[gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Nuno Magalhães]

Hello Gentoo World,


TL;DR warning

I've tested Gentoo and liked it, tried to tune it a bit and borked it. :)

I want to use mdadm to create a RAID1 with 2 SATA disks. From what i
gather, i'll need (bootable)  0xFD partitions, i'll use full disk for
them and no separate /boot (unless required). Is GPT required or can i
stick to MBR? Is fdisk safe? Seems usable to me.

Is 0.90 metadata mandatory for RAID1? What's the recommended version?

I've seen manuals that use mknode, but discovered that mdadm --create
will create a /dev/md for me. (Later i want to get rid of systemd-udev
and use eudev instead.)
Also, why so many tty* and similar in /dev? Is there a way to make it
less crowded? Just a whim...

Does GRUB2 (rather grub2-install) handle well RAID1 stuff or does it
get confused?

What's the difference between dodmraid and domdadm? I don't want to
use fakeraid, so is it safe to just use domdadm?

Then i want to use LVM on the /dev/md and setup my / in an LV. This
seems straightforward (as far as creation goes). Any tips here? I
remember you could tune LVM LVs to the underlying RAID stripe.

I intend to use XFS for /. Incidentally, if i later decide to "fork
out" /usr (or some other subdirectory) into it's own LV, is it "just"
a mater of copying its contents and updating /etc/fstab? Or should i
just do it now and expand the LVs if later required (especially if i
want to use different filesystems)?

The problem will be (has been) getting it to boot.

If i have 2 kernels in /boot, shouldn't grub2-mkconfig generate 2
entries in the GRUB boot menu (not counting the recovery entries)?

I read somewhere that genkernel is a bad choice for creating the
kernel because it un/sets a CONFIG_ flag that interferes with RAID/LVM
(sorry, i should've noted where/what). I use make menuconfig anyway,
it's fun. I do use genkernel to create the initramfs, i'm assuming
"genkernel --lvm --mdadm --bootloader=grub --install initramfs" would
suffice?

I'm assuming the key will be to make sure /etc/mdadm.conf has the
ARRAY= line and that GRUB has the right parameters in
/etc/default/grub, like
GRUB_PRELOAD_MODULES=raid,lvm
Or mdraid09? Where do these come from, /etc/grub/i386pc? Mine's an
amd64 but that's the only directory i could find.
GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX_DEFAULT="domdadm dolvm rootfstype=xfs"

Are there any USE flags i should be aware of? Currently i'm gonna go
with USE="bindist 3dnow 3dnowext mmx mmxext popcnt sse sse2 sse3 sse4a
smp ssl unicode -avahi -pulseaudio -selinux -gnome -kde -systemd
-bluetooth -ieee1394 -networkmanager -fortran"
Plus CPU_FLAGS_X86 based on an emerge news item about processor flags.
Neither RAID nor LVM should have an impact, application-wise.

While the Handbook is awesome, it doesn't cover this and all the
information i find is either outdated or conflicting. I had a similar
setup with Debian Wheezy on this same hardware, but that was done
through the debian installer, nifty and under the hood.


Incidentally, the hardware's an Asus M2NPV-VM with 4 SATA II disks.
It's my desktop, not mission-critical, but i want to make the most of
it.

Thanks for the patience and feedback (and the distro!) :)

Cheers,
Nuno

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Peter Humphrey]

On Sunday 17 May 2015 12:48:58 Nuno Magalhães wrote:

> I want to use mdadm to create a RAID1 with 2 SATA disks. From what i
> gather, i'll need (bootable)  0xFD partitions, i'll use full disk for
> them and no separate /boot (unless required). Is GPT required or can i
> stick to MBR? Is fdisk safe? Seems usable to me.

Use this guide:

https://wwwold.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-x86+raid+lvm2-quickinstall.xml

> Is 0.90 metadata mandatory for RAID1? What's the recommended version?

You need 0.90 metadata for any volume that needs to be bootable, unless you 
use what Dale calls an init thingy. I don't do that, and this is my setup:

/boot on /dev/md1 = /dev/sd[ab]1 in RAID1 with metadata 0.90.
/ on /dev/md5 = /dev/sd[ab]5 in RAID1 with metadata 0.90.
[the rest] on /dev/md7 = /dev/sd[ab]7 in RAID1 with metadata > 1.0.

> I've seen manuals that use mknode, but discovered that mdadm --create
> will create a /dev/md for me.

I didn't know that. Interesting.

> (Later i want to get rid of systemd-udev and use eudev instead.)

I use openrc, not systemd. It still works well and has less complication - and 
less typing!

> Also, why so many tty* and similar in /dev? Is there a way to make it
> less crowded? Just a whim...

I tried removing them but found they'd been re-created after the next boot. Ho 
hum.

> Does GRUB2 (rather grub2-install) handle well RAID1 stuff or does it
> get confused?

Don't know. I use legacy-grub. The last I looked, grub-2 couldn't handle the 
choice of kernels I have.

> What's the difference between dodmraid and domdadm? I don't want to
> use fakeraid, so is it safe to just use domdadm?

I think so, yes. As far as I know, dmraid is fake raid.

> Then i want to use LVM on the /dev/md and setup my / in an LV. This
> seems straightforward (as far as creation goes). Any tips here? I
> remember you could tune LVM LVs to the underlying RAID stripe.

I just followed the quick-installation guide.

