| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Tony0945
Watchman
Joined: 25 Jul 2006
Posts: 5127
Location: Illinois, USA
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:36 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| khayyam wrote: | | ... strange because I just did a 5200rpm 2.5" 80GB disk this way only the other day and my jaw droped when it took something in the region of 10-15 minutes. |
Pardon me for intervening but do the math. (3TB/80G)=37.5 37.5 * 10 minutes= 6.25 hours. Transfer rate of 5200RPM drive is easily only 100MB/sec.
I don't have any to test, but my 7200 RPM drives are around 135 MB/sec. (5200/7200)*135 = 97.5
6.25/(63.6/100) = ~9.83 hours The numbers add up. Big drive @USB =S-L-O-W! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Goverp
Veteran
Joined: 07 Mar 2007
Posts: 1999
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 11:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Khay, sorry, we may be misunderstanding each other. I used cryptsetup plain to encript 2.7TB of zeros with a random key. And it took 12 hours (not 10, I forgot when I started). It wasn't CPU bound, nor USB3 bound, so I'm pretty sure it was disk I/O bound at 63.6 MB/sec. (I didn't try copying /dev/random, or worse /dev/urandom. I did by mistake copy /dev/zero to it, and got about the same I/O rate (asymptotically; it started out blisteringly fast, but I guess that's cache)).
Looking at other comments, it looks to be a slow drive. It's a WD 3TB "My Book for Mac" which is some WD drive with USB3 cable and external power supply in a pretty plastic box to go on my bookshelf. I assume the MAC designator just meant it had Mac software to discard instead of Windows.
_________________
Greybeard |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony0945
Watchman
Joined: 25 Jul 2006
Posts: 5127
Location: Illinois, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 12:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Those Mybooks are generally a WD Green drive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naib wrote: | | -exec rm {} \; deletes the entire list and does not spawn a rm for every entry (-delete would and would slow down for a long list) |
You want a + instead: -exec rm {} +
(That's been in POSIX since at least 2001, so it is portable.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
depontius
Advocate
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 3509
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 3:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A slight, but related diversion...
Having been part of the "avoid systemd" club for several years now, a while back I noticed that USE="introspection" drags a lot of junk along and seems very intrusive. So I've been avoiding it rather like the plague. I avoid it with less fervor than systemd, but more than dbus. I have USE="-dbus" globally, but it's there for one or two packages that require it and that I don't want to do without. I've got USE="-introspection" set globally, but I believe I have one or two packages that also require it. However if some package comes along that needs it AND calls for a whole bunch of stuff to be rebuilt with USE="+introspection" then I tend to avoid that package.
Then we get "redshift". My wife has been having some sleeping difficulties lately, and it often helps her to sit at the computer and write. So the writing helps, but being in front of the computer hurts. Something like "redshift" would be a great thing for the situation.
But it uses introspection, and calls for a bunch of stuff to also be built with it.
So I'm here in the Curmudgeon Corner asking if my avoidance of USE="introspection" is misplaced.
There is a similar package called "sct" that does something similar, though less sophisticated. It's not in portage, but it's distributed as source.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fcl
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 31 Dec 2016
Posts: 77
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| x11-misc/sct is in the tree but it's keyworded |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mrbassie
l33t
Joined: 31 May 2013
Posts: 772
Location: over here
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 5:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
@depontius
I emerged redshift yesterday and it didn't pull anything in with it  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
depontius
Advocate
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 3509
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mrbassie wrote: | @depontius
I emerged redshift yesterday and it didn't pull anything in with it |
Were you specifically avoiding things like systemd, dbus, and introspection? It's the latter that caused my grief. Anyway, I installed "sct" . That and a cron setup will do the job for me.
I'm still interested in perspectives on whether avoiding the introspection USE flag is a good idea or not.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mrbassie
l33t
Joined: 31 May 2013
Posts: 772
Location: over here
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| depontius wrote: | | mrbassie wrote: | @depontius
I emerged redshift yesterday and it didn't pull anything in with it |
Were you specifically avoiding things like systemd, dbus, and introspection? It's the latter that caused my grief. Anyway, I installed "sct" . That and a cron setup will do the job for me.
