
Re: [gentoo-user] Open Question: The feasibility of a complete portage binhost
On 01/21/2015 07:47 AM, Sam Bishop wrote:
> So I've been thinking crazy thoughts.
>
> Theoretically it can't be that hard to do a complete package binhost for
> gentoo.
I love that you qualify this with "theoretically."
>
> To be clear, when i say complete, Im referring to building, all
> versions of all ebuilds marked stable or unstable on amd64, with every
> combination of use flags.
Every ebuild with every combination of USE flags? This is likely
impossible, and definitely not feasible. With 17000ish ebuilds in the
portage tree and assuming each only has 2 USE flags, this would be
building 17000*2^2 = 68,000 packages. If average build time is 20
seconds (nice server w/ SSD and enough RAM to build in /tmp), it'd take
377ish hours to do an initial build of the tree. I guess this isn't so
bad. Of course, there are outliers like www-client/firefox: 19
non-language USE flags, so 2^19 different firefox permutations at a fast
5 minutes apiece would take 43000 hours. I haven't looked at
REQUIRED_USE, so there could be less than 2^19 different combinations of
flags; taking it down to 2^10 combinations is only 85 hours or so.
>
> This pretty much boils down to bytes and bytes of storage + compute
> resources. Both of which are easily available to me. So I began
> pondering and here I am, thinking to myself "is this really all there
> is too it"?
A full CentOS mirror is ~600GB iirc, so you're gonna need a ton of storage.
> Does it really come down to CPU cycles and repeatedly running through
> the following commands for each combination of ebuild, version and use
> flags
> emerge --emptytree --onlydeps ${name}
> emerge --emptytree --buildpkgonly --buildpkg ${name}
>
> Obviously running them in a clean environment each time, either by
> chroot or other means.
> Then just storing the giant binhost somewhere suitable such as an AWS
> s3 bucket setup to work via HTTP so the normal tools work fine with
> it.
>
I haven't used binpkgs in a long time, but I think USE on the client
machine has to match the USE of the package being installed. Managing
all of this would be a nightmare unless you wrote your own special
portage server that served up binpkgs in a USE-aware way and a portage
host could request a binpkg with a certain USE.
Theoretically, great idea. I think this would be possible if you had
maybe 3 or 4 different USE combos (i.e. one for servers, one for KDE
client machines, one for gnome clients, etc.).
Alec
P.S. I'm reasonably sure my math is correct, but I would appreciate
corrections.
Re: [gentoo-user] Download of source for file-5.22 blocked by firewall?
>From the sync output: >>> Downloading 'http://mirror.datapipe.net/gentoo/distfiles/file-5.22.tar.gz' --2015-01-21 08:49:43-- http://mirror.datapipe.net/gentoo/distfiles/file-5.22.tar.gz Resolving mirror.datapipe.net... 64.27.65.115 Connecting to mirror.datapipe.net|64.27.65.115|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 404 Not Found 2015-01-21 08:49:43 ERROR 404: Not Found. >>> Downloading 'ftp://ftp.gw.com/mirrors/pub/unix/file/file-5.22.tar.gz' So, why the 'ERROR 404: Not Found'? It then falls back to ftp? But the ports it tries to use change every time? On 1/21/2015 7:38 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: > Hi all, > > Ok, new one to me... > > I'm performing some updates after a hiatus of a couple of months, and > the second package to be installed was file-5.22. > > I have my firewall locked down pretty tight, controlling even outbound > access, and when portage tries to download the source for this file it > is being blocked by the firewall: > > kernel: [6185615.878195] (fw>): IN= OUT=enp2s0 SRC=###.###.###.### > DST=38.117.134.18 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=64958 DF PROTO=TCP > SPT=52338 DPT=65369 WINDOW=14600 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 > > I've never had a problem like this and have had the same firewall rules > for a very long time. > > Here is what I have for portage access: > > # allow outbound subversion access for portage / layman > -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT > -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 3690 -j ACCEPT > -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 56160 -j ACCEPT > # allow outbound access to git repos > -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 9418 -j ACCEPT > > Have there been some additions that I need to add? Other ideas why I'm > unable to update file? > > Thanks >
Re: [gentoo-user] Open Question: The feasibility of a complete portage binhost
On 21 January 2015 at 21:23, Alec Ten Harmsel wrote:
>
> On 01/21/2015 07:47 AM, Sam Bishop wrote:
>> So I've been thinking crazy thoughts.
