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 > Ubuntu > Ubuntu Server Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-25-2010, 07:20 PM
"Egbert Jan"
 
Default Changes in booting with ubuntu-server 10.04

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: Soren Hansen [mailto:soren@ubuntu.com]
> Verzonden: donderdag 25 maart 2010 19:22
> Aan: Egbert Jan van den Bussche
> CC: ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
> Onderwerp: Re: Changes in booting with ubuntu-server 10.04
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 10:07:51PM +0100, Egbert Jan van den
> Bussche wrote:
> > I have not tried any of the alpha or beta releases yet. But
> now I see
> > Micheal's horror story. PLEASE do not assume that a server
> can display
> > ANY kind of graphics. All my servers run headles and can only be
> > logged in with ssh. If really no other way, I have to bring a
> > keyboard/display to the rack... Again please let the init messages
> > flow over our consoles.
>
> Silly question perhaps, but if they're headless why do you
> care a whole lot about what's being shown?
>
> --
> Soren Hansen
> Ubuntu Developer
> http://www.ubuntu.com/
>
Well, it is always possible to hook something up. Not nessarily capable of
doing fancy graphics.

Egbert Jan


--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 03-26-2010, 07:42 AM
"Egbert Jan"
 
Default Changes in booting with ubuntu-server 10.04

Hi again Soren,

Because IF I need to attach a console I do that to catch each and every
information that could help me find any problems during boot.

I'm from a old era. VAXVMS on DEC mini's. There were only servers and
character terminals. There were no VGA output devices. I want (and I think
many with me) the simple all revealing line oriented logging during the boot
process on a simple serial or console port. No bells, no wistles. If
something goes wrong during the boot we want to know and have informative
output at hand on (simple) output devices. Not hidden in high level messages
in fancy screens.

But what heck, nobody asked to have fancy server bootspash screens on
servers. If that is the new way of working, fine but just give us the
possibility to have a boot option to have all starting services scrolling
over the screen (and hopefully an 'OK' on the right).

No hard feelings, I also want this distro to be the best.
Egbert Jan (NL)

PS I switched from years and years of Mandriva usage to Ubuntu because I got
the impression that Ubuntu developers WERE paying attention to what the
community wants.


> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: 'Soren Hansen' [mailto:soren@ubuntu.com]
> Verzonden: donderdag 25 maart 2010 23:02
> Aan: Egbert Jan
> Onderwerp: Re: Changes in booting with ubuntu-server 10.04
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 10:20:20PM +0100, Egbert Jan wrote:
> > I just expressed my fear that the Good Old boot messages are being
> > replaced by nothing-saying desktop output. IF
> ubuntu/canonical really
> > keeps this new booting as default with no easy install
> option, I'm off
> > to Debian, but with bleeding heart.
>
> I still don't understand your argument. Why do you care
> what's on the VGA output (or not) if you don't have a monitor
> attached to it?
>
> --
> Soren Hansen
> Ubuntu Developer
> http://www.ubuntu.com/
>


--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 03-26-2010, 07:54 AM
carlopmart
 
Default Changes in booting with ubuntu-server 10.04

Egbert Jan wrote:
> Hi again Soren,
>
> Because IF I need to attach a console I do that to catch each and every
> information that could help me find any problems during boot.
>
> I'm from a old era. VAXVMS on DEC mini's. There were only servers and
> character terminals. There were no VGA output devices. I want (and I think
> many with me) the simple all revealing line oriented logging during the boot
> process on a simple serial or console port. No bells, no wistles. If
> something goes wrong during the boot we want to know and have informative
> output at hand on (simple) output devices. Not hidden in high level messages
> in fancy screens.
>
> But what heck, nobody asked to have fancy server bootspash screens on
> servers. If that is the new way of working, fine but just give us the
> possibility to have a boot option to have all starting services scrolling
> over the screen (and hopefully an 'OK' on the right).
>
> No hard feelings, I also want this distro to be the best.
> Egbert Jan (NL)
>
> PS I switched from years and years of Mandriva usage to Ubuntu because I got
> the impression that Ubuntu developers WERE paying attention to what the
> community wants.
>
>

+1 and totally agree with Egbert.

If Ubuntu/Canonical would like to have a serious server ditro, usplash, plymouth and
similiar technologies aren't need on server edition and they were disabled by default.

Server edition needs to be stable, robust, administrable via command line. The
remaining surplus.



--
CL Martinez
carlopmart {at} gmail {d0t} com

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 03-26-2010, 03:57 PM
Thierry Carrez
 
Default Changes in booting with ubuntu-server 10.04

Le 26/03/2010 09:42, Egbert Jan wrote:
> But what heck, nobody asked to have fancy server bootspash screens on
> servers. If that is the new way of working, fine but just give us the
> possibility to have a boot option to have all starting services scrolling
> over the screen (and hopefully an 'OK' on the right).

