| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Realmaker
l33t
Joined: 17 Sep 2003
Posts: 683
Location: Bremen, Germany
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 5:08 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Is there a live-cd with reiser4 on it?
_________________
Athlon 2600+ Barton, Asus A7N8x-X, nForce2, Asus Geforce FX5700 256mb, TwinMos 512ddr-sdram cl 2.5
Wer andern eine Bratwurst brät, der hat ein Bratwurstbratgerät. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5350
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 6:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ruzbeh wrote: | Can someone tell me what you exactly need for Reiser4? I can format to Reiser4 using mkfs.reiser4, but when I try to mount i get
| Code: | mount -t reiser4 /dev/hda8 /mnt/gentoo
mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/hda8,
or too many mounted file systems |
I have "Reiser4" option compiled in the kernel under File Systems
I have reiser4progs and reiserfsprogs
Did I miss anything? Btw /dev/hda8 can be converted to ext2, ext3, there's nothing wrong with it AFAIK |
Just the same here , I have xx-sources 2.8.1-r1 and reiser4progs 1.0.0 . I can format and mount this as reiserfs but R4 gives me the same prob as you.
Any help? 
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
Gentoo because I'm a masochist
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X. Portage ~x86 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zr40
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 19 Sep 2002
Posts: 76
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 6:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You did enable Reiser4 in the kernel, right? 
What's 2.8.1? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5350
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yep ,
R4 on and 8k stacks
(oops)Linux linbox 2.6.8.1-xx1
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
Gentoo because I'm a masochist
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X. Portage ~x86 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zr40
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 19 Sep 2002
Posts: 76
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Anything interesting in dmesg? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5350
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No but I have , somehow , solved the prob.!
I turned on R4 debugging in the kernel, rebuilt, rebooted and the partition mounted from its fstab entry.
I did a fsck.reiser4 without any hitch and I am now copying back portage.
I had also rebuild reiser4progs and libaal against the new xx kernel. This may have resulted in some change that was only effective on reboot.
Anyhow, looks good.
Thanks for your comments.
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
Gentoo because I'm a masochist
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X. Portage ~x86 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ruzbeh
Apprentice
Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts: 223
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 8:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gentree wrote: | No but I have , somehow , solved the prob.!
I turned on R4 debugging in the kernel, rebuilt, rebooted and the partition mounted from its fstab entry.
I did a fsck.reiser4 without any hitch and I am now copying back portage.
I had also rebuild reiser4progs and libaal against the new xx kernel. This may have resulted in some change that was only effective on reboot.
Anyhow, looks good.
Thanks for your comments.
|
I looked up a Howto, and it said you need "Use larger keys on reiser4 tree", compiled it, now I can mount and work with reiser4. I don't have reiser4 debug options enabled now however |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cyvillian24
n00b
Joined: 29 Aug 2004
Posts: 6
Location: Bay Area
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:41 pm Post subject: Issues |
|
|
I've been having issues with it as my storage server.
drive1, ext3, 30gb
drive2, reiser4, 200gb
I tarred up drive1
| Quote: | # pwd
/media/drive1
# tar cvvf /media/drive2/stuff.tar *
<blah blah>
Done.
|
So the tar file is 30gb.
I unmount drive1, format & convert it to reiser4, and
| Quote: |
# pwd
/media/drive1
tar xvvf /media/drive2/stuff.tar
|
The result is only 17gb of files got extracted, yet the tar file is 30gb. Also, some of the files were not extracted, I checked with a 3rd party tar program(winrar), and did not see the files which were not extracted. I imagine they're in there because of the 13gigs unaccounted for, but I cannot see the files.
I'm wondering if this is attributed to reiser4 in any way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zr40
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 19 Sep 2002
Posts: 76
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
With what is that 17GB measured? If that tar contains mostly small files, that might account for the difference in disk space usage.
Try 'diff -r /media/drive1 /media/drive2'. If diff doesn't return any output, all is fine. If it does, however, something went wrong.
Your ext3 partition had a size of 30GB. Unless that space is totally filled, the resulting tar file cannot be 30GB.
Edit:
Actually, I've misread your post. Don't do that diff  I assumed /media/drive2 was the new reiser4 partition where you copied data from /media/drive1 from.