> I intend to use XFS for /. Incidentally, if i later decide to "fork
> out" /usr (or some other subdirectory) into it's own LV, is it "just"
> a mater of copying its contents and updating /etc/fstab? Or should i
> just do it now and expand the LVs if later required (especially if i
> want to use different filesystems)?

I can't help you with XFS. I know that ext4 in an LV in a VG in a PV on RAID1 
works reliably, even though it does look complex when I write it like that.

> The problem will be (has been) getting it to boot.
> 
> If i have 2 kernels in /boot, shouldn't grub2-mkconfig generate 2
> entries in the GRUB boot menu (not counting the recovery entries)?
> 
> I read somewhere that genkernel is a bad choice for creating the
> kernel because it un/sets a CONFIG_ flag that interferes with RAID/LVM
> (sorry, i should've noted where/what). I use make menuconfig anyway,
> it's fun. I do use genkernel to create the initramfs, i'm assuming
> "genkernel --lvm --mdadm --bootloader=grub --install initramfs" would
> suffice?

Again, legacy grub here. But if you're using an initramfs, from what I've seen 
you don't need to specify metadata 0.90.

--->8

> While the Handbook is awesome, it doesn't cover this and all the
> information i find is either outdated or conflicting.

I reinstalled yesterday while following the guide I cited.

Damn. I've just checked and something has renamed my /dev/md7 to 
/dev/md127. Again. It's just too bad. I shall have to stop it when I get a 
quiet moment and reassemble it into /dev/md7. Actually, I know what caused 
it but I didn't notice at the time.

HTH.

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Rich Freeman]

Just a few clarifications below.

One thing this discussion is missing is any mention of BIOS / EFI.
Most of the discussion below seems most relevant to a legacy BIOS
installation.  Many specialized Gentoo install docs, like mdadm+lvm,
don't really make mention of EFI, or other more recent developments.
Now that all the docs are on the wiki I'd strongly encourage anybody
with an interest to improve them.  Many seasoned Gentoo users barely
reference the documentation these days and I think that is part of why
they've become a bit dated.

A few of the topics below are somewhat controversial, particularly on
this list.  I tried to stick to the facts and indicate where there is
a difference of opinion.  I'd prefer not to rehash all the various
debates...

On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sunday 17 May 2015 12:48:58 Nuno Magalhães wrote:
>
>> (Later i want to get rid of systemd-udev and use eudev instead.)
>
> I use openrc, not systemd. It still works well and has less complication - and
> less typing!

Most people using openrc are also using systemd-udev (and there is a
good chance you do too).  The latter was previously named udev and
long predates what most people call systemd.  Eudev is a fork of udev,
which comes from after it came under the systemd umbrella, but before
the name change and a number of changes that were controversial.  I
believe they try to incorporate many of the patches from systemd-udev
but some default behaviors are different.

In any case, I just wanted to clarify that systemd-udev is not the
"systemd" you're probably thinking of.  In particular, it doesn't
replace openrc or sysvinit.  Systemd-udev largely is concerned with
populating /dev, and running initialization of hardware when it is
detected, based on a configurable set of rules.

>
>> I intend to use XFS for /. Incidentally, if i later decide to "fork
>> out" /usr (or some other subdirectory) into it's own LV, is it "just"
>> a mater of copying its contents and updating /etc/fstab? Or should i
>> just do it now and expand the LVs if later required (especially if i
>> want to use different filesystems)?
>
> I can't help you with XFS. I know that ext4 in an LV in a VG in a PV on RAID1
> works reliably, even though it does look complex when I write it like that.

As far as LVM and xfs themselves go, you can do what you propose.

However, Gentoo QA policy is that it is expected that /usr is mounted
early in boot.  Various tools can break if it is not.  Typically this
is the responsibility of an initramfs, however you can also use
scripts that run early during initialization from / which mount it.
If you just stick /usr in fstab and rely on openrc to mount it for you
normally, you may or may not have problems.

It has been a long time since I actually used such a system in this
manner with Gentoo, but the last I saw discussion on it most who used
this configuration found it usually worked fine, unless you were using
something like a bluetooth keyboard or other key system component that
required a lot of userspace tooling to make work.  However, as a
matter of policy you're on your own if you choose not to mount /usr
early during boot in some way.

The reason it is not supported is that with the rise of things like
bluetooth the list of dependencies possibly required during early boot
has grown to the point where we'd end up not even having a /usr before
long.  My sense is that for the most part most maintainers tend to
respect the traditional definition of / and /usr on Gentoo, and thus
you can often get away with doing things the traditional way.
However, the policy does allow us to end debates over things like udev
rules invoking some userspace tool in /usr and such.  Some packages
more strongly depend on /usr being installed in early boot, and there
have been suggestions (but nothing concrete) that Gentoo consider
supporting the /usr-move that other distros have embraced (and that
would basically get rid of /lib, /bin, and so on).

>
> Again, legacy grub here. But if you're using an initramfs, from what I've seen
> you don't need to specify metadata 0.90.

I used to use grub legacy and kernel RAID auto-assembly.  As a result
I was using metadata 0.90.

I found this configuration problematic on rare occasions.  There is a
reason that mdadm changed the metadata, and why most distros don't do
it this way.  (more below)

>
> Damn. I've just checked and something has renamed my /dev/md7 to
> /dev/md127. Again. It's just too bad. I shall have to stop it when I get a
> quiet moment and reassemble it into /dev/md7. Actually, I know what caused
> it but I didn't notice at the time.

And this was one of the configuration problems I ran into on rare
occasion.  Often booting from a rescue CD or such caused something
like this to happen.