Please follow status on Launchpad bug 548954:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-meta/+bug/548954

That bug doesn't need comments on how desirable it is, though patches
and testers are always welcome.

--
Thierry Carrez
Technical lead, Ubuntu server team

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 03-26-2010, 04:34 PM
'Soren Hansen'
 
Default Changes in booting with ubuntu-server 10.04

On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 09:42:19AM +0100, Egbert Jan wrote:
> Because IF I need to attach a console I do that to catch each and
> every information that could help me find any problems during boot.

The boot process as it is (and has been for years) already doesn't give
a whole lot of information. You usually have correlate its output with
syslog and/or dmesg and/or deamon specific log files to really narrow
down on a problem.

That said, Plymouth is actually supposed to make this /better/. I'm not
sure if that's going to happen for Lucid (it's not really my area), but
the idea is that since there's something in charge of collecting output
from boot scripts and presenting it to the user, that something can also
put this information in a log file. This means that that anyhing you see
during boot should end up in a log file which should alleviate the need
for looking at the boot sequence.

Yes, that's a lot of "should"'s, but I'm afraid that's all I have right
now. Someone else may be able to weigh in with some more authoritative
information or at least more detail.

> But what heck, nobody asked to have fancy server bootspash screens on
> servers.

That's simply not true. /You/ may not have asked for it, but it's
certainly been asked for. I myself, for instance, don't mind a pretty
boot sequence (brief as it may be).

> PS I switched from years and years of Mandriva usage to Ubuntu because
> I got the impression that Ubuntu developers WERE paying attention to
> what the community wants.

I like to think that we do. However, please consider that the community
is diverse as are its opinions on different matters.

--
Soren Hansen
Ubuntu Developer
http://www.ubuntu.com/
--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 03-26-2010, 05:15 PM
Etienne Goyer
 
Default Changes in booting with ubuntu-server 10.04

'Soren Hansen' wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 09:42:19AM +0100, Egbert Jan wrote:
>> But what heck, nobody asked to have fancy server bootspash screens on
>> servers.
>
> That's simply not true. /You/ may not have asked for it, but it's
> certainly been asked for. I myself, for instance, don't mind a pretty
> boot sequence (brief as it may be).

I have not seen anybody complaining on the look of the Server Edition
boot process either. Was that discussed at a UDS, or something? If so,
I must have missed the blueprint.

Just because of the potential for regressions and unforeseen problems, I
think it is a terrible idea to introduce that feature in an LTS cycle.
I hope it get backed out before release.


--
Etienne Goyer
Technical Account Manager - Canonical Ltd
Ubuntu Certified Instructor - LPIC-3

~= Ubuntu: Linux for Human Beings =~

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 03-26-2010, 06:42 PM
Alvin
 
Default Changes in booting with ubuntu-server 10.04

On Friday 26 March 2010 19:15:09 Etienne Goyer wrote:
> 'Soren Hansen' wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 09:42:19AM +0100, Egbert Jan wrote:
> >> But what heck, nobody asked to have fancy server bootspash screens on
> >> servers.
> >
> > That's simply not true. /You/ may not have asked for it, but it's
> > certainly been asked for. I myself, for instance, don't mind a pretty
> > boot sequence (brief as it may be).
>
> I have not seen anybody complaining on the look of the Server Edition
> boot process either. Was that discussed at a UDS, or something? If so,
> I must have missed the blueprint.
>
> Just because of the potential for regressions and unforeseen problems, I
> think it is a terrible idea to introduce that feature in an LTS cycle.
> I hope it get backed out before release.

I haven't seen the Lucid boot process yet, and that is the sole reason for not
having complained yet. Currently, we lack every form of boot logging. Some
bugs on Launchpad have pictures of the boot process attached to them, taken by
a digital camera.

In Karmic, there were several bugs introduced by mountall/upstart/plymouth.
See the latest comments of https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/470776
Error messages will be hidden by default.
The specific error messages here can sometimes be correct, and sometimes be
wrong. Most people will rather see the source of that problem fixed instead of
covered up with a nice animation.

As a server administrator, I'm not interested in fast boot times, nor in fancy
graphics. I'm interested in reliable booting and knowing what is going on. I'd
like to have upstart because it eliminates the need to set a specific order in
the processes (no more rcX), but I'd never sacrifice reliability for that.