Edit 2:
If you have the space, try untarring that tar file somewhere on a non-reiser4 partition and run 'diff -r /media/drive1 /somewhere' (and replace /somewhere, of course )
Last edited by Zr40 on Sun Aug 29, 2004 10:28 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cyvillian24
n00b
Joined: 29 Aug 2004
Posts: 6
Location: Bay Area
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The drive was totally filled, 30gb in size. Also, they were mostly large files(1GB-5GB each) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zr40
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 19 Sep 2002
Posts: 76
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 10:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's also possible the files contain large areas of 'zero' bytes, so called 'sparse files'*. I've once noticed that on a ReiserFS (v3) partition, where a 400MB cache file would only take about 100MB disk space. The amount of data cached inside that file was 100MB
Also, please read the edits of my previous post
*) My description is not totally correct, but not necessarily wrong. Use Google for information about such files. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5350
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 4:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I looked up a Howto, and it said you need "Use larger keys on reiser4 tree", compiled it, now I can mount and work with reiser4. I don't have reiser4 debug options enabled now however |
That's it. I forgot that while I was in there and turned on R4 debugging I also decided that the file ordering offered by Large Keys may be useful.
This is obviously a bug since this should be an option and should not mean the partition refuses to mount if it is not selected , but R4 is a long way from release as stable to that's fair enuf. It's a pain, but that's the cost of playing with betas.
Thanks for pointing that out , now I can turn off debugging and it will probably be faster.
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
Gentoo because I'm a masochist
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X. Portage ~x86 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ruzbeh
Apprentice
Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts: 223
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gentree wrote: | | Quote: | | I looked up a Howto, and it said you need "Use larger keys on reiser4 tree", compiled it, now I can mount and work with reiser4. I don't have reiser4 debug options enabled now however |
That's it. I forgot that while I was in there and turned on R4 debugging I also decided that the file ordering offered by Large Keys may be useful.
This is obviously a bug since this should be an option and should not mean the partition refuses to mount if it is not selected , but R4 is a long way from release as stable to that's fair enuf. It's a pain, but that's the cost of playing with betas.
Thanks for pointing that out , now I can turn off debugging and it will probably be faster.
|
lol, do you even realise what you're saying? Reiser4 is already out and released, not beta or whatever |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5350
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 7:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
OK , I stand corrected. Grovelling apologies for being so sadly stupid and ill-imformed. I hope this error has not caused anyone any personal loss or brievment. I bow to you sire.
I have been using R4 since January and last time I looked it was regarded as unstable .
I suppose liball and reiser4progs going to 1.0.0 a few weeks back indicates it is now stable.
A link to the howto would be useful to see what the score is . Maybe there's refernce to an existing bug report. If not. one should probably be created, tho' we'll probably get shot down in flames if it is reported to gentoo.bugzilla because it's not supported by gentoo team.
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
Gentoo because I'm a masochist
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X. Portage ~x86 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5350
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 7:24 pm Post subject: Re: Issues |
|
|
| Cyvillian24 wrote: |
The result is only 17gb of files got extracted, yet the tar file is 30gb. Also, some of the files were not extracted, I checked with a 3rd party tar program(winrar), and did not see the files which were not extracted. I imagine they're in there because of the 13gigs unaccounted for, but I cannot see the files.
I'm wondering if this is attributed to reiser4 in any way. |
Looks like the archive was created badly since winrar also fails to extract what you expect. It would be more logical to blame ext3 that stored the original data than R4 that stored the archive (you maybe should have done a fsck before tarring).
If R4 had lost some part of the file I think tar would show errors when extracting.
Shame you did not spot the error before reformatting the 30G drive.
BTW R4's stong point is many small files, you should find jfs or xfs more efficient for the data you are dealing with. I think even ext3 will be faster than R4 for what you have ... altho' less safe!
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
Gentoo because I'm a masochist
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X. Portage ~x86
Last edited by Gentree on Mon Aug 30, 2004 9:10 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
episode96
Apprentice
Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 173
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 7:40 pm Post subject: Re: Issues |
|
|
| Gentree wrote: | [
ext3 is not a journalling fs and is therefore less reliable.
|
Actually, ext3 is basically ext2 + journaling system. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dave_pretty
n00b
Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Posts: 54
Location: Canberra, Australia
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2004 5:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Can anyone give any insight into how long it might for Linus to merge the Reiser4 support from the mm-sources into the main kernel? I'm rather fond of the gentoo-dev-sources kernel and would like to stick with it - I tried the mm-sources, but the cd-burning issues that came in at 2.6.8 make it kind of useless for me.
