| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ansar
n00b
Joined: 30 Oct 2002
Posts: 4
|
 Posted: Sun Oct 05, 2003 4:07 pm Post subject: How about lufs |
 |
|
| Has anyone looked into lufs |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nephros
Advocate
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
Posts: 2130
Location: Graz, Austria (Europe - no kangaroos.)
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 05, 2003 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Someone already mentioned rsync and that you can do cool stuff with it.
But one of the coolest things it can do is repair corrupted .iso files.
The server you downloaded the iso from has to support rsync, but quite a few (e.g. rsync:// gd.tuwien.ac.at) do, so you go | Code: | | rsync rsync://path/to/some/gentoo.iso /home/user/download/file.iso |
and wait for it to finish: voila! repaired iso file.
_________________
Please put [SOLVED] in your topic if you are a moron. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
softchill
n00b
Joined: 28 Jun 2003
Posts: 73
Location: Quebec, Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 05, 2003 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've seen lots of nice tips and I got a few for you.
Special character and string interpreted by the terminal
Someone made an alias to clean the screen when you logout... I got better:
then add what ever else you want getty to show before the login prompt.
Here's the way I configure my prompt, I put all that code in /etc/conf.d/prompt, and source it from /etc/profile. Plus it got the string interpreted by the terminal as a color change. You can use those strings in your /etc/issue file to get color. (
PS1 is the prompt, PS2 is usually set to ">" and it is used when you type command on more than one line.)
| Code: | # Define colors
nil='[00m'
bla='[0;30m'
red='[0;31m'
gre='[0;32m'
yel='[0;33m'
blu='[0;34m'
mag='[0;35m'
cya='[0;36m'
whi='[0;37m'
BLA='[1;30m'
RED='[1;31m'
GRE='[1;32m'
YEL='[1;33m'
BLU='[1;34m'
MAG='[1;35m'
CYA='[1;36m'
WHI='[1;37m'
# Set default colors
COLOR_USER=$BLA
# Get per user colors
if [ -f $HOME/.prompt_color ] ; then
# In /root you can put COLOR_USER=$RED so your prompt color tell's your root.
. $HOME/.prompt_color
fi
PS1="\[$WHI\][\[$BLA\]\d (\[$BLU\]\@\[$BLA\]) on tty\l\[$WHI\]]"
PS1="$PS1 [\[$yel\]\j\[$BLA\]zZ\[$WHI\]]"
PS1="$PS1\n[\[$COLOR_USER\]\u\[$BLU\]@\[$WHI\]\h \[$BLU\]\W\[$WHI\]]\[$yel\]\$\[$nil\] "
PS2="\[$WHI\][\[$BLA\]*\[$WHI\]>\[$nil\] " |
You know, when you cat a binary file and your terminal get all messed up, its cause a character is interpreted by the termnal, that character is the 14 in the ascii code (shift out) and you can type it in bash or vim by pressing ^V^N. You can also fix your terminal with ascii 15 (shift in) by pressing ^V^O. (^V means do not interpret the next character)
ncftp really is the best ftp client out there except it does'nt handle sftp protocol.
vim really is the best editor. vimtutor can help you getting in. You can try :make to compile you code from your makefile and :copen to get a buffer with the error. :next show you the next error, :previous the previous. :help holy-grail show you all of the command line options.
bash-completion is soooo cool.
sodipodi is a great svg program
Reading is the only way to learn.
Dont be with the dark side 
And do not emerge OpenOffice from source... get the binary, it's compiling from a bit less than 24 hours now  . |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
softchill
n00b
Joined: 28 Jun 2003
Posts: 73
Location: Quebec, Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 05, 2003 11:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SmegTheLight wrote: | My all time favorite was this one:
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=14562&highlight=screen+script
Using "screen" and "script" to be able to start an emerge of something remotely, detatch from the terminal, and have the emerge continue.
Allowed me to start large ebuilds on my home machine from work via ssh, and not have to worry about keeping the ssh session open.. |
Have you ever tried nohup:
nohup [some command]
everything is appended to nohup.out |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
meowsqueak
Veteran
Joined: 26 Aug 2003
Posts: 1549
Location: New Zealand
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2003 7:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nohup is a similar solution but 'screen' really is a cut above. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vishruth
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 25 Oct 2002
Posts: 138
Location: India
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2003 3:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wrex wrote: | The apocryphal story, though, is of the luser asking: Why is this taking so long?"  |
How's that possible? That shouldn't be possible in rm -r... does the added -f option make any difference?
| rm man page wrote: | DESCRIPTION
rm
removes each given file. By default, it does not remove directories. But when the -r or -R option is given, the entire directory tree below the specified directory is removed (and there are no limitations on the depth of directory trees that can be removed by `rm -r'). It is an error when the last path component of file is either . or .. (so as to avoid unpleasant surprises with `rm -r .*' or so).