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 03-27-2010, 02:48 PM
"Nikolai K. Bochev"
 
Default Changes in booting with ubuntu-server 10.04

Didn't centos have a boot splash that can show the boot process in a small console window ? Or was it SuSe ?
So you get the pretty booting splash with a nice progress bar, but if you want, you can click on an arrow to open the console and watch the boot process.
It's both "enterprisey" and informative.

----- "Soren Hansen" <soren@ubuntu.com> wrote:

> The boot process as it is (and has been for years) already doesn't
> give
>
> a whole lot of information. You usually have correlate its output with
>
> syslog and/or dmesg and/or deamon specific log files to really narrow
>
> down on a problem.
>
>
>
> That said, Plymouth is actually supposed to make this /better/. I'm
> not
>
> sure if that's going to happen for Lucid (it's not really my area),
> but
>
> the idea is that since there's something in charge of collecting
> output
>
> from boot scripts and presenting it to the user, that something can
> also
>
> put this information in a log file. This means that that anyhing you
> see
>
> during boot should end up in a log file which should alleviate the
> need
>
> for looking at the boot sequence.
>
>
>
> Yes, that's a lot of "should"'s, but I'm afraid that's all I have
> right
>
> now. Someone else may be able to weigh in with some more authoritative
>
> information or at least more detail.


> That's simply not true. /You/ may not have asked for it, but it's
>
> certainly been asked for. I myself, for instance, don't mind a pretty
>
> boot sequence (brief as it may be).


> I like to think that we do. However, please consider that the
> community
>
> is diverse as are its opinions on different matters.

--


Nikolai K. Bochev
System Administrator




--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 03-29-2010, 08:03 AM
Tom Ellis
 
Default Changes in booting with ubuntu-server 10.04

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Nikolai K. Bochev wrote:
> Didn't centos have a boot splash that can show the boot process in a small console window ? Or was it SuSe ?
> So you get the pretty booting splash with a nice progress bar, but if you want, you can click on an arrow to open the console and watch the boot process.
> It's both "enterprisey" and informative.

This was RHGB which has it's own bunch of issues, which Plymouth was
designed to replace. Plymouth is the way forward, but I agree we need to
be able to display some output of the standard init scripts like in
previous releases. Removing splash and quiet increases verbosity of the
boot sequence but I still see zero output from the run of the mill
server services, apache etc.

This may be just a bug with where the output is being redirected,
perhaps we can leverage some of the work in other distributions running
Plymouth to see if the same issue is encountered?

- --
Regards,
Tom Ellis
Premium Service Engineer - Canonical
GPG: EEC4 4552 B57E D9BD 7E57 F7F5 3990 6F7D 063C 355A
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkuwXuAACgkQOZBvfQY8NVrDVwCdGKTKx3xW9D 6xnqmuFnyoyC66
LnEAn27+aeNjK+DImXPJRi2XSOyRF753
=wSeI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 03-29-2010, 09:59 AM
Imre Gergely
 
Default Changes in booting with ubuntu-server 10.04

On 03/29/2010 11:03 AM, Tom Ellis wrote:
> Nikolai K. Bochev wrote:
>> Didn't centos have a boot splash that can show the boot process in a small console window ? Or was it SuSe ?
>> So you get the pretty booting splash with a nice progress bar, but if you want, you can click on an arrow to open the console and watch the boot process.
>> It's both "enterprisey" and informative.
>
> This was RHGB which has it's own bunch of issues, which Plymouth was
> designed to replace. Plymouth is the way forward, but I agree we need to
> be able to display some output of the standard init scripts like in
> previous releases. Removing splash and quiet increases verbosity of the
> boot sequence but I still see zero output from the run of the mill
> server services, apache etc.
>
> This may be just a bug with where the output is being redirected,
> perhaps we can leverage some of the work in other distributions running
> Plymouth to see if the same issue is encountered?

It's not really a server issue, but it could be related to booting. I've
just updated my Karmic to Lucid on my laptop. I have an ecrypted home
partition (with LUKS). I did not install it this way, but converted it
later my hand.

Now with Lucid I have problems on every boot. It asks me for the
password (a nice textbox appears on the splash screen), but then it just
waits there and I have to press S (skip) or M (mount/manual?), which
doesn't work and I get a shell where I can mount it manually.

I tried with nofb and without quiet and splash at the beginning, now it
asks me in text mode, but the same thing happens, it's just sitting
there, after I input the passphrase. I'm not even mentioning that
there's no clear prompt because it's overwritten with other messages /
scrolls up.

Does anybody else have a problem with encrypted partitions at boot time?

--
Imre Gergely
Yahoo!: gergelyimre | ICQ#: 101510959
MSN: gergely_imre | GoogleTalk: gergelyimre
gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 0x34525305

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:53 AM.

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