One of the advantages of using an initramfs is that they can be a lot
smarter about finding your partitions.  You can identify them by UUID
or label, and not care as much if mdadm or the kernel renames your
device nodes.

I'd seriously take a look at dracut, though I don't know if it works
with eudev.  It certainly should support openrc, and I know that it
did back when I was running openrc.  It can also mount /usr for you,
and in fact it should automatically do so.  It also respects your
fstab - it uses its internal logic and the kernel boot line to
initially find filesystems, but then it reads your /etc/fstab and
remounts everything as you define it there just in case something has
changed since the last time you built the initramfs/etc.  You can
define your own modules for it which makes it reasonably easy to get
it to do anything at all during early boot, and it doesn't require
anything to be built static (it finds required shared objects anywhere
on the filesystem and includes them in the initramfs).  It can also
give you a rescue shell if something goes wrong, and depending on your
settings you can make that rescue shell reasonably well-featured
(using either dash or bash as you prefer inside, and I imagine you
could tell it to install the other on the side).  A while ago I needed
to run some btrfs tools that aren't in dracut by default and it was
trivial to tell dracut to include them, and I forced a shell on next
boot which gave me the latest tools and kernel without having to build
a rescue CD with them, and a bash shell to run them from.

It certainly isn't necessary to use an initramfs to use Gentoo, and I
used to be among the more minimalist crowd that avoided them.
However, once I took the time to examine dracut it went from being a
blob that looked unnecessary to a tool that is often useful.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[covici]

Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Just a few clarifications below.
> 
> One thing this discussion is missing is any mention of BIOS / EFI.
> Most of the discussion below seems most relevant to a legacy BIOS
> installation.  Many specialized Gentoo install docs, like mdadm+lvm,
> don't really make mention of EFI, or other more recent developments.
> Now that all the docs are on the wiki I'd strongly encourage anybody
> with an interest to improve them.  Many seasoned Gentoo users barely
> reference the documentation these days and I think that is part of why
> they've become a bit dated.
> 
> A few of the topics below are somewhat controversial, particularly on
> this list.  I tried to stick to the facts and indicate where there is
> a difference of opinion.  I'd prefer not to rehash all the various
> debates...
> 
> On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Sunday 17 May 2015 12:48:58 Nuno Magalhães wrote:
> >
> >> (Later i want to get rid of systemd-udev and use eudev instead.)
> >
> > I use openrc, not systemd. It still works well and has less complication - and
> > less typing!
> 
> Most people using openrc are also using systemd-udev (and there is a
> good chance you do too).  The latter was previously named udev and
> long predates what most people call systemd.  Eudev is a fork of udev,
> which comes from after it came under the systemd umbrella, but before
> the name change and a number of changes that were controversial.  I
> believe they try to incorporate many of the patches from systemd-udev
> but some default behaviors are different.
> 
> In any case, I just wanted to clarify that systemd-udev is not the
> "systemd" you're probably thinking of.  In particular, it doesn't
> replace openrc or sysvinit.  Systemd-udev largely is concerned with
> populating /dev, and running initialization of hardware when it is
> detected, based on a configurable set of rules.
> 
> >
> >> I intend to use XFS for /. Incidentally, if i later decide to "fork
> >> out" /usr (or some other subdirectory) into it's own LV, is it "just"
> >> a mater of copying its contents and updating /etc/fstab? Or should i
> >> just do it now and expand the LVs if later required (especially if i
> >> want to use different filesystems)?
> >
> > I can't help you with XFS. I know that ext4 in an LV in a VG in a PV on RAID1
> > works reliably, even though it does look complex when I write it like that.
> 
> As far as LVM and xfs themselves go, you can do what you propose.
> 
> However, Gentoo QA policy is that it is expected that /usr is mounted
> early in boot.  Various tools can break if it is not.  Typically this
> is the responsibility of an initramfs, however you can also use
> scripts that run early during initialization from / which mount it.
> If you just stick /usr in fstab and rely on openrc to mount it for you
> normally, you may or may not have problems.
> 
> It has been a long time since I actually used such a system in this
> manner with Gentoo, but the last I saw discussion on it most who used
> this configuration found it usually worked fine, unless you were using
> something like a bluetooth keyboard or other key system component that
> required a lot of userspace tooling to make work.  However, as a
> matter of policy you're on your own if you choose not to mount /usr
> early during boot in some way.
> 
> The reason it is not supported is that with the rise of things like
> bluetooth the list of dependencies possibly required during early boot
> has grown to the point where we'd end up not even having a /usr before
> long.  My sense is that for the most part most maintainers tend to
> respect the traditional definition of / and /usr on Gentoo, and thus
> you can often get away with doing things the traditional way.
> However, the policy does allow us to end debates over things like udev
> rules invoking some userspace tool in /usr and such.  Some packages
> more strongly depend on /usr being installed in early boot, and there
> have been suggestions (but nothing concrete) that Gentoo consider
> supporting the /usr-move that other distros have embraced (and that
> would basically get rid of /lib, /bin, and so on).
> 
> >
> > Again, legacy grub here. But if you're using an initramfs, from what I've seen
> > you don't need to specify metadata 0.90.
> 
> I used to use grub legacy and kernel RAID auto-assembly.  As a result
> I was using metadata 0.90.
> 
> I found this configuration problematic on rare occasions.  There is a
> reason that mdadm changed the metadata, and why most distros don't do
> it this way.  (more below)
> 
> >
> > Damn. I've just checked and something has renamed my /dev/md7 to
> > /dev/md127. Again. It's just too bad. I shall have to stop it when I get a
> > quiet moment and reassemble it into /dev/md7. Actually, I know what caused
> > it but I didn't notice at the time.
> 
> And this was one of the configuration problems I ran into on rare
> occasion.  Often booting from a rescue CD or such caused something
> like this to happen.
> 
> One of the advantages of using an initramfs is that they can be a lot
> smarter about finding your partitions.  You can identify them by UUID
> or label, and not care as much if mdadm or the kernel renames your
> device nodes.
> 
> I'd seriously take a look at dracut, though I don't know if it works
> with eudev.  It certainly should support openrc, and I know that it
> did back when I was running openrc.  It can also mount /usr for you,
> and in fact it should automatically do so.  It also respects your
> fstab - it uses its internal logic and the kernel boot line to
> initially find filesystems, but then it reads your /etc/fstab and
> remounts everything as you define it there just in case something has
> changed since the last time you built the initramfs/etc.  You can
> define your own modules for it which makes it reasonably easy to get
> it to do anything at all during early boot, and it doesn't require
> anything to be built static (it finds required shared objects anywhere
> on the filesystem and includes them in the initramfs).  It can also
> give you a rescue shell if something goes wrong, and depending on your
> settings you can make that rescue shell reasonably well-featured
> (using either dash or bash as you prefer inside, and I imagine you
> could tell it to install the other on the side).  A while ago I needed
> to run some btrfs tools that aren't in dracut by default and it was
> trivial to tell dracut to include them, and I forced a shell on next
> boot which gave me the latest tools and kernel without having to build
> a rescue CD with them, and a bash shell to run them from.
> 
> It certainly isn't necessary to use an initramfs to use Gentoo, and I
> used to be among the more minimalist crowd that avoided them.
> However, once I took the time to examine dracut it went from being a
> blob that looked unnecessary to a tool that is often useful.