>>
>> Theoretically it can't be that hard to do a complete package binhost for
>> gentoo.
>
> I love that you qualify this with "theoretically."
>
I'm in a position where the cost of these servers may become less than
the cost of paying developers to wait while ebuilds compile. So II'm
having a semi-serious theoretical discussion with myself as to the
merits of opening this up to the entire Gentoo community and a much
more serious theoretical discussion here right now with anyone on this
list as to just how would one do this.
>>
>> To be clear, when i say complete, Im referring to building, all
>> versions of all ebuilds marked stable or unstable on amd64, with every
>> combination of use flags.
>
> Every ebuild with every combination of USE flags? This is likely
> impossible, and definitely not feasible. With 17000ish ebuilds in the
> portage tree and assuming each only has 2 USE flags, this would be
> building 17000*2^2 = 68,000 packages. If average build time is 20
> seconds (nice server w/ SSD and enough RAM to build in /tmp), it'd take
> 377ish hours to do an initial build of the tree. I guess this isn't so
> bad. Of course, there are outliers like www-client/firefox: 19
> non-language USE flags, so 2^19 different firefox permutations at a fast
> 5 minutes apiece would take 43000 hours. I haven't looked at
> REQUIRED_USE, so there could be less than 2^19 different combinations of
> flags; taking it down to 2^10 combinations is only 85 hours or so.
>
Or... looking at it another way, in order to do this in under 24 hrs,
the initial burst capacity would need to be, using your time estimate
and a healthy over estimate of capacity. It would need approximately
20 'nice servers'... for a day for the initial build, then a much
reduced number in order to continue the ongoing work of building all
the new changes.
>>
>> This pretty much boils down to bytes and bytes of storage + compute
>> resources. Both of which are easily available to me. So I began
>> pondering and here I am, thinking to myself "is this really all there
>> is too it"?
>
> A full CentOS mirror is ~600GB iirc, so you're gonna need a ton of storage.
>
1TB on AWS S3 costs me $30 ... thats about 20 minutes of developer
time saved to pay back the cost.
At the moment our build pipeline can take over 45 minutes... most of
it is ebuilds compiling so it won't be hard to speed up with a
binhost.
Were not exactly going to build 'less often', so this does add up.
>> Does it really come down to CPU cycles and repeatedly running through
>> the following commands for each combination of ebuild, version and use
>> flags
>> emerge --emptytree --onlydeps ${name}
>> emerge --emptytree --buildpkgonly --buildpkg ${name}
>>
>> Obviously running them in a clean environment each time, either by
>> chroot or other means.
>> Then just storing the giant binhost somewhere suitable such as an AWS
>> s3 bucket setup to work via HTTP so the normal tools work fine with
>> it.
>>
>
> I haven't used binpkgs in a long time, but I think USE on the client
> machine has to match the USE of the package being installed. Managing
> all of this would be a nightmare unless you wrote your own special
> portage server that served up binpkgs in a USE-aware way and a portage
> host could request a binpkg with a certain USE.
>
> Theoretically, great idea. I think this would be possible if you had
> maybe 3 or 4 different USE combos (i.e. one for servers, one for KDE
> client machines, one for gnome clients, etc.).
>
> Alec
>
> P.S. I'm reasonably sure my math is correct, but I would appreciate
> corrections.
>
I don't see why it can't be all the combinations, the issue is
storage, and the storage costs could be a lot lower than expected
given how hard it is to guess. So I would also love to see some
corrected/more accurate estimates, especially any that are based on
numbers from anyone who has been involved in running a tinderbox,
these aren't exactly numbers many people have sitting around haha.
Re: [gentoo-user] Download of source for file-5.22 blocked by firewall?