If the -i option is given, or if a file is unwritable, standard input is a terminal, and the -f option is not given, rm prompts the user for whether to remove the file, writing a question to stderr and reading an answer from stdin. If the response is not affirmative, the file is skipped. |
_________________
http://freeshell.in/~vish/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
meowsqueak
Veteran
Joined: 26 Aug 2003
Posts: 1549
Location: New Zealand
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2003 3:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
I concur. Try
| Code: | $ rm -i -r .*
rm: cannot remove `.' or `..'
rm: cannot remove `.' or `..'
rm: remove regular file `.Xauthority'? |
I don't particularly want to try using the -f switch in case it overrides this... anyone know? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andvin
n00b
Joined: 27 May 2003
Posts: 23
Location: Linköping, Sweden
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2003 8:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| meowsqueak wrote: | I concur. Try
| Code: | $ rm -i -r .*
rm: cannot remove `.' or `..'
rm: cannot remove `.' or `..'
rm: remove regular file `.Xauthority'? |
I don't particularly want to try using the -f switch in case it overrides this... anyone know? |
'-f' should be interpreted as 'ask no questions, just do it!' or if u like 'Use the force, Luke!' |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MatzeOne
Guru
Joined: 07 Sep 2003
Posts: 579
Location: Hamburg, Germany
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2003 9:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| meowsqueak wrote: | | nohup is a similar solution but 'screen' really is a cut above. |
i agree...
with screen you can take over your irssi (irc-client) - session you started from home to work and detach later...
screen is really nice in combination with ssh 
_________________
Mit null lässt sich eine ganze Menge machen.
Sportschule Hamburg |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wrex
n00b
Joined: 01 May 2003
Posts: 26
Location: San Jose, CA
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2003 5:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| meowsqueak wrote: | I concur. Try
| Code: | $ rm -i -r .*
rm: cannot remove `.' or `..'
rm: cannot remove `.' or `..'
rm: remove regular file `.Xauthority'? |
I don't particularly want to try using the -f switch in case it overrides this... anyone know? |
Well, I said it was an apocryphal story -- turns out it's pretty dated, too.
I'm 99.986% certain that early versions of SunOS and other Unixen would allow you to happily delete your entire filesystem with "rm -rf .*".
It's pretty straightforward to demonstrate that gnu rm is smart enough to prevent you from doing this, however:
| Code: | megrims root # mkdir -p /tmp/test/{bin,lib}
megrims root # mkdir -p /tmp/test/a/b/c/d
megrims root # cp /bin/{bash,rm} /tmp/test/bin
megrims root # cd /lib
megrims lib # tar cf - . | (cd /tmp/test/lib; tar xpf -)
megrims lib # chroot /tmp/test
megrims / # cd a/b/c/d
megrims d # rm -rf .*
rm: cannot remove `.' or `..'
rm: cannot remove `.' or `..'
megrims d # exit
exit
megrims lib # ls -a /tmp/test/a/b/c/d
./ ../
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vishruth
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 25 Oct 2002
Posts: 138
Location: India
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2003 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wrex wrote: | | meowsqueak wrote: | I concur. Try
| Code: | $ rm -i -r .*
rm: cannot remove `.' or `..'
rm: cannot remove `.' or `..'
rm: remove regular file `.Xauthority'? |
I don't particularly want to try using the -f switch in case it overrides this... anyone know? |
Well, I said it was an apocryphal story -- turns out it's pretty dated, too.
I'm 99.986% certain that early versions of SunOS and other Unixen would allow you to happily delete your entire filesystem with "rm -rf .*".
It's pretty straightforward to demonstrate that gnu rm is smart enough to prevent you from doing this, however:
| Code: | megrims root # mkdir -p /tmp/test/{bin,lib}
megrims root # mkdir -p /tmp/test/a/b/c/d
megrims root # cp /bin/{bash,rm} /tmp/test/bin
megrims root # cd /lib
megrims lib # tar cf - . | (cd /tmp/test/lib; tar xpf -)
megrims lib # chroot /tmp/test
megrims / # cd a/b/c/d
megrims d # rm -rf .*
rm: cannot remove `.' or `..'
rm: cannot remove `.' or `..'
megrims d # exit
exit
megrims lib # ls -a /tmp/test/a/b/c/d
./ ../
|
|
Ah... so even rm -rf won't work. That's what I wanted to know, but I had not tried it yet, thanks. You saved me some time.