Last time I tried to use dracut with openrc, it failed, I can't remember
exactly what happened, I think udev did hang, but its been a while since
this happened.  Dracut uses systemd internally, so maybe this is part of
the problem.

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Canek Peláez Valdés]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7938 bytes --]

On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 10:35 AM, <covici@ccs.covici.com> wrote:
>
> Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> > Just a few clarifications below.
> >
> > One thing this discussion is missing is any mention of BIOS / EFI.
> > Most of the discussion below seems most relevant to a legacy BIOS
> > installation.  Many specialized Gentoo install docs, like mdadm+lvm,
> > don't really make mention of EFI, or other more recent developments.
> > Now that all the docs are on the wiki I'd strongly encourage anybody
> > with an interest to improve them.  Many seasoned Gentoo users barely
> > reference the documentation these days and I think that is part of why
> > they've become a bit dated.
> >
> > A few of the topics below are somewhat controversial, particularly on
> > this list.  I tried to stick to the facts and indicate where there is
> > a difference of opinion.  I'd prefer not to rehash all the various
> > debates...
> >
> > On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk>
wrote:
> > > On Sunday 17 May 2015 12:48:58 Nuno Magalhães wrote:
> > >
> > >> (Later i want to get rid of systemd-udev and use eudev instead.)
> > >
> > > I use openrc, not systemd. It still works well and has less
complication - and
> > > less typing!
> >
> > Most people using openrc are also using systemd-udev (and there is a
> > good chance you do too).  The latter was previously named udev and
> > long predates what most people call systemd.  Eudev is a fork of udev,
> > which comes from after it came under the systemd umbrella, but before
> > the name change and a number of changes that were controversial.  I
> > believe they try to incorporate many of the patches from systemd-udev
> > but some default behaviors are different.
> >
> > In any case, I just wanted to clarify that systemd-udev is not the
> > "systemd" you're probably thinking of.  In particular, it doesn't
> > replace openrc or sysvinit.  Systemd-udev largely is concerned with
> > populating /dev, and running initialization of hardware when it is
> > detected, based on a configurable set of rules.
> >
> > >
> > >> I intend to use XFS for /. Incidentally, if i later decide to "fork
> > >> out" /usr (or some other subdirectory) into it's own LV, is it "just"
> > >> a mater of copying its contents and updating /etc/fstab? Or should i
> > >> just do it now and expand the LVs if later required (especially if i
> > >> want to use different filesystems)?
> > >
> > > I can't help you with XFS. I know that ext4 in an LV in a VG in a PV
on RAID1
> > > works reliably, even though it does look complex when I write it like
that.
> >
> > As far as LVM and xfs themselves go, you can do what you propose.
> >
> > However, Gentoo QA policy is that it is expected that /usr is mounted
> > early in boot.  Various tools can break if it is not.  Typically this
> > is the responsibility of an initramfs, however you can also use
> > scripts that run early during initialization from / which mount it.
> > If you just stick /usr in fstab and rely on openrc to mount it for you
> > normally, you may or may not have problems.
> >
> > It has been a long time since I actually used such a system in this
> > manner with Gentoo, but the last I saw discussion on it most who used
> > this configuration found it usually worked fine, unless you were using
> > something like a bluetooth keyboard or other key system component that
> > required a lot of userspace tooling to make work.  However, as a
> > matter of policy you're on your own if you choose not to mount /usr
> > early during boot in some way.
> >
> > The reason it is not supported is that with the rise of things like
> > bluetooth the list of dependencies possibly required during early boot
> > has grown to the point where we'd end up not even having a /usr before
> > long.  My sense is that for the most part most maintainers tend to
> > respect the traditional definition of / and /usr on Gentoo, and thus
> > you can often get away with doing things the traditional way.
> > However, the policy does allow us to end debates over things like udev
> > rules invoking some userspace tool in /usr and such.  Some packages
> > more strongly depend on /usr being installed in early boot, and there
> > have been suggestions (but nothing concrete) that Gentoo consider
> > supporting the /usr-move that other distros have embraced (and that
> > would basically get rid of /lib, /bin, and so on).
> >
> > >
> > > Again, legacy grub here. But if you're using an initramfs, from what
I've seen
> > > you don't need to specify metadata 0.90.
> >
> > I used to use grub legacy and kernel RAID auto-assembly.  As a result
> > I was using metadata 0.90.
> >
> > I found this configuration problematic on rare occasions.  There is a
> > reason that mdadm changed the metadata, and why most distros don't do
> > it this way.  (more below)
> >
> > >
> > > Damn. I've just checked and something has renamed my /dev/md7 to
> > > /dev/md127. Again. It's just too bad. I shall have to stop it when I
get a
> > > quiet moment and reassemble it into /dev/md7. Actually, I know what
caused
> > > it but I didn't notice at the time.
> >
> > And this was one of the configuration problems I ran into on rare
> > occasion.  Often booting from a rescue CD or such caused something
> > like this to happen.
> >
> > One of the advantages of using an initramfs is that they can be a lot
> > smarter about finding your partitions.  You can identify them by UUID
> > or label, and not care as much if mdadm or the kernel renames your
> > device nodes.
> >
> > I'd seriously take a look at dracut, though I don't know if it works
> > with eudev.  It certainly should support openrc, and I know that it
> > did back when I was running openrc.  It can also mount /usr for you,
> > and in fact it should automatically do so.  It also respects your
> > fstab - it uses its internal logic and the kernel boot line to
> > initially find filesystems, but then it reads your /etc/fstab and
> > remounts everything as you define it there just in case something has
> > changed since the last time you built the initramfs/etc.  You can
> > define your own modules for it which makes it reasonably easy to get
> > it to do anything at all during early boot, and it doesn't require
> > anything to be built static (it finds required shared objects anywhere
> > on the filesystem and includes them in the initramfs).  It can also
> > give you a rescue shell if something goes wrong, and depending on your
> > settings you can make that rescue shell reasonably well-featured
> > (using either dash or bash as you prefer inside, and I imagine you
> > could tell it to install the other on the side).  A while ago I needed
> > to run some btrfs tools that aren't in dracut by default and it was
> > trivial to tell dracut to include them, and I forced a shell on next
> > boot which gave me the latest tools and kernel without having to build
> > a rescue CD with them, and a bash shell to run them from.
> >
> > It certainly isn't necessary to use an initramfs to use Gentoo, and I
> > used to be among the more minimalist crowd that avoided them.
> > However, once I took the time to examine dracut it went from being a
> > blob that looked unnecessary to a tool that is often useful.
>
> Last time I tried to use dracut with openrc, it failed, I can't remember
> exactly what happened, I think udev did hang, but its been a while since
> this happened.  Dracut uses systemd internally, so maybe this is part of
> the problem.