On 01/21/2015 08:51 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: > From the sync output: > Downloading > 'http://mirror.datapipe.net/gentoo/distfiles/file-5.22.tar.gz' > --2015-01-21 08:49:43-- > http://mirror.datapipe.net/gentoo/distfiles/file-5.22.tar.gz > Resolving mirror.datapipe.net... 64.27.65.115 > Connecting to mirror.datapipe.net|64.27.65.115|:80... connected. > HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 404 Not Found > 2015-01-21 08:49:43 ERROR 404: Not Found. > Downloading 'ftp://ftp.gw.com/mirrors/pub/unix/file/file-5.22.tar.gz' > So, why the 'ERROR 404: Not Found'? > > It then falls back to ftp? But the ports it tries to use change every time? > > On 1/21/2015 7:38 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Ok, new one to me... >> >> I'm performing some updates after a hiatus of a couple of months, and >> the second package to be installed was file-5.22. >> >> I have my firewall locked down pretty tight, controlling even outbound >> access, and when portage tries to download the source for this file it >> is being blocked by the firewall: >> >> kernel: [6185615.878195] (fw>): IN= OUT=enp2s0 SRC=###.###.###.### >> DST=38.117.134.18 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=64958 DF PROTO=TCP >> SPT=52338 DPT=65369 WINDOW=14600 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 >> >> I've never had a problem like this and have had the same firewall rules >> for a very long time. >> >> Here is what I have for portage access: >> >> # allow outbound subversion access for portage / layman >> -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT >> -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 3690 -j ACCEPT >> -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 56160 -j ACCEPT >> # allow outbound access to git repos >> -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 9418 -j ACCEPT >> >> Have there been some additions that I need to add? Other ideas why I'm >> unable to update file? >> >> Thanks >> > I don't think it's your firewall, I can't download from either of those URLs. Have you ran `emerge --sync` recently? Could be some mirrors have changed or something, who really knows. fwiw sys-apps/file downloads from lug.mtu.edu for me and that works fine. Alec
Re: [gentoo-user] Open Question: The feasibility of a complete portage binhost
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Sam Bishop wrote: > > I don't see why it can't be all the combinations, the issue is > storage, and the storage costs could be a lot lower than expected > given how hard it is to guess. I don't believe that binpkg filenames contain the use flag settings, and I'm not sure that given multiple copies of a binpkg with different filenames portage goes through them and figures out which ones are which. This isn't an area I have looked into seriously. However, it obviously would be a blocker for getting what you propose to work, even theoretically. I don't really see the value in having EVERY combination of use flags on call though. Practically speaking I doubt this could be done. You're talking about a LOT of combinations. However, I think it would be very useful to have a binpkg repository all the same. Perhaps have one for each of a few common profiles with the default flags. That alone would be a significant undertaking. Just about everybody who has talked about running Gentoo in a datacenter has set up a binpkg repository. They may very well deviate from the default USE flags, but for the most part they try to keep their systems identical. They would build updates as binpkg, install to a test system, and after testing deploy them to production and that would of course go quickly. I have a script I use to build binpkg nightly for the day's updates. That lets me review updates and deploy them quickly. Any rebuilds/etc still take time, but the bulk of my updates are very fast this way with minimal time spent staring at the screen. This would be another route to take if your really did need highly varied deployments. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] Open Question: The feasibility of a complete portage binhost
On 21/01/2015 15:23, Alec Ten Harmsel wrote: > On 01/21/2015 07:47 AM, Sam Bishop wrote: >> > So I've been thinking crazy thoughts. >> > >> > Theoretically it can't be that hard to do a complete package binhost for >> > gentoo. > I love that you qualify this with "theoretically." > >> > >> > To be clear, when i say complete, Im referring to building, all >> > versions of all ebuilds marked stable or unstable on amd64, with every >> > combination of use flags. > Every ebuild with every combination of USE flags? This is likely > impossible, and definitely not feasible. A word: tinderbox A sentence: flameyes' blog describes just how long it takes to do basic runs and the difficulties attached "not feasible" is 100% spot-on correct -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Open Question: The feasibility of a complete portage binhost