_________________
http://freeshell.in/~vish/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeedo
Apprentice
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 202
Location: Akureyri, Iceland
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2003 9:40 pm Post subject: Re: Autofs? |
|
|
| Booyah wrote: | | That shfs tip is fantastic! No more NFS overhead. |
Eh... shfs has way more overhead than NFS because it has to encrypt everything besides just transfering files, the client then has to decrypt everything
shfs between two machines here; 1667MHz AMD & 233MHz G3: 30K/sec
NFS between two machines here; 1667MHz AMD & 233MHz G3: 1MB/sec
and thats on 10Mb lan where tha max speed is 1.25MB,
So yes, there is alot of overhead in shfs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
meowsqueak
Veteran
Joined: 26 Aug 2003
Posts: 1549
Location: New Zealand
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2003 12:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Depends on the speed of your machines. I notice you're using a 233MHz CPU there. I have a P2-266 and ssh significantly slows down scp transfers (by a factor of 4 on my 100mbit LAN). However between two AthlonXP processors (1600+ and 1800+) ssh performs almost as good as a raw netcat. For a 140 second ssh transfer, netcat took 138 seconds (single file).
So there's some speed of operation between an XP1600+ and a P2-266 where the CPU encryption overhead takes over from the network as the dominant bottleneck.
As an aside, has 'fsh' been mentioned in this thread? This is a useful application for maintaining a 'persistent' ssh connection for script and shell operations that would normally create and tear down many ssh connections (like some CVS operations). It works better the slower your network. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hbmartin
Guru
Joined: 12 Sep 2003
Posts: 386
Location: Home is where the boxen are
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2003 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| viperlin wrote: | | Stu L Tissimus wrote: | Everyone probably knows this one, but it's great for multitasking (and doing stuff while emerging a program).
ALT+F1-6 |
thats from the command line (in the command line you can use the windows keys to move left and right through them too)
when in X it's CTRL-ALT-F1 -6 to take you to main commandline |
OK thanks, I did that.
Now I'm stuck on the command line and typing this from lynx
How do I get back to X?
Harold |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aroben
n00b
Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 33
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2003 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CTRL-ALT-F7 should put you back in X.
-Adam |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hbmartin
Guru
Joined: 12 Sep 2003
Posts: 386
Location: Home is where the boxen are
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2003 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| meowsqueak wrote: | | Depends on the speed of your machines. I notice you're using a 233MHz CPU there. I have a P2-266 and ssh significantly slows down scp transfers (by a factor of 4 on my 100mbit LAN). |
You're comparing Apples and oranges. He said a 233MHz PPC not x86. Not disputing your other stats, but PPCs can typically perform on par with higher clock speed x86s.
Uh oh, did I just start that whole debate again?
Harold |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AlterEgo
Veteran
Joined: 25 Apr 2002
Posts: 1619
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2003 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
1) type "camera:/" in the address bar of konqueror to read out yout digicam.
2) Use linux |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tawtao
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 29 Sep 2003
Posts: 116
Location: Baltimore
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2003 7:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TwoSlick wrote: | | Quote: | | just tried to emerge that shfs and this is what i got |
| Code: | gcc -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -Wall -I- -I. -I/var/tmp/portage/shfs-0.31-r1/image//lib/modules/2.4.20-win4lin-r1/build/include -I/usr/src/linux/include/ -DMODULE -DMODVERSIONS -DEXPORT_SYMTAB -D__KERNEL__ -DLINUX -DDEBUG_LEVEL=0 -c dcache.c -o dcache.o
dcache.c:2:31: linux/modversions.h: No such file or directory |
It looks like gcc couldn't find a header file in your kernal source directory "/usr/src/linux/include/"
Make sure your kernel is correctly located there, and try again.
- TwoSlick |
I believe modversions.h is created when you compile modules. So config your kernel, compile kernel and modules .. . and then try again.
Good luck |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeedo
Apprentice
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 202
Location: Akureyri, Iceland
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2003 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hbmartin wrote: | | meowsqueak wrote: | | Depends on the speed of your machines. I notice you're using a 233MHz CPU there. I have a P2-266 and ssh significantly slows down scp transfers (by a factor of 4 on my 100mbit LAN). |
You're comparing Apples and oranges. He said a 233MHz PPC not x86. Not disputing your other stats, but PPCs can typically perform on par with higher clock speed x86s.
Uh oh, did I just start that whole debate again? :wink:
Harold |
It's not a debate, its a fact, G3's and G4's are faster at the same clock speeds as wintels, except maybe for the transmeta stuff..