_________________
Jabber: hippojazz@jabber.org
free music at http://davepretty.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IvanHoe
l33t
Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 658
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2004 5:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| zigmund555 wrote: | | Anyone tried Resier4 on an AMD64? |
Yes, and I'm using it right now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
syadnom
Guru
Joined: 09 May 2002
Posts: 531
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2004 6:21 am Post subject: well |
|
|
i have had a problem
i have two identical installs. one reiserfs and one reiser4. the reiser4 i get lockups on when hitting the filesystem hard
gentoo-dev-sources + reiser_date_8.26 for 2.6.8-r3
lockups ONLY when hitting filesystem hard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aethyr
Veteran
Joined: 06 Apr 2003
Posts: 1085
Location: NYC
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2004 6:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dave_pretty wrote: | | Can anyone give any insight into how long it might for Linus to merge the Reiser4 support from the mm-sources into the main kernel? I'm rather fond of the gentoo-dev-sources kernel and would like to stick with it - I tried the mm-sources, but the cd-burning issues that came in at 2.6.8 make it kind of useless for me. |
I would either say never in 2.6 the way it is now, or possibly late 2004 if they drop certain interfaces.
I'm not kidding either, there's an absolutely ginormous discussion on this week's lkml:
http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0408.3/index.html
(look for "silent semantic changes with reiser4").
Originally Hans wanted to get it in 3-6 weeks:
http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0408.2/0410.html
However, once it was merged into mm, a lot of questions were raised. In any event, Reiser4 will not be in vanilla for awhile. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oberyno
Guru
Joined: 15 Feb 2004
Posts: 467
Location: /bin/zsh
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2004 7:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| aethyr wrote: | | dave_pretty wrote: | | Can anyone give any insight into how long it might for Linus to merge the Reiser4 support from the mm-sources into the main kernel? I'm rather fond of the gentoo-dev-sources kernel and would like to stick with it - I tried the mm-sources, but the cd-burning issues that came in at 2.6.8 make it kind of useless for me. |
I would either say never in 2.6 the way it is now, or possibly late 2004 if they drop certain interfaces.
...
However, once it was merged into mm, a lot of questions were raised. In any event, Reiser4 will not be in vanilla for awhile. |
Yep, alot of kernel devs don't like how reiser4 does things they think should be in the VFS.
For a stable reiser4 kernel, I would recommend ck-sources. Con bases his patches off vanilla, so his patchsets don't have the random wonkiness(usb breakage, cd-burning problems, recent truncation problems, etc...) of mm-sources. Plus they have decent performance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pilla
Bodhisattva
Joined: 07 Aug 2002
Posts: 7729
Location: Underworld
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2004 12:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I had a hard lock in my system (due to APM I think) and when I booted it I could see checks for all my reiserfs 3.6 partitions in dmesg, but nothing about my reiser4 partitions:
| dmesg | grep -i reiser wrote: |
ReiserFS: hda9: found reiserfs format "3.6" with standard journal
ReiserFS: hda9: using ordered data mode
ReiserFS: hda9: journal params: device hda9, size 8192, journal first block 18, max trans len 1024, max batch 900, max commit age 30, max trans age 30
ReiserFS: hda9: checking transaction log (hda9)
ReiserFS: hda9: replayed 5 transactions in 0 seconds
ReiserFS: hda9: Using r5 hash to sort names
VFS: Mounted root (reiserfs filesystem) readonly.
ReiserFS: dm-13: found reiserfs format "3.6" with standard journal
ReiserFS: dm-13: using ordered data mode
ReiserFS: dm-13: journal params: device dm-13, size 8192, journal first block 18, max trans len 1024, max batch 900, max commit age 30, max trans age 30
ReiserFS: dm-13: checking transaction log (dm-13)
ReiserFS: dm-13: replayed 2 transactions in 0 seconds
ReiserFS: dm-13: Using r5 hash to sort names
ReiserFS: dm-15: found reiserfs format "3.6" with standard journal
ReiserFS: dm-15: using ordered data mode
ReiserFS: dm-15: journal params: device dm-15, size 8192, journal first block 18, max trans len 1024, max batch 900, max commit age 30, max trans age 30
ReiserFS: dm-15: checking transaction log (dm-15)
ReiserFS: dm-15: replayed 5 transactions in 0 seconds
ReiserFS: dm-15: Using r5 hash to sort names
ReiserFS: dm-19: found reiserfs format "3.6" with standard journal
ReiserFS: dm-19: using ordered data mode
ReiserFS: dm-19: journal params: device dm-19, size 8192, journal first block 18, max trans len 1024, max batch 900, max commit age 30, max trans age 30
ReiserFS: dm-19: checking transaction log (dm-19)
ReiserFS: dm-19: replayed 1 transactions in 0 seconds
ReiserFS: dm-19: Using r5 hash to sort names
ReiserFS: dm-23: found reiserfs format "3.6" with standard journal
ReiserFS: dm-23: using ordered data mode
ReiserFS: dm-23: journal params: device dm-23, size 8192, journal first block 18, max trans len 1024, max batch 900, max commit age 30, max trans age 30
ReiserFS: dm-23: checking transaction log (dm-23)
ReiserFS: dm-23: replayed 19 transactions in 1 seconds
ReiserFS: dm-23: Using r5 hash to sort names
|
Should I update baselayout or anything else?