I'm still interested in perspectives on whether avoiding the introspection USE flag is a good idea or not. |
afaik I don't have anything with the introspection flag and certainly no systemd, I do have dbus here and there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
i4dnf
Apprentice
Joined: 18 Sep 2005
Posts: 271
Location: Bucharest, Romania
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2017 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| depontius wrote: | | mrbassie wrote: | @depontius
I emerged redshift yesterday and it didn't pull anything in with it |
Were you specifically avoiding things like systemd, dbus, and introspection? It's the latter that caused my grief. Anyway, I installed "sct" . That and a cron setup will do the job for me.
I'm still interested in perspectives on whether avoiding the introspection USE flag is a good idea or not. |
It's redshift's gtk use flag that pulls in gtk+:3[introspection].
_________________
"The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not MAD" (SALVATOR DALI) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mrbassie
l33t
Joined: 31 May 2013
Posts: 772
Location: over here
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2017 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| There is a plasma widget for redshift in the main tree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
depontius
Advocate
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 3509
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2017 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| i4dnf wrote: | | depontius wrote: | | mrbassie wrote: | @depontius
I emerged redshift yesterday and it didn't pull anything in with it |
Were you specifically avoiding things like systemd, dbus, and introspection? It's the latter that caused my grief. Anyway, I installed "sct" . That and a cron setup will do the job for me.
I'm still interested in perspectives on whether avoiding the introspection USE flag is a good idea or not. |
It's redshift's gtk use flag that pulls in gtk+:3[introspection]. |
I see that now, thanks. I've looked a bit at "sct", and it will need some cron fiddling back of it, in order to do what I want. Redshift might be easier, but I don't know that I like it's need for "color accuracy", based on latitude and longitude. I'm not after accuracy here, I'm after better sleep. I think I know what I want to do with color temperature, and I'm not sure I want someone else setting the policy.
Still - any curmudgeonly attitudes about USE="introspection" and the wisdom of accepting/avoiding it?
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mv
Watchman
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 6747
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2017 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| depontius wrote: | | USE="introspection" and the wisdom of accepting/avoiding it? |
You mentioned that it pulls in a lot of packages, but most packages which it needs are actually due to gtk+:3. You might want to try gtk+:3 from the mv overlay which has BSD's atk-bridge patch which avoids the worst dependencies of gtk+:3.
introspection alone pulls in only gobject-introspection and gobject-introspection-common. The latter is completely "harmless" and just an m4 file needed for autotools (only the tarball is long, because just one file from the gobject-introspection tarball is taken). The former is one library and some interface description data. Main space is eaten by the latter, of course.
If something needs perl or python bindings for gtk+:3 or even just python-3 bindings for some gtk, there is practically no way around introspection: It is the analogue of e.g. dev-perl/Gtk2 for gtk:3.
The meaning of the word "introspection" suggests that it might need some additional rtti overhead. However, it is rather likely that this overhead is there in gtk+:3 even with USE=-introspection. So far, I did not check the source code to confirm or reject this conjecture.
Concerning redshift, you might want to give the old version redshift-1.8 from the mv overlay a try which still uses python-2.7. However, I am not sure whether it still works  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
depontius
Advocate
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 3509
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2017 11:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mv wrote: | | depontius wrote: | | USE="introspection" and the wisdom of accepting/avoiding it? |
You mentioned that it pulls in a lot of packages, but most packages which it needs are actually due to gtk+:3. You might want to try gtk+:3 from the mv overlay which has BSD's atk-bridge patch which avoids the worst dependencies of gtk+:3.
introspection alone pulls in only gobject-introspection and gobject-introspection-common. The latter is completely "harmless" and just an m4 file needed for autotools (only the tarball is long, because just one file from the gobject-introspection tarball is taken). The former is one library and some interface description data. Main space is eaten by the latter, of course.