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 10:17 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote: > On 21/01/2015 15:23, Alec Ten Harmsel wrote: >> On 01/21/2015 07:47 AM, Sam Bishop wrote: >>> > So I've been thinking crazy thoughts. >>> > >>> > Theoretically it can't be that hard to do a complete package binhost for >>> > gentoo. >> I love that you qualify this with "theoretically." >> >>> > >>> > To be clear, when i say complete, Im referring to building, all >>> > versions of all ebuilds marked stable or unstable on amd64, with every >>> > combination of use flags. >> Every ebuild with every combination of USE flags? This is likely >> impossible, and definitely not feasible. > > A sentence: flameyes' blog describes just how long it takes to do basic > runs and the difficulties attached > To be fair, this project wouldn't have to deal with all the error reporting/etc which the tinderbox does have to deal with. It also won't be predominantly run in conditions where failures are anticipated (new system packages, etc). It also doesn't have to do tests/etc, though that would obviously be nice. Obviously it will still take just as long to build. Again, I suggest walking before running here. Try building a binpkg repository for @world with only kde-meta in the world file on the kde desktop profile with no other changes other than # jobs/etc (or pick gnome if you prefer). See how much effort that takes to get working (and keep up to date) and use that as a guide for what it will take to go beyond that. Just that would be very useful - it would be a great tool for anybody who manages to break their toolchains or dealing with a very stale install. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] Open Question: The feasibility of a complete portage binhost
I actually had kind of a cool idea while walking to the bus stop this morning; a JIT Portage server that builds packages on demand. This would require: * Writing a portage server * Patching portage to connect to said server Basically, `emerge ` would send a message to the server "I need www-client/firefox-35.0[pulseaudio]". The server would return the tarball if already built, otherwise build it and then return it. This would be reasonably complex to implement in practice, but it would let everybody using the same binhost to run their own custom USE flags. Re more accurate numbers: dev-java/icedtea. Let's pretend building this takes ~5 minutes (this is faster than my desktop can do it in RAM with 6 hyper-threaded cores). There are 13 USE flags that are configurable if you're using HotSpot; we'll ignore JamVM and CACAO. On a single server, this would take nearly a month (28.44 days, exactly). Alec
Re: [gentoo-user] Download of source for file-5.22 blocked by firewall?
On 1/21/2015 9:01 AM, Alec Ten Harmsel wrote: > On 01/21/2015 08:51 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: >> From the sync output: >> > Downloading >> 'http://mirror.datapipe.net/gentoo/distfiles/file-5.22.tar.gz' >> --2015-01-21 08:49:43-- >> http://mirror.datapipe.net/gentoo/distfiles/file-5.22.tar.gz >> Resolving mirror.datapipe.net... 64.27.65.115 >> Connecting to mirror.datapipe.net|64.27.65.115|:80... connected. >> HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 404 Not Found >> 2015-01-21 08:49:43 ERROR 404: Not Found. >> > Downloading 'ftp://ftp.gw.com/mirrors/pub/unix/file/file-5.22.tar.gz' >> So, why the 'ERROR 404: Not Found'? >> >> It then falls back to ftp? But the ports it tries to use change every time? >> >> On 1/21/2015 7:38 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Ok, new one to me... >>> >>> I'm performing some updates after a hiatus of a couple of months, and >>> the second package to be installed was file-5.22. >>> >>> I have my firewall locked down pretty tight, controlling even outbound >>> access, and when portage tries to download the source for this file it >>> is being blocked by the firewall: >>> >>> kernel: [6185615.878195] (fw>): IN= OUT=enp2s0 SRC=###.###.###.### >>> DST=38.117.134.18 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=64958 DF PROTO=TCP >>> SPT=52338 DPT=65369 WINDOW=14600 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 >>> >>> I've never had a problem like this and have had the same firewall rules >>> for a very long time. >>> >>> Here is what I have for portage access: >>> >>> # allow outbound subversion access for portage / layman >>> -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT >>> -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 3690 -j ACCEPT >>> -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 56160 -j ACCEPT >>> # allow outbound access to git repos >>> -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 9418 -j ACCEPT >>> >>> Have there been some additions that I need to add? Other ideas why I'm >>> unable to update file? >>> >>> Thanks >>> >> > > I don't think it's your firewall, I can't download from either of those > URLs. Have you ran `emerge --sync` recently? Could be some mirrors have > changed or something, who really knows. fwiw sys-apps/file downloads > from lug.mtu.edu for me and that works fine. Ran it first thing this morning before attempting to update... Just resync'd, same problem...
Re: [gentoo-user] Download of source for file-5.22 blocked by firewall?