_________________
"I'm just very selective about the reality I choose to accept." -- Calvin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chaosite
Guru
Joined: 13 Dec 2003
Posts: 540
Location: Right over here.
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2004 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Realmaker wrote: | | Is there a live-cd with reiser4 on it? |
Yes, there is.
Redeeman's LiveCD.
I don't remember the address, but its always on the topic in #love-sources@freenode |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
firephoto
Veteran
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 1612
Location: +48° 5' 23.40", -119° 48' 30.00"
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2004 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aethyr wrote: |
I would either say never in 2.6 the way it is now, or possibly late 2004 if they drop certain interfaces.
I'm not kidding either, there's an absolutely ginormous discussion on this week's lkml:
http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0408.3/index.html
(look for "silent semantic changes with reiser4").
|
I just read through half of that, then I just read the Linus/Hans/Al/Christoph/Jamie messages. Hours later...
Now I've been waiting to try reiser4 out and was hoping it would make it into the vanilla kernel but it seems to have hit a road block.
Is it a wrong assumption that there are individuals/groups that don't want any reiser fs to succeed? First there were some security related claims, then there was the "you can't do that, we don't do it that way, get over it", also what seemed to be some resentment towards it's commercial support, but mostly the hold up seems to be the files as directories part.
I'm not a programmer and I don't understand what is so complicated about how reiser4 is doing things and how it doesn't work in the correct way with the current system. I see a file or directory as an object, this object either has data/information in it or it has more objects in it. If I see /etc/config/foo I just see foo, I can't tell you if foo is a file or a directory till I open it then it's obvious what it is. I know this is a simple view of the situation but it seems to have been made into an overblown situation. There seems to be a desire that all files sytems have to behave the same way so it's odd man out and the rest don't do what reiser4 does so there's not much motivation to change.
I really don't understand what it hurts to include reiser4 support in the develpment-sources so it can get some wider testing without having to test the other bleeding edge stuff that comes with the other kernel patches. There's lots of things in vanilla now that are marked experimental and some of those with a big warning about using them but they still are in the "stable" kernel.
Oh well, maybe I'll have to patch my own vanilla kernel and experience everything that's so bad and wrong with reiser4. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ruzbeh
Apprentice
Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts: 223
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2004 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| firephoto wrote: | | aethyr wrote: |
I would either say never in 2.6 the way it is now, or possibly late 2004 if they drop certain interfaces.
I'm not kidding either, there's an absolutely ginormous discussion on this week's lkml:
http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0408.3/index.html
(look for "silent semantic changes with reiser4").
|
I just read through half of that, then I just read the Linus/Hans/Al/Christoph/Jamie messages. Hours later...
Now I've been waiting to try reiser4 out and was hoping it would make it into the vanilla kernel but it seems to have hit a road block.
Is it a wrong assumption that there are individuals/groups that don't want any reiser fs to succeed? First there were some security related claims, then there was the "you can't do that, we don't do it that way, get over it", also what seemed to be some resentment towards it's commercial support, but mostly the hold up seems to be the files as directories part.
I'm not a programmer and I don't understand what is so complicated about how reiser4 is doing things and how it doesn't work in the correct way with the current system. I see a file or directory as an object, this object either has data/information in it or it has more objects in it. If I see /etc/config/foo I just see foo, I can't tell you if foo is a file or a directory till I open it then it's obvious what it is. I know this is a simple view of the situation but it seems to have been made into an overblown situation. There seems to be a desire that all files sytems have to behave the same way so it's odd man out and the rest don't do what reiser4 does so there's not much motivation to change.
I really don't understand what it hurts to include reiser4 support in the develpment-sources so it can get some wider testing without having to test the other bleeding edge stuff that comes with the other kernel patches. There's lots of things in vanilla now that are marked experimental and some of those with a big warning about using them but they still are in the "stable" kernel.
Oh well, maybe I'll have to patch my own vanilla kernel and experience everything that's so bad and wrong with reiser4. |
What's the problem? Just emerge ck-sources. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Gentoo Chat