Dracut only uses systemd optionally and (AFAIR) not by default. If you
don't specify it, dracut will use its own scripts as init.

Regards.
--
Canek Peláez Valdés
Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 9420 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Peter Humphrey]

On Sunday 17 May 2015 10:09:11 Rich Freeman wrote:
--->8
> Most people using openrc are also using systemd-udev (and there is a
> good chance you do too).  The latter was previously named udev and
> long predates what most people call systemd.  Eudev is a fork of udev,
> which comes from after it came under the systemd umbrella, but before
> the name change and a number of changes that were controversial.  I
> believe they try to incorporate many of the patches from systemd-udev
> but some default behaviors are different.
> 
> In any case, I just wanted to clarify that systemd-udev is not the
> "systemd" you're probably thinking of.  In particular, it doesn't
> replace openrc or sysvinit.  Systemd-udev largely is concerned with
> populating /dev, and running initialization of hardware when it is
> detected, based on a configurable set of rules.

Thanks for the clarification. I admit I haven't kept up with developments here.

> On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk>
> wrote:
> > Damn. I've just checked and something has renamed my /dev/md7 to
> > /dev/md127. Again. It's just too bad. I shall have to stop it when I get a
> > quiet moment and reassemble it into /dev/md7. Actually, I know what caused
> > it but I didn't notice at the time.
> 
> And this was one of the configuration problems I ran into on rare
> occasion.  Often booting from a rescue CD or such caused something
> like this to happen.

I believe the cause in this case was forgetting an important step part-way 
through creating the volumes, rebooting to repair the omission and then 
resuming. I should have checked before now that /dev/mdX hadn't been renamed 
to /dev/md12X. I think it should be fairly straightforward to fix though.

> One of the advantages of using an initramfs is that they can be a lot
> smarter about finding your partitions.  You can identify them by UUID
> or label, and not care as much if mdadm or the kernel renames your
> device nodes.
> 
> I'd seriously take a look at dracut, though I don't know if it works
> with eudev.  It certainly should support openrc, and I know that it
> did back when I was running openrc.

Maybe I will. I suspect dodgy disks and I have a pair of new SSDs on the way. 
Perhaps it's time for a rethink.

> It certainly isn't necessary to use an initramfs to use Gentoo, and I
> used to be among the more minimalist crowd that avoided them.
> However, once I took the time to examine dracut it went from being a
> blob that looked unnecessary to a tool that is often useful.

