[gentoo-user] gnomad2 error
Stephen Turner
> send_njb3_command: I/O failure on USB data pipe
hey guys the above is an error i get while running gnomad2 for my zen xtra
i cant get it to work and would rather not use windoze, any suggestions?
this error comes from the command prompt immediately after execution of gnomad2
=====
::: common sense? does it come with a manual?:::
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Thomas Richards
Hash: SHA1
Hello,
I recently decided to build a new gentoo system for xmas. With this
new system, I will be getting a 120GB hard drive. I was contimplating
a partition scheme and I would like some advice.
Currently, I have this worked out:
/boot ext2 10 MB
/var ReiserFS X GB(I was thinking maybe 20? 30? any suggestions?)
/usr/portage ReiserFS 5 GB (i read that rfs is good for small files,
on the forums it suggested this because of updating the portage cache
and most of the files are small, so the process speeds up)
I dont think I'm going to want to make a seperate /home or /usr
partition, but I was thinking of maybe a 10 GB /root partition on ext3
to store important files. Has anyone compared JFS to ext3? I'm
leaning more towards JFS, since I read it does have faster read time.
I would make this as my root partition.
I'm trying to get a system that is flexible for future upgrades(the
large /var for the /var/tmp dir) and general use. I also want to be
able to squeeze as much speed out of this as I can; thats why I'm
using ReiserFS in the /var and /usr/portage. Any comments and
suggestions are welcome. I want to get something set up once, I dont
want to go back and have to resize partitions. Thats why I'm
overestimating the size of my partitions, to allow room for future
storage.
Thank You
Thomas Richards
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQE/6gFCK4gvbg3FdRARAjPdAJ42+gt02Y7r5E+Ktfyt2IBQsTnQagCcDcTv
oXDdvjvOnx/4LGLo6sY0q1w=
=NKb3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Just Modeste
Thomas Richards <t...@g13net.com> wrote:
> I recently decided to build a new gentoo system for xmas. With this
> new system, I will be getting a 120GB hard drive. I was contimplating
> a partition scheme and I would like some advice.
> Currently, I have this worked out:
You can use LVM (or LVM2 with kernel-2.6) for dynamic partitions. You
can resize it when it is smaller...
--
Just Modeste.
"Parce que la Connaissance ne vaut que lorsqu'elle est partagée."
_____________________________________________________________________
Envie de discuter en "live" avec vos amis ? Télécharger MSN Messenger
http://www.ifrance.com/_reloc/m la 1ère messagerie instantanée de France
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Thomas Richards
Hash: SHA1
I didnt know about LVM before, it looks very interesting. I think I'm
going to try it out.
Tom
Just Modeste wrote:
| On Wed, 24 Dec 2003 21:12:34 +0000 Thomas Richards <t...@g13net.com>
| wrote:
|
|> I recently decided to build a new gentoo system for xmas. With
|> this new system, I will be getting a 120GB hard drive. I was
|> contimplating a partition scheme and I would like some advice.
|> Currently, I have this worked out:
|
|
| You can use LVM (or LVM2 with kernel-2.6) for dynamic partitions.
| You can resize it when it is smaller...
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQE/6g1AK4gvbg3FdRARAkWFAKCuWscEGxcWlz2l8f8FY+1Pk4a9hACfXIX+
ewJejpTnGu+dWV/veMc7DAo=
=YFD5
Spider
you have 120 gb, use at least 32 mb here. or you'll regret it when you
want to try out things (oh, new bootloader with some cute games in it?
perhaps initrd with a mini-safe system on it for... ) just in case.
> /var ReiserFS X GB(I was thinking maybe 20? 30? any suggestions?)
/var ~512Mb - 1Gb, i prefer ext3, theres no performance horse
necessary there. you want stability in "append" functions mostly.
/var/tmp : ext2, No need for a journal at all. ~5-8 Gb is quite
enough even if you dont clean it out. ext2 is still by far the fastest
filesystem.
And frankly, you don't care about "oh i must retain all data if power
goes" on /var/tmp .. the thing you do mostly there is compile. "oops"
if its lost ; )
> /usr/portage ReiserFS 5 GB (i read that rfs is good for small files,
> on the forums it suggested this because of updating the portage cache
> and most of the files are small, so the process speeds up)
I suggest ext2 here too. All the data can be recovered from the net, so
you dont gain anything from a journal. And once more, performance is
better on ext2 ;)
> I dont think I'm going to want to make a seperate /home or /usr
> partition, but I was thinking of maybe a 10 GB /root partition on ext3
> to store important files. Has anyone compared JFS to ext3? I'm
> leaning more towards JFS, since I read it does have faster read time.
> I would make this as my root partition.
Separate /home from / , you have far more write activity in /home, so
you want that separated. and it makes for a better upgrade path when you
move systems, or try out another root partition (reinstalling Gentoo,
testing the new flashy distro on a small partition? ) as its just to
mount /home and all is there as you want it.
//Spider
--
begin .signature
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature!