Anyway some people here have grossly misunderstood what i was saying, the point was that shfs has more overhead than NFS which someone here wrongly stated wasnt true. Dont get me wrong, i use shfs its more secure than NFS which i wouldnt use over the open internet especially on wireless networks but saying shfs has less overhead is just plain wrong. It does, but its more secure in return. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grannydmb
n00b
Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 16
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2003 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mirrorselect is a cool tool to increase your emerge download speeds.
(app-portage/mirrorselect)
mirrorselect -a for automatic selection of your mirror
mirrorselect -i for interactive selection of your mirror |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hbmartin
Guru
Joined: 12 Sep 2003
Posts: 386
Location: Home is where the boxen are
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2003 10:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Get a wireless mouse.
Like the Logitech MX700 (fully supported).
I'll never use a corded mouse again.
Harold |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
meowsqueak
Veteran
Joined: 26 Aug 2003
Posts: 1549
Location: New Zealand
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2003 10:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hbmartin wrote: | | You're comparing Apples and oranges. |
Thank you for pointing out the obvious. Yes, - Jeedo was comparing a fast machine to a much slower one, as was I. I never suggested a P2-266 was equivalent to a PPC-233 - although it seems that you assumed that I did. Just because I can't test with a PPC-233 doesn't invalidate my argument. Perhaps the original poster might like to verify my results on his own hardware? Then we'd have two sets of experimental data to compare.
How about you stick with the intent of the post rather than being pedantic about irrelevant details like that? I can't see how it adds to the discussion. Oh, unless you're going to tell me something like a PPC-233 is equivalent to a 1000 MHz Intel-based CPU...?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
meowsqueak
Veteran
Joined: 26 Aug 2003
Posts: 1549
Location: New Zealand
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2003 11:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeedo wrote: | | Anyway some people here have grossly misunderstood what i was saying, the point was that shfs has more overhead than NFS which someone here wrongly stated wasnt true. |
Assuming you're referring to my comment - you are being overly theatrical and misquoting me and I don't like that. I didn't claim there was less overhead with shfs. I didn't even mention shfs. I was talking about real-world general encryption performance and the influence of bottlenecks. If you read my post again (carefully this time) you'll see I was actually talking about scp (file transfer over ssh) and the effect that encryption has on performance between different sets of hardware.
You mentioned "...has to encrypt everything besides just transfering files, the client then has to decrypt everything..." so I was quite justified to reply on the effects of encryption in general on an scp file transfer. You'll note I don't actually mention shfs anywhere in my original post.
At least you didn't try and elaborate the pitiful 'apples and oranges' distraction.
Oh, and to make this easier in future, if you have a problem with one of my posts, then refer to it properly, not as "some people", please. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeedo
Apprentice
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 202
Location: Akureyri, Iceland
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2003 12:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| meowsqueak wrote: | | Jeedo wrote: | | Anyway some people here have grossly misunderstood what i was saying, the point was that shfs has more overhead than NFS which someone here wrongly stated wasnt true. |
Assuming you're referring to my comment - you are being overly theatrical and misquoting me and I don't like that. I didn't claim there was less overhead with shfs. I didn't even mention shfs. I was talking about real-world general encryption performance and the influence of bottlenecks. If you read my post again (carefully this time) you'll see I was actually talking about scp (file transfer over ssh) and the effect that encryption has on performance between different sets of hardware.
You mentioned "...has to encrypt everything besides just transfering files, the client then has to decrypt everything..." so I was quite justified to reply on the effects of encryption in general on an scp file transfer. You'll note I don't actually mention shfs anywhere in my original post.
At least you didn't try and elaborate the pitiful 'apples and oranges' distraction.
Oh, and to make this easier in future, if you have a problem with one of my posts, then refer to it properly, not as "some people", please. |
Sorry about that, i was quite sleepy when i wrote that and misread some things. However the "some people" comment was not an attempt to be snyde, thing is that i was reading all the responses to the original posts and remembered someone talking about that, however i didnt remember the name, hence "some people".
Hope we're okey. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hbmartin
Guru
Joined: 12 Sep 2003
Posts: 386
Location: Home is where the boxen are
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2003 3:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| meowsqueak wrote: | | I never suggested a P2-266 was equivalent to a PPC-233 - although it seems that you assumed that I did. |
Call it a misread on my part.
| meowsqueak wrote: | | Just because I can't test with a PPC-233 doesn't invalidate my argument. |
I specifically said
| hbmartin wrote: | | Not disputing your other stats |
| meowsqueak wrote: | | How about you stick with the intent of the post rather than being pedantic about irrelevant details like that? I can't see how it adds to the discussion. |
Point taken.
| meowsqueak wrote: | Oh, unless you're going to tell me something like a PPC-233 is equivalent to a 1000 MHz Intel-based CPU...?  |
I'll wait til you've cooled down to do that 
Harold |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Off the Wall