If something needs perl or python bindings for gtk+:3 or even just python-3 bindings for some gtk, there is practically no way around introspection: It is the analogue of e.g. dev-perl/Gtk2 for gtk:3.
The meaning of the word "introspection" suggests that it might need some additional rtti overhead. However, it is rather likely that this overhead is there in gtk+:3 even with USE=-introspection. So far, I did not check the source code to confirm or reject this conjecture.
Concerning redshift, you might want to give the old version redshift-1.8 from the mv overlay a try which still uses python-2.7. However, I am not sure whether it still works |
I started coming across "introspection" in the deep-L.P.-paranoia days, and it dragged a lot of stuff around, either new or rebuilt. So it got some guilt by association. I've jumped through a few hoops to avoid it, so maybe I'm better off using it.
As for redshift, I installed it (-gtk3) and just tried it out. It's a bit too aggressive for my tastes. I'm not out to simulate natural sun color temperature, or anything like that. I just want the blue mostly out a few hours before bedtime until morning. Other than that, I want good old 6500K. I think I'll see what I need to wrap around sct.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 8:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| depontius wrote: | any curmudgeonly attitudes about USE="introspection" and the wisdom of accepting/avoiding it?
I started coming across "introspection" in the deep-L.P.-paranoia days, and it dragged a lot of stuff around, either new or rebuilt. So it got some guilt by association. I've jumped through a few hoops to avoid it, so maybe I'm better off using it. |
Heh, I did too. Setting it off in make.conf was a good way to keep the systemdbust crapfest off our machines, and to warn us of any weirdness coming.
At the time, it seemed like something you'd only need for evaluation of interpreted (scripting) languages, or late/lazy binding; the latter of which smelt wrong.
So I left it off, since there's always the option to add it later for scripted bindings, if they prove necessary.
*shrug* if you need it for something, I'd go ahead and use it, though it's always good to check the relevant ebuild/s. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mv
Watchman
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 6747
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 11:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| steveL wrote: | | or late/lazy binding |
Do you have examples/references for this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khayyam
Watchman
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| depontius wrote: | | But it uses introspection, and calls for a bunch of stuff to also be built with it. So I'm here in the Curmudgeon Corner asking if my avoidance of USE="introspection" is misplaced. |
depontius ... at one point I had USE="-introspection' and 'dev-libs/gobject-introspection-common-1.40.0' in package.provided .... simply to avoid the additional dependency (for something which the stated purpose of wasn't clear, even after reading their website). This worked for a while, but then a gtk+ update came along and the build failed, so I'd then removed it from package.provided (and as mv pointed out above, it's just an autoconf m4 file) so no biggy. I've not been bothered by it in any other way, nothing has insisted that it be enabled (admittedly I'm not using much that depends on, or uses, gtk+:2 ... and I don't have gtk+:3). As for what it is, or does, it seems to me that is only something those developing applications using gtk+ might concern themselves with ... and as you're obviously not, the only question is, does x,y,z require it, and if so do you enabled the useflag, or not. Basically, its not a feature that you may say "mmmmm ... introspection, get me somma dat", it's for those developing and who decide they want/need language bindings (and a way to incorporate those languages within the application). If you provide USE="-introspection" then I doubt you'd notice, until such a time as something requires it. Personally, I'll continue to ignore it, as I'm not signed up to desktop environment as be all and end all of the linux experience ... and given the crapolla that is the one GUI app I might actually use/need (a graphical browser) it's probably going to be a short goodbye to all that anyhow (and good riddance).
best ... khay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 6051
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 2:17 pm Post subject: tmpfiles: R! /dir/.* destroys root |
|
|
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/5644
| Quote: | Do NOT run the reproducer without a proper backup and/or on a production system!
How to reproduce:
# mkdir -p /foo/dir{1,2}
# touch /foo/.bar{1,2}
# cat /etc/tmpfiles.d/test.conf
R! /foo/.* - - - - -
Reboot.