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end
Thomas Richards
Hash: SHA1
Hmm yea, come to think of it your suggestions make more sense. I
still think I'm going to try out LVM. I'm just leary of setting
limits on the partitions(paranoid thinking in the future nut). I
will take yer suggestion and create a /home and a / partition. Any
suggestion on why I should use JFS over ext3 or vice versa?
Tom
Spider wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQE/6hpgK4gvbg3FdRARAtPMAJ94C25jZgIH4RSaoqXQe2qNxTy2wACggRbE
9vnWgY9qfhkgF1Xfy3wwU/E=
=hCx7
Collins
> Hello,
>
> I was thinking of maybe a 10 GB /root partition on ext3
> to store important files. Has anyone compared JFS to ext3?
Can't help you with JFS, but I'm an EXT3 fan. Many of my correspondents on
the linux-users list prefer XFS over anything else, but it's not available
without getting patches until 2.6 (there are plans to merge it into 2.4), I
just completed a reiserfs install on a SUSE system and found the journal
trashed a couple of days later, so I've written that one off.
Unless you are putting up a heavy duty server, I don't think you'll notice a
real speed difference with any of these fs. I've used EXT3 almost since its
beginning without any problems.
Enjoy your new machine.
--
Collins
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Ben Calvert
> On Wednesday 24 December 2003 13:12, Thomas Richards wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I was thinking of maybe a 10 GB /root partition on ext3
> > to store important files. Has anyone compared JFS to ext3?
I tried jfs on a recent install and had lots of strange behavior. perhaps I
set something up wrong, but I had to manually fsck the thing ( after clean
shutdowns ) at every boot. I gave up after a week and went back to reiser.
>
> Can't help you with JFS, but I'm an EXT3 fan. Many of my correspondents on
> the linux-users list prefer XFS over anything else, but it's not available
> without getting patches until 2.6 (there are plans to merge it into 2.4),
XFS is great, as long as you have a seperate power source for your drives, and
a battery back up in the raid controller. Otherwise, you _will_ suffer
dataloss when your machine gets hardbooted. strange, inexplicable loss in
files that wern't even open when the machine went down.
> I just completed a reiserfs install on a SUSE system and found the journal
> trashed a couple of days later, so I've written that one off.
This is the first bad thing i've heard about reiser in a long time, but i'll
take your word for it. was the journal on the same drive?
>
> Unless you are putting up a heavy duty server, I don't think you'll notice
> a real speed difference with any of these fs. I've used EXT3 almost since
> its beginning without any problems.
I have to agree that ext3 is the safest option out there. ( barring ufs2 with
softupdates :)
>
> Enjoy your new machine.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Spider
> Any suggestion on why I should use JFS over ext3 or vice versa?
>
Not really, overall I advice against ReiserFS because of their horrid
recovery-tools. Jfs I've had mixed success with but overall it felt
good. I haven't evaluated xfs because so far it hasn't been mainline
when I've started to work on repartitioning.
Ext3 isn't the fastest in the race, but it has a darn good support team.
That matters a lot for me.
Robert Crawford
> Not really, overall I advice against ReiserFS because of their horrid
> recovery-tools. Jfs I've had mixed success with but overall it felt
> good. I haven't evaluated xfs because so far it hasn't been mainline
> when I've started to work on repartitioning.
>
> Ext3 isn't the fastest in the race, but it has a darn good support team.
> That matters a lot for me.
> //Spider
I've been following this discussion, and must differ with Spider, even though
I'm sure he knows much more Linux than I do. At least in my case
(desktop/home usage box), I originally used ext2/3. About a year ago, I
switched all my boxes over to reiserfs, and the improvement in responsiveness
and overall speed was, in a word, drastic- so much so that I would never
consider going back ( I do use ext3 on my Gentoo /boot partition).
I've never lost one bit of data when having to do a reboot after a lockup (I
do lots of kernel and app testing with Gentoo ~x86 systems, and Mandrake
cooker). The reiserfs journaling has always worked perfectly for me. I do
work with generally small files, which reiser is suppose to excel at.
I generally defer to Spider's expertise, but since it became clear that he was
not a reiserfs fan, I thought I'd offer a different opinion, based on my
personal experience with reiserfs. As usual, YMMV, and reiserfs might not be
the best choice in all cases.
Robert Crawford
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Thomas Richards
Hash: SHA1
I would like to thank all of you for your input :) Its things like
this that make Gentoo so great. Do to shipping errors, i wont have my
new case for atleast another couple of days. So its just that much
longer until I can actually get my system up. I wish all of you a
Merry Christmas :)
Tom
|
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQE/6q2ZK4gvbg3FdRARAnDMAJ9vzLSRVI00+WVpEKG9qmrbW+GSCQCfUx/V
rK83vvcGUSWcC4gmNeW3AwI=
=ZpXI
Rudmer van Dijk
i second that, ReiserFS is a great filesystem and I use it for all my boxes as
the primary filesystem. Never had trouble with it, and I used about every
kernel from 2.5.0 through 2.6.0.
The only downside is with my mailer: kmail, it is really slow on opening a
Maildir mailbox. But that is is problem of kamil and _not_ the filesystem!
