hick518
-
Posts
76 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by hick518
-
-
-
Thanks for the pointer, cardinal.
Here's what I've done:
'emerge genkernel'
'genkernel --lvm initramfs'
Edited /etc/boot.conf:
added 'dolvm' to parms, like this: params += dolvm real_root=auto rootfstype=auto
updated initrd line, like this: initrd initramfs-genkernel-x86-3.19.3-1~exp1
'boot-update'
I checked /boot/grub/grub.cfg and it looks good to me. Unfortunately I'm getting the same errors as before. My system boots, but it mounts /usr late in the boot process.
I've tried several variations of the params line, including hard-coding real_root and rootfstype instead of setting them to 'auto'. Nothing has worked so far. Am I doing something wrong or is this a bug?
-
I'm running the debian-sources kernel. I have put /usr on an lvm partition. I get the following messages during boot:
Mounting /dev/vg1/usr as /usr: mount -t ext4 -o noatime,ro /dev/vg1/usr /newroot/usr
mount: mounting /dev/vg1/usr on /newroot/usr failed: No such file or directory
!! Unable to mount /dev/vg1/usr for /usr
>> Booting (initramfs)..
and then later:
Setting up the Logical Volume Manager ...
/etc/init.d/device-mapper: line 65: uniq: command not found
/etc/init.d/device-mapper: line 64: awk: command not found
/etc/init.d/device-mapper: line 64: awk: command not found
/etc/init.d/device-mapper: line 65: uniq: command not found
Awk and uniq are in /usr/bin, so /usr must not be mounted yet. Then:
/dev/mapper/vg1-usr: clean, 145293/327680 files, 645590/1310720 blocks
And /usr ends up mounted by the time the system boots.
I'm guessing initramfs is my answer. Debian-sources provides an initramfs file, but I'm not sure if it supports lvm and I'm not sure what to specify in grub. I tried adding 'lvm' to the boot parameters, but that didn't change anything as far as I could tell.
-
And this is what it looks like when you pile on way too much crap...



- aryvandaar and Deklan?
-
2
-
-
How can I find out the reason a particular package is masked (as determined by 'emerge -s lxqt-meta')?
On my stable generic_64 system, lxqt-meta is masked. But on my current generic_64 system and my stable pentium4 system, it is not. Same thing goes for the media-tv/kodi package. So I'm wondering if I've screwed up my stable generic_64 system somehow, and if there's some way to verify the reason these packages are masked.
-
I'm running Funtoo stable as a desktop. I'm curious about how long I can go in between updates. Is there some practical limit where it becomes difficult to perform an update if the system is too old?
I would like to regularly update security-related stuff (openssh, firefox, etc), and do a full update only yearly or so. Is this feasible, or am I asking for trouble?
-
I filed an "Improvement": https://bugs.funtoo.org/browse/FL-2462
-
I noticed that there is no /etc/issue file in a default install of Funtoo stable. Is this an error, or is it intended? Or perhaps there is a package I must install to get this file?
Of course I could create this file manually, but most Linux distros I'm familiar with will provide this. I use this file in my .vimrc file to make certain settings depending on the distro I'm using vim on. Is there something besides /etc/issue that I could/should be using to do this?
-
-
Thanks for the suggestions, swamprabbit and sputnik.
Is there somewhere I can get a list of all the possible USE flags? Edit: Nevermind. I found this at /usr/portage/profiles/use.desc and us.local.desc.
And sputnik -- yes, LXDE is Openbox with some extra stuff pre-configured (a panel, wallpaper, some recommended apps, etc.)
-
What does the ':0' mean in the following packages?
lxsession:0
libgee:0
Google isn't that great at searching for punctuation marks, unfortunately.
The reason I'm asking is because 'emerge -auDN @world' on my funtoo stable system is complaining about not being able to install these packages. But there is an lxsession and libgee -- both without the ':0' -- so I'm wondering what the difference is.
-
I plan to install Funtoo on some low-spec hardware (a P4 laptop with 512MB of RAM). It will have the LXDE desktop, a web browser, LibreOffice, and not much else running on it. I will be running "stable" rather than "current", in an effort to reduce the amount of updates I see.
Are there any suggestions for minimizing compile times? Any USE flags I should be specifying to strip out unneeded features? Any clever use of of package sets to avoid updating packages that are not security-related?
I'm brand new to Funtoo, so I might be missing some obvious techniques. Don't be afraid to insult me with basic suggestions.
-
The bug was fixed and closed so fast that I didn't have time to thank the devs. Thanks guys!
-
-
My reason for wanting to use stable is that I hope to install Funtoo on several old machines. I am hoping to minimize the impact of compiling updates on these underpowered machines. Some might say that a source distribution is not right for my purposes, but I have other reasons for wanting to use Funtoo.
Is there a guide or list of recommendations for running a Funtoo desktop on older hardware?
Is "current" recommended only because that's what the developers expect most Funtoo users would want? Or is there a problem with using "stable" which causes it to be not recommended?
-
Is it possible to switch from the "current" build to "stable"?
I am running into problems installing stable, but current installs fine. So I am considering installing current, then running 'epro build stable' before installing any additional packages.
Is this expected to work, or am I asking for trouble?




LDAP Authentication using LXDM
in General Discussion
Posted
I configured a Funtoo laptop to authenticate to an LDAP server that has been in use for years and is known to work. I can ssh to the Funtoo system as any LDAP user. But I cannot log in via LXDM as an LDAP user, with one exception:
"user1" was a locally-created user, but once LDAP authentication was set up, "user1" was removed. "user1" exists as an LDAP user, but with a different UID and GID. "user1" is now the only LDAP user who can log in via LXDM.
I don't know if it's significant that "user1" was previously a local user, or that he had previously logged in via LXDM as a local user. But it's the only difference I can think of between him and the other LDAP users who cannot log in via LXDM.
Any ideas?
By the way, I am also running sssd for offline logins. But my testing was done while I had a network connection and could access the LDAP server.