Note the dot in the glob. When either using r!, or removing the dot and using R!, the bug doesn't reproduce. |
...
| Quote: | | poettering locked and limited conversation to collaborators 5 hours ago |
_________________
| Quote: | | Removed by Chiitoo |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AJM
Apprentice
Joined: 25 Sep 2002
Posts: 189
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 3:30 pm Post subject: Re: tmpfiles: R! /dir/.* destroys root |
|
|
| Naib wrote: | | Quote: | | poettering locked and limited conversation to collaborators 5 hours ago |
|
Sometimes you get a feeling about certain people and their work that you can't entirely justify at first, but mostly they provide the evidence themselves sooner or later... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
proteusx
Guru
Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Posts: 338
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 3:40 pm Post subject: Re: tmpfiles: R! /dir/.* destroys root |
|
|
| AJM wrote: |
Sometimes you get a feeling about certain people and their work that you can't entirely justify at first, but mostly they provide the evidence themselves sooner or later... |
My exact thoughts.
That is why I never installed in my machines any software by that phoney cantankerous brat. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 6051
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
1st comment:
| poettering wrote: | | I am not sure I'd consider this much of a problem. Yeah, it's a UNIX pitfall, but "rm -rf /foo/.*" will work the exact same way, no? |
seriously downvoted and proven wrong 
and this is the individual that soo many binary distro's have gotten into bed with
_________________
| Quote: | | Removed by Chiitoo |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zucca
Moderator
Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 3339
Location: Rasi, Finland
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 5:49 pm Post subject: Re: tmpfiles: R! /dir/.* destroys root |
|
|
| Naib wrote: | https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/5644
| Quote: | Do NOT run the reproducer without a proper backup and/or on a production system!
How to reproduce:
# mkdir -p /foo/dir{1,2}
# touch /foo/.bar{1,2}
# cat /etc/tmpfiles.d/test.conf
R! /foo/.* - - - - -
Reboot.
Note the dot in the glob. When either using r!, or removing the dot and using R!, the bug doesn't reproduce. |
...
| Quote: | | poettering locked and limited conversation to collaborators 5 hours ago |
|
Well. It'll be marked as NOTABUG anyways... I guess opentmpfiles should be now updated to meet this feature of systemd-tmpfiles. ;)
EDIT: They actually seemed to accept the patch... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khayyam
Watchman
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| poettering wrote: | | I am not sure I'd consider this much of a problem. Yeah, it's a UNIX pitfall, but "rm -rf /foo/.*" will work the exact same way, no? |
NFW! hahaha ... if a picture spoke a thousand words.
| Naib wrote: | | poettering locked and limited conversation to collaborators 5 hours ago |
NFW! hahaha ... if a picture spoke a thousand words.
| Naib wrote: | | and this is the individual that soo many binary distro's have gotten into bed with :) |
... and non-binary distro's, like gentoo.
best ... khay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| steveL wrote: | At the time, it seemed like something you'd only need for evaluation of interpreted (scripting) languages, or late/lazy binding; the latter of which smelt wrong.
So I left it off, since there's always the option to add it later for scripted bindings, if they prove necessary. |
| mv wrote: | | Do you have examples/references for [late/lazy binding]? |
Not really, it's just old background. introspection is one aspect of reflection, which was something that came up studying Java at Uni.
The most common use apart from debugging/testing, is what I'd call "lazy binding" in an analogy with dlopen(), at an object level, for extensibility.
"Can we call method X?" or "Is this object of type Foo?"; if so, continue to call whatever.
It's very similar to loading a plugin function. Again, late or lazy binding for extensibility, deferred til runtime.
OFC if you don't like the turn of phrase, no worry.
It's not something I see much need for at base-system level ("what, you don't know what you're using?"); hence it smells wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krinn
Watchman
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7470
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 10:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| poettering wrote: | | I am not sure I'd consider this much of a problem. Yeah, it's a UNIX pitfall, but "rm -rf /foo/.*" will work the exact same way, no? |
Not only the code, but his attitude is so pathetic... If removing root of a system is not a problem, i wonder what could be a problem for him then. |
|
| 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