Rudmer
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Spider
> On Thursday 25 December 2003 8:43 am, Spider wrote:
>
> > Not really, overall I advice against ReiserFS because of their
> > horrid recovery-tools. Jfs I've had mixed success with but overall
> > it felt good. I haven't evaluated xfs because so far it hasn't been
> > mainline when I've started to work on repartitioning.
> >
> > Ext3 isn't the fastest in the race, but it has a darn good support
> > team.
> > That matters a lot for me.
> > //Spider
>
rationale for ext2 vs reiserfs for /usr/portage and /var/tmp comes from
benchmarking tests, here :
http://fsbench.netnation.com/
Compare this fex :
http://fsbench.netnation.com/new_hardware/2.6.0-test9/scsi/bonnie.html
You want to look at the 50k tables (mid page) where they are fairly well
tied, except when you look at %CPU.
Reiserfs has a -horrid- way of dealing with the processor, and requires
a lot of cpu munching.
> I've never lost one bit of data when having to do a reboot after a
> lockup (I do lots of kernel and app testing with Gentoo ~x86 systems,
> and Mandrake cooker).
Look one thread above this, subject:
Subject: [gentoo-user] ReiserFSCK woes
> The reiserfs journaling has always worked perfectly for me. I do work
> with generally small files, which reiser is suppose to excel at. I
> generally defer to Spider's expertise, but since it became clear that
> he was not a reiserfs fan, I thought I'd offer a different opinion,
> based on my personal experience with reiserfs. As usual, YMMV, and
> reiserfs might not be the best choice in all cases.
Reiser has its uses, for a squid cache server fex. But I wouldn't put
it even near a partition with data I value. it may be "stable" for
users, and so on. that doesn't matter if the fsck tools are so horridly
handicapped that they cannot recover data without forcibly rebuilding
the tree.
Try doing "emerge sync" wait until its mid-process and press
alt+sysrq+b. (cvs up is actually worse ;7 ) .
As said, I ran reiserfs for a while, but won't ever do it again because
of how it cannot recover when it goes down the drain.
And if you really want to know how bad, dislodge the IDE cable some
while you're working on the disk. (I dont guarantee the drive will
survive though ;). you get udma crc errors... keep working as you
don't notice your disk does that, emerge -u system is a good thing since
you left it overnight...
Then come back, reinsert cable, reboot, and watch the show.
put short: Reiser has performance, but uses CPU power more than
anything (not good when compiling). And it can't recover data once
things really go down the drain.
Collins
> XFS is great, as long as you have a seperate power source for your drives,
> and a battery back up in the raid controller. Otherwise, you _will_ suffer
> dataloss when your machine gets hardbooted. strange, inexplicable loss in
> files that wern't even open when the machine went down.
>
Just goes to show what a personal thing a fs is. Many like resierfs, but I've
experienced little but grief from it (two attempts over several years). I've
read a few comments here and there that ext3 is not totally stable, but I
haven't had any problems (power failures included) over several years. My
friends on linux-users maintain that any xfs problems with power outages were
fixed years ago (which doesn't stop the official gentoo documentation from
following this line) and probably were most probably due to selecting
unfortunate options for xfs in the first place I've brought up comments like
these on the linux-users list, but they just laugh while successfully running
major servers with xfs..
Collins
On Thursday 25 December 2003 07:26, Spider wrote:
> begin quote
> On Thu, 25 Dec 2003 09:32:20 -0500
>
> Robert Crawford <flac...@access4less.net> wrote:
> > On Thursday 25 December 2003 8:43 am, Spider wrote:
> > > Not really, overall I advice against ReiserFS because of their
> > > horrid recovery-tools.
> > > Ext3 isn't the fastest in the race, but it has a darn good support
> > > team.
> > > That matters a lot for me.
>
>
> Reiserfs has a -horrid- way of dealing with the processor, and requires
> a lot of cpu munching.
>
> Reiser has its uses ... But I wouldn't put
> it even near a partition with data I value. it may be "stable" for
> users, and so on. that doesn't matter if the fsck tools are so horridly
> handicapped that they cannot recover data without forcibly rebuilding
> the tree.
>
> As said, I ran reiserfs for a while, but won't ever do it again because
> of how it cannot recover when it goes down the drain.
>
> put short: Reiser has performance, but uses CPU power more than
> anything (not good when compiling). And it can't recover data once
> things really go down the drain.
>
Sort of sums up my most recenta experience. I didn't even suffer a power
outage. I deleted an reorganized some partitions following the resier
partition (root partition for a SUSE 9.0 system), then shutdown normally.
When I booted again, reiser believed that the partition origin had changed (it
had not; same starting/ending cylinder as before), refused to decode the
super block, marked the partition as readonly, and subsequently failed the
rebuild tree, etc. Nothing would make th journal usable again. Fortunately
most of the daa in my /home directory was intact, so I was able to copy off
the data I needed and to reinstall using ext3 without a major loss. Needless
to say, this experience (never encountered using ext3) left a sour taste in
my mouth, It may well be that I don't understand reiser well enough and that
I made some simple screwup that contributed to the problem, but I, too, would
"never again put it near data I value."