Thanks again for your contribution, Rich.

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 2015-05-17 um 18:05 schrieb Peter Humphrey:

> Maybe I will. I suspect dodgy disks and I have a pair of new SSDs on the way. 
> Perhaps it's time for a rethink.

perhaps one more thought to be thought right now:

skip mdadm and lvm ... and try btrfs as you have the chance on shiny new
hardware

less layers, more features ... I definitely recommend giving this a try.

tl;dr ... maybe you listed some reason to stick with mdadm/lvm2/xfs etc
... sorry in that case

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Nuno Magalhães]

On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 8:36 PM, Stefan G. Weichinger <lists@xunil.at> wrote:
> tl;dr ... maybe you listed some reason to stick with mdadm/lvm2/xfs etc
> ... sorry in that case

I didn't. 2 disks with RAID1/LVM, 2 disks (maybe) with ZFS. Pairs
because by board has 2 SATA channels, otherwise i'd go RAID5 and gain
an extra TB.
BTRFS seems a bit unstable at the moment (i could be wrong).

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

On 17.05.2015 22:48, Nuno Magalhães wrote:
> On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 8:36 PM, Stefan G. Weichinger <lists@xunil.at> wrote:
>> tl;dr ... maybe you listed some reason to stick with mdadm/lvm2/xfs etc
>> ... sorry in that case
> 
> I didn't. 2 disks with RAID1/LVM, 2 disks (maybe) with ZFS. Pairs
> because by board has 2 SATA channels, otherwise i'd go RAID5 and gain
> an extra TB.
> BTRFS seems a bit unstable at the moment (i could be wrong).

not for your use-case = RAID1

-> google for Chris Mason, btrfs, stable ...

Ok, it is not as tested as XFS or ext4 ... but stable enough for
desktops with a few disks (avoid RAID5/6 for now, yes .. but lev1 should
be fine already).

btrfs is in development still, sure (all other fs are in development as
well ;) ).

-

So if you decide for it, keep your kernel and btrfs-progs updated  ...
and an eye on the btrfs-mailing-list(s). And don't overdo with the
snapshots ( ... 10, ok ... hundreds, hmm ... ).

backups ... no comment needed, right?

There were problems with btrfs and the kernel a few months ago (Rich
Freeman was hit by that, maybe he chimes in here), but in general for me
it is still a very positive experience.

I run it on 2 servers with RAID1-setups, a desktop with an SSD and a
RAID1 for 2 hdds ... and on two laptops with dualboot-setups ... after
the initial learning phase I am basically just using it and happy.

No more re-partitioning hassle  ... checksums overall ... snapshots if
you want ... etc etc

For example I cloned my working rootfs into a separate btrfs-subvolume,
and rebuilt everything in there (using systemd-nspawn ... off-topic
here) ... and then switched over to that rootfs by simply adding a new
gummiboot entry.

As you ordered 2 ssds right now this seems a perfect opportunity to
start over and test something "new" (btrfs is in the linux kernel since
2009).

good luck, have fun, Stefan

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Nuno Magalhães]

btrfs... ZFS... dunno... we'll see ;)

On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Stefan G. Weichinger <lists@xunil.at> wrote:
>
> As you ordered 2 ssds right now this seems a perfect opportunity to
> start over and test something "new" (btrfs is in the linux kernel since
> 2009).

SSDs? Nope... not yet, maybe when i use this desktop as backup i'll
get an HDD caddy + SSD for the laptop.
Then decide what to replace Windows on the laptop with... maybe
Slackware, i've been curious about these two distros... or LFS or
Devuan. We'll see.

For now i'll wait 'till the RAID1 finishes sync'ing, LVM is acting
weird. Then hopefully back to the Handbook.

Cheers,
Nuno

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 850 bytes --]

On Sun, 17 May 2015 12:48:58 +0100, Nuno Magalhães wrote:

> I want to use mdadm to create a RAID1 with 2 SATA disks. From what i
> gather, i'll need (bootable)  0xFD partitions, i'll use full disk for
> them and no separate /boot (unless required). Is GPT required or can i
> stick to MBR? Is fdisk safe? Seems usable to me.

If you are not using a UEFI motherboard, you can stick to MBR. Whether
you should is another question. GPT is more flexible and robust than MBR,
having learned from all the shortcomings of the last 30 years of putting
up with a system designed for 10MB hard disk.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

When told the reason for Daylight Saving time the old Indian said...
"Only a white man would believe that you could cut a foot off the top of a
blanket And sew it to the bottom of a blanket and have a longer blanket."

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Rich Freeman]

On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Stefan G. Weichinger <lists@xunil.at> wrote:
>
> There were problems with btrfs and the kernel a few months ago (Rich
> Freeman was hit by that, maybe he chimes in here), but in general for me
> it is still a very positive experience.
>

It is nowhere near the stability of ext4.  In the last year I've
probably had 2-3 periods of time where I was getting frequent panics,
or panics anytime I'd mount my filesystems rw.  That said, I've never
had an occasion where I couldn't mount the filesystem ro, and I've
never had an actual loss of committed data.  Just downtime while I
sorted things out.  I do keep a full daily rsnapshot backup on ext4
right now since I consider btrfs experimental.  However, if I were too
cheap to do that I wouldn't have actually lost anything yet.

