FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-24-2012, 05:43 PM
Alexis Ballier
 
Default preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy

On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 18:56:44 +0100
""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" <phajdan.jr@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Currently preserve_old_lib functions generate two commands per
> preserved lib:
>
> # revdep-rebuild --library '/usr/lib/libv8.so.3.9.4'
> # rm '/usr/lib/libv8.so.3.9.4'
>
> I'd like to modify eutils.eclass to only generate one command:
>
> # revdep-rebuild --library '/usr/lib/libv8.so.3.9.4' &&
> rm '/usr/lib/libv8.so.3.9.4'
>
> What do you think?
>

+1

moreover the && wont delete the lib if revdep-rebuild failed i think,
so it should be even safer to copy/paste

A.
 
Old 02-24-2012, 05:47 PM
Kent Fredric
 
Default preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy

> # revdep-rebuild --library '/usr/lib/libv8.so.3.9.4' &&
> * * * *rm '/usr/lib/libv8.so.3.9.4'


Might even be worth patching revdep-rebuild:

revdep-rebuild --library /usr/lib/libv8.so.3.9.4 --autoclean


--
Kent
 
Old 02-24-2012, 05:47 PM
Rich Freeman
 
Default preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> moreover the && wont delete the lib if revdep-rebuild failed i think,
> so it should be even safer to copy/paste

Am I the only paranoid person who moves them rather than unlinking
them? Oh, if only btrfs were stable...

Rich
 
Old 02-24-2012, 06:12 PM
Pacho Ramos
 
Default preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy

El vie, 24-02-2012 a las 18:56 +0100, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." escribió:
> Currently preserve_old_lib functions generate two commands per preserved
> lib:
>
> # revdep-rebuild --library '/usr/lib/libv8.so.3.9.4'
> # rm '/usr/lib/libv8.so.3.9.4'
>
> I'd like to modify eutils.eclass to only generate one command:
>
> # revdep-rebuild --library '/usr/lib/libv8.so.3.9.4' &&
> rm '/usr/lib/libv8.so.3.9.4'
>
> What do you think?
>

Great, I am already running both in that way manually
 
Old 02-24-2012, 07:20 PM
James Broadhead
 
Default preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy

On 24 February 2012 17:56, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." <phajdan.jr@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Currently preserve_old_lib functions generate two commands per preserved
> lib:
>
> # revdep-rebuild --library '/usr/lib/libv8.so.3.9.4'
> # rm '/usr/lib/libv8.so.3.9.4'
>
> I'd like to modify eutils.eclass to only generate one command:
>
> # revdep-rebuild --library '/usr/lib/libv8.so.3.9.4' &&
> * * * *rm '/usr/lib/libv8.so.3.9.4'
>
> What do you think?

Definitely a good idea, but FYI it's only been possible since last week :P
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=326923
 
Old 02-24-2012, 11:31 PM
Richard Yao
 
Default preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy

> Am I the only paranoid person who moves them rather than unlinking
> them? *Oh, if only btrfs were stable...

Is this a reference to snapshots? You can use ZFS for those. The
kernel modules are only available in the form of 9999 ebuilds right
now, but they your data should be safe unless you go out of your way
to break things (e.g. putting the ZIL/SLOG on a tmpfs). Alternatively,
there is XFS, which I believe also supports snapshots.
 
Old 02-25-2012, 02:44 AM
Mike Gilbert
 
Default preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Richard Yao <ryao@cs.stonybrook.edu> wrote:
>> Am I the only paranoid person who moves them rather than unlinking
>> them? *Oh, if only btrfs were stable...
>
> Is this a reference to snapshots? You can use ZFS for those. The
> kernel modules are only available in the form of 9999 ebuilds right
> now, but they your data should be safe unless you go out of your way
> to break things (e.g. putting the ZIL/SLOG on a tmpfs). Alternatively,
> there is XFS, which I believe also supports snapshots.
>

I've been using btrfs exclusively for about 6 months, and I don't
*think* I've lost anything...
 
Old 02-25-2012, 02:53 AM
Rich Freeman
 
Default preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> I've been using btrfs exclusively for about 6 months, and I don't
> *think* I've lost anything...
>

From what I've seen as long as you keep things simple, and don't have
heavy loads, you're at least reasonably likely to get by unscathed.
I'd definitely keep good backups though. Just read the mailing lists,
or for kicks run xfs-test on your server. Xfs-test doesn't do any
direct disk access or anything like that - it is no different than
running bazillions of cat's, mv's, rm's, cp's, etc. It most likely
will panic your system if you try it on btrfs - on ext4 it will
probably load the living daylights out of it but you should be fine.
The issues with btrfs at this point are the ones that aren't so easy
to spot, like race conditions, issues when you use more unusual
configurations, and so on.

Oh, and go ahead and try filling up your disk some time. If your
kernel is recent enough it might not panic when you get down to a few
GB left.

I'm eager for the rise of btrfs - it IS the filesystem of the future.
However, that cuts both ways right now.

Rich
 
Old 02-25-2012, 03:10 AM
William Kenworthy
 
Default preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy

On Fri, 2012-02-24 at 22:44 -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Richard Yao <ryao@cs.stonybrook.edu> wrote:
> >> Am I the only paranoid person who moves them rather than unlinking
> >> them? Oh, if only btrfs were stable...
> >
> > Is this a reference to snapshots? You can use ZFS for those. The
> > kernel modules are only available in the form of 9999 ebuilds right
> > now, but they your data should be safe unless you go out of your way
> > to break things (e.g. putting the ZIL/SLOG on a tmpfs). Alternatively,
> > there is XFS, which I believe also supports snapshots.
> >
>
> I've been using btrfs exclusively for about 6 months, and I don't
> *think* I've lost anything...
>

I did ... tried it out and found it "tougher" than reiserfs to break
which is saying something considering how flaky extended 2/3 proved for
the same task.

Problem was, once it broke you couldnt fix it

Also there are some things that dont work, one of which was a few
packages would always fail to emerge when using btrfs for temp storage
(I think one was libreoffice)

So I deleted the btrfs partitions and put reiserfs back ...

BillK
 
Old 02-25-2012, 03:35 AM
Zac Medico
 
Default preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy

On 02/24/2012 08:10 PM, William Kenworthy wrote:
> Also there are some things that dont work, one of which was a few
> packages would always fail to emerge when using btrfs for temp storage
> (I think one was libreoffice)

I've been using btrfs for temp storage, for more than a year, and
haven't noticed any problems with specific packages (libroffice builds
fine).

The only problems I've experienced are:

1) Intermittent ENOSPC when unpacking lots of files. Maybe this is
related to having compression enabled. I haven't experienced it lately,
so maybe it's fixed in recent kernels.

2) Bug 353907 [1] which is fixed in recent kernels and coreutils.

[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=353907
--
Thanks,
Zac
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:46 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org