On 1/21/2015 11:03 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 1/21/2015 9:01 AM, Alec Ten Harmsel wrote: >> On 01/21/2015 08:51 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: >>> From the sync output: >>> >> Downloading >>> 'http://mirror.datapipe.net/gentoo/distfiles/file-5.22.tar.gz' >>> --2015-01-21 08:49:43-- >>> http://mirror.datapipe.net/gentoo/distfiles/file-5.22.tar.gz >>> Resolving mirror.datapipe.net... 64.27.65.115 >>> Connecting to mirror.datapipe.net|64.27.65.115|:80... connected. >>> HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 404 Not Found >>> 2015-01-21 08:49:43 ERROR 404: Not Found. >>> >> Downloading 'ftp://ftp.gw.com/mirrors/pub/unix/file/file-5.22.tar.gz' >>> So, why the 'ERROR 404: Not Found'? >>> >>> It then falls back to ftp? But the ports it tries to use change every time? >>> >>> On 1/21/2015 7:38 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: Hi all, Ok, new one to me... I'm performing some updates after a hiatus of a couple of months, and the second package to be installed was file-5.22. I have my firewall locked down pretty tight, controlling even outbound access, and when portage tries to download the source for this file it is being blocked by the firewall: kernel: [6185615.878195] (fw>): IN= OUT=enp2s0 SRC=###.###.###.### DST=38.117.134.18 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=64958 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=52338 DPT=65369 WINDOW=14600 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 I've never had a problem like this and have had the same firewall rules for a very long time. Here is what I have for portage access: # allow outbound subversion access for portage / layman -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 3690 -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 56160 -j ACCEPT # allow outbound access to git repos -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 9418 -j ACCEPT Have there been some additions that I need to add? Other ideas why I'm unable to update file? Thanks >>> >> >> I don't think it's your firewall, I can't download from either of those >> URLs. Have you ran `emerge --sync` recently? Could be some mirrors have >> changed or something, who really knows. fwiw sys-apps/file downloads >> from lug.mtu.edu for me and that works fine. > > Ran it first thing this morning before attempting to update... > > Just resync'd, same problem... Changed mirror setting in make.conf to: http://www.gtlib.gatech.edu/pub/gentoo/ and all is well now... Guess there is a problem with mirror.datapipe?
Re: [gentoo-user] Open Question: The feasibility of a complete portage binhost
Am Mittwoch 21 Januar 2015, 20:36:55 schrieb Sam Bishop: > So I've been thinking crazy thoughts. > > Theoretically it can't be that hard to do a complete package binhost for > gentoo. > > To be clear, when i say complete, Im referring to building, all > versions of all ebuilds marked stable or unstable on amd64, with every > combination of use flags. Not enough. You will also have to build against every combination of dependency subslots. e.g., different poppler, boost, icu, perl and many more versions... Which makes the task near impossible. -- Andreas K. Huettel Gentoo Linux developer kde, council
Re: [gentoo-user] Open Question: The feasibility of a complete portage binhost
On 21/01/2015 17:42, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 10:17 AM, Alan McKinnon > wrote: >> On 21/01/2015 15:23, Alec Ten Harmsel wrote: >>> On 01/21/2015 07:47 AM, Sam Bishop wrote: > So I've been thinking crazy thoughts. > > Theoretically it can't be that hard to do a complete package binhost for > gentoo. >>> I love that you qualify this with "theoretically." >>> > > To be clear, when i say complete, Im referring to building, all > versions of all ebuilds marked stable or unstable on amd64, with every > combination of use flags. >>> Every ebuild with every combination of USE flags? This is likely >>> impossible, and definitely not feasible. >> >> A sentence: flameyes' blog describes just how long it takes to do basic >> runs and the difficulties attached >> > > To be fair, this project wouldn't have to deal with all the error > reporting/etc which the tinderbox does have to deal with. It also > won't be predominantly run in conditions where failures are > anticipated (new system packages, etc). It also doesn't have to do > tests/etc, though that would obviously be nice. Obviously it will > still take just as long to build. To be equally fair, I was responding to the OP's idea that it is feasible to do this: "To be clear, when i say complete, Im referring to building, all versions of all ebuilds marked stable or unstable on amd64, with every combination of use flags." That is well-nigh impossible in any reasonable time frame. How many packages in the tree? My trusty find command and some guessing tell me around 18,000, plus 8309 lines in profiles/use.*. I shudder to think how much compiling that will take. I mentioned Diego's tinderbox because that's a real-life example of building everything in a build-host type environment and how long it takes to compile just one run. > > Again, I suggest walking before running here. Try building a binpkg > repository for @world with only kde-meta in the world file on the kde > desktop profile with no other changes other than # jobs/etc (or pick > gnome if you prefer). See how much effort that takes to get working > (and keep up to date) and use that as a guide for what it will take to > go beyond that. Just that would be very useful - it would be a great > tool for anybody who manages to break their toolchains or dealing with > a very stale install. Agreed. I think what would be useful in real life would be binpkgs for each profile in the tree with default USE for each, done once a week or once a fortnight. Think in terms of stage3 raised to the next level. Useful for getting oneself out of a jam - it's quite surprising how many people have deleted gcc or all versions of python then come here for advice. Usually they get told to unpack the package from stage3 in a chroot - recent binpkgs are a cool nice-to-have. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Usign ansible
Am 19.01.2015 um 11:11 schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger: > I might file the bug at b.g.o. .. going upstream seems a bit early ;-) posted to their google-group and got pointed to the latest devel-branch (equals to ** in our gentoo-world). Works now, even in "mixed mode" (both systemd and openrc installed). nice! Stefan
Re: [gentoo-user] Download of source for file-5.22 blocked by firewall?