On the other hand, both btrfs and zfs will get you a level of data
security that you simply won't get from ext4+lvm+mdadm - protection
from silent corruption.  The only time I've ever had a filesystem eat
my data on linux was on ext4+lvm+mdadm actually - when I googled for
the specific circumstances I think I ran into one guy on a list
somewhere who had the same problem, but it is pretty rare (and one
piece of advice I would give to anybody using lvm is to backup your
metadata - if I had done that and was more careful about running fsck
in repair mode I probably could have restored everything without
issue).  (For the curious, the issue was that I repaired a bunch of
fsck-detected problems in one filesystem and lost a lot of data in
another one.  I suspect that LVM got its mapping messed up somehow,
and it might have had to do with operating in degraded mode (perhaps
due to a crash and need for rebuild).)

A big advantage of btrfs/zfs is that everything is checksummed on
disk, and the filesystem is not going to rely on anything that isn't
internally consistent.  In the event of a rebuild/etc it can always
tell which copies are good/bad, unless you do something really crazy
like split an array onto two PCs, then rebuild both, and then try to
start mix the disks back together - from what I've heard btrfs lacks
generation numbers/etc needed to detect this kind of problem.

For personal use btrfs is great for playing around with the likely
future default linux filesystem.  I wouldn't go installing it on
production servers in a workplace unless it was a really niche
situation, and then only with appropriate steps to mitigate the risks
(lots of testing of new kernel releases, backups or an ability to
regenerate the system, etc).  I wouldn't go so far as to say that
there are no circumstances where it is the right tool for the job.
You should understand the pros/cons before using it, as with any tool.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Nuno Magalhães]

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 2:08 AM, Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On the other hand, both btrfs and zfs will get you a level of data
> security that you simply won't get from ext4+lvm+mdadm - protection
> from silent corruption.

That's one of the advantages i see in ZFS. Do you use it frequently?
Can anyone comment on its memory usage (without dedicated SSDs for
ARC)?

Maybe i'd use the 4 drives as a ZFS pool.

For now LVM complains about duplicate PVs (when pvcreate /dev/md0),
i'll have to fiddle with the filters in lvm.conf

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Rich Freeman]

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Nuno Magalhães <nunomagalhaes@eu.ipp.pt> wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 2:08 AM, Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> On the other hand, both btrfs and zfs will get you a level of data
>> security that you simply won't get from ext4+lvm+mdadm - protection
>> from silent corruption.
>
> That's one of the advantages i see in ZFS. Do you use it frequently?
> Can anyone comment on its memory usage (without dedicated SSDs for
> ARC)?
>
> Maybe i'd use the 4 drives as a ZFS pool.
>
> For now LVM complains about duplicate PVs (when pvcreate /dev/md0),
> i'll have to fiddle with the filters in lvm.conf
>

I use btrfs heavily, but not ZFS.  The feature set overlaps, but ZFS
has more enterprise-oriented features and is more mature, and btrfs
has more single-workstation-oriented features and is less mature.  For
example, ZFS has features like write-intent logging and read caching
that are useful especially on large arrays.  Btrfs, on the other hand,
lets you mix different-sized drive in a single redundancy unit or
add/remove devices to a single redundancy unit, while in ZFS you can
have multiple vdevs in a zpool but you cannot add/remove drives from a
vdev or fully utilize drives of different sizes in a vdev.  That is
something which is very useful when you have a 3-drive RAID and want
to make it a 4-drive RAID, but it isn't terribly useful when you want
to add 5 drives to a 30-drive SAN.

I'm not sure how many of those differences are design-limitations vs
just being what devs have spent their time on.  I'm sure over time the
feature set of both will grow and further overlap each other.
However, right now with the current focus I'd expect ZFS to continue
to focus on features useful in very large deployments, and btrfs on
features useful in small deployments.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Alan McKinnon]

On 18/05/2015 20:21, Nuno Magalhães wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 2:08 AM, Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> On the other hand, both btrfs and zfs will get you a level of data
>> security that you simply won't get from ext4+lvm+mdadm - protection
>> from silent corruption.
> 
> That's one of the advantages i see in ZFS. Do you use it frequently?
> Can anyone comment on its memory usage (without dedicated SSDs for
> ARC)?


ZFS needs a lot of memory to function well. It does work and run with
far less memory than recommended, but doesn't run *well* - performance
is impaired.

I don't recall the exact formula (insufficiently caffeinated at 8am) but
8G is about your minimum for a decent storage device




-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckinnon@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Peter Humphrey]

On Sunday 17 May 2015 21:36:57 Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> Am 2015-05-17 um 18:05 schrieb Peter Humphrey:
> > Maybe I will. I suspect dodgy disks and I have a pair of new SSDs on the
> > way. Perhaps it's time for a rethink.
> 
> perhaps one more thought to be thought right now:

(I overlooked this at the time.)

> skip mdadm and lvm ... and try btrfs as you have the chance on shiny new
> hardware

I also have a spare external hard disk, which I could experiment with for 
snapshots etc.

> less layers, more features ... I definitely recommend giving this a try.

I do like the idea of having fewer layers and less complication. I'm doing a 
bit of reading while awaiting the bits - the SSDs are here; all I need now is 
the mounting brackets.

> tl;dr ... maybe you listed some reason to stick with mdadm/lvm2/xfs etc
> ... sorry in that case

No, it's just what I have at the moment.

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 471 bytes --]

On Tue, 19 May 2015 10:02:38 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:

> > skip mdadm and lvm ... and try btrfs as you have the chance on shiny
> > new hardware  
> 
> I also have a spare external hard disk, which I could experiment with
> for snapshots etc.