On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:58:05 -0500, Tanstaafl wrote: > Changed mirror setting in make.conf to: > > http://www.gtlib.gatech.edu/pub/gentoo/ > > and all is well now... > > Guess there is a problem with mirror.datapipe? That's why I have several mirrors defined, portage will try them in turn so it doesn't matter if one fails. -- Neil Bothwick By the time you can make ends meet, they move the ends. pgp5DHMyOQBdI.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-user] Openrc now on Arch LInux
It seems Openrc is spreading? https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/OpenRC Anyone tested openrc on Arch linux? I have read in several places that Arch linux has moved to systemd, exclusively? James
Re: [gentoo-user] Openrc now on Arch LInux
why ask this question in Gentoo user land?
2015-01-22
Thanks & Best Regards.
Email: taozhijiang@tp-link.{net, com.cn}
发件人： James
发送时间： 2015-01-22 06:33:22
收件人： gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
抄送：
主题： [gentoo-user] Openrc now on Arch LInux
It seems Openrc is spreading?
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/OpenRC
Anyone tested openrc on Arch linux? I have read in several places
that Arch linux has moved to systemd, exclusively?
James
.
Re: [gentoo-user] Openrc now on Arch LInux
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 5:32 PM, James wrote: > > Anyone tested openrc on Arch linux? I have read in several places > that Arch linux has moved to systemd, exclusively? > Don't believe everything you read. You'll probably also read that Gentoo doesn't use systemd. :) -- Rich
[gentoo-user] Picking dom0 OS for new XEN server
Pondering dom0 os for new Xen server (Xeon e5 2620 v3 cpu) . Server is for home use. (routing/firewall; dns/dhcp, mail servers, etc. etc; linux gui desktop; linux media-server; windows as separate domains). I have basic skills in debian, and gentoo. A bit rusty on the rpm-based distros. Totally unfamiliar with *BSD. Total newbie in XEN So, given this list is bound to be a bit biased, : why would I pick gentoo for dom0, and what version of XEN would I use ?
Re: [gentoo-user] Picking dom0 OS for new XEN server
On 2015-01-22 08:32, Håkon Alstadheim wrote: Pondering dom0 os for new Xen server (Xeon e5 2620 v3 cpu) . Server is for home use. (routing/firewall; dns/dhcp, mail servers, etc. etc; linux gui desktop; linux media-server; windows as separate domains). I have basic skills in debian, and gentoo. A bit rusty on the rpm-based distros. Totally unfamiliar with *BSD. Total newbie in XEN So, given this list is bound to be a bit biased, : why would I pick gentoo for dom0, and what version of XEN would I use ? Picking gentoo for dom0 is probably the same question as "why would I use gentoo instead of other linux distribution". Me personally have very good experience in running xen dom0 machines on gentoo. If you separate your dom0 machine and the services are in domUs, then the dom0 is very small, clean and easy to maintain (for years). Ask on the debian list and I'm sure they will answer the same way so it's your choice ;) If it's a new server you may try the new 4.5 release. I don't know how stable it is, I just started my first VM on 4.5 today, but I'm running 4.3 in production and 4.4 in pre-production. Since you don't need to migrate in production, it's not a problem I believe.