Snapshots are subvolumes in btrfs, so they stay in the same filesystem.
That's why they are so fast.

It's a similar situation with ZFS.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Stop tagline theft! Copyright your tagline (c)

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Rich Freeman]

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 6:13 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 19 May 2015 10:02:38 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
>
>> > skip mdadm and lvm ... and try btrfs as you have the chance on shiny
>> > new hardware
>>
>> I also have a spare external hard disk, which I could experiment with
>> for snapshots etc.
>
> Snapshots are subvolumes in btrfs, so they stay in the same filesystem.
> That's why they are so fast.
>
> It's a similar situation with ZFS.

Yup.  In both cases they're copy-on-write, so they don't consume
additional space except to the extent that things change.

Also, in both cases you can serialize a snapshot (either in its
entirety or as a diff vs a previous snapshot) and store it on separate
storage.  This is mainly done for backup (storing the serialized
files) or replication (replaying them onto another server with the
same filesystem).

But, neither ZFS nor btrfs are without issue on Linux, so I'd use care
in a production environment.  The btrfs issues tend to revolve around
stability, and the zfs issues tend to revolve around dealing with
out-of-mainline code and legal/license issues.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Peter Humphrey]

On Tuesday 19 May 2015 08:54:26 Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 6:13 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 May 2015 10:02:38 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> >> > skip mdadm and lvm ... and try btrfs as you have the chance on shiny
> >> > new hardware
> >> 
> >> I also have a spare external hard disk, which I could experiment with
> >> for snapshots etc.
> > 
> > Snapshots are subvolumes in btrfs, so they stay in the same filesystem.
> > That's why they are so fast.
> > 
> > It's a similar situation with ZFS.
> 
> Yup.  In both cases they're copy-on-write, so they don't consume
> additional space except to the extent that things change.
> 
> Also, in both cases you can serialize a snapshot (either in its
> entirety or as a diff vs a previous snapshot) and store it on separate
> storage.  This is mainly done for backup (storing the serialized
> files) or replication (replaying them onto another server with the
> same filesystem).
> 
> But, neither ZFS nor btrfs are without issue on Linux, so I'd use care
> in a production environment.  The btrfs issues tend to revolve around
> stability, and the zfs issues tend to revolve around dealing with
> out-of-mainline code and legal/license issues.

Well, this is my toy desktop, so no risk to fame and fortune there. By /toy/, 
of course, I mean I play with it, not that it's a Mickey-Mouse setup (which 
some of you pros out there might think it is anyway, but that's another 
story).

Some people will remember that I had a fling with f2fs on my little Atom LAN 
server some months ago; I don't think I'll be using that this time!

Incidentally, what's the received wisdom on frequency of file-system trimming 
on SSDs these days? I've seen values quoted between twice a day and once a 
week. And how does trimming affect btrfs?

Hmm. Looks like I'm hijacking Nuno's thread. Apologies if that's ruffled any 
feathers, but I think I'm still on-topic, more or less, and he may still be 
interested in the conversation.

- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Rich Freeman]

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Incidentally, what's the received wisdom on frequency of file-system trimming
> on SSDs these days? I've seen values quoted between twice a day and once a
> week. And how does trimming affect btrfs?
>

I've been trimming mine daily, and I've yet to be able to distinguish
it from a no-op.  As far as I can tell fstrim -v always outputs 0
bytes trimmed.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Peter Humphrey]

On Tuesday 19 May 2015 10:53:26 Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> 
wrote:
> > Incidentally, what's the received wisdom on frequency of file-system
> > trimming on SSDs these days? I've seen values quoted between twice a day
> > and once a week. And how does trimming affect btrfs?
> 
> I've been trimming mine daily, and I've yet to be able to distinguish
> it from a no-op.  As far as I can tell fstrim -v always outputs 0
> bytes trimmed.

Ah, well that's quite different from my Atom box with its 64GB SSD; before I 
remove the -v a few weeks ago it was reporting many megabytes trimmed most 
times it ran. That's on ext4 and running Gentoo with http-replicator service.

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Peter Humphrey]

On Tuesday 19 May 2015 10:53:26 Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> 
wrote:
> > Incidentally, what's the received wisdom on frequency of file-system
> > trimming on SSDs these days? I've seen values quoted between twice a day
> > and once a week. And how does trimming affect btrfs?
> 
> I've been trimming mine daily, and I've yet to be able to distinguish
> it from a no-op.  As far as I can tell fstrim -v always outputs 0
> bytes trimmed.

I've just run fstrim manually on my LAN server, which is installed on ext4:
# /sbin/fstrim -av
/usr/local: 0 B (0 bytes) trimmed
/usr/portage/packages: 71.4 MiB (74878976 bytes) trimmed
/usr/portage: 389.3 MiB (408174592 bytes) trimmed
/var/cache/http-replicator: 0 B (0 bytes) trimmed
/var/cache/squid: 41.5 MiB (43532288 bytes) trimmed
/home: 123.1 MiB (129081344 bytes) trimmed
/: 698.9 MiB (732839936 bytes) trimmed

It's supposed to have done that at 01:15 on Saturday, but my KMail system is 
sick so I can't say what it actually did. Roll on new SSDs!

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Rich Freeman]

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 May 2015 10:53:26 Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk>
> wrote:
>> > Incidentally, what's the received wisdom on frequency of file-system
>> > trimming on SSDs these days? I've seen values quoted between twice a day
>> > and once a week. And how does trimming affect btrfs?
>>
>> I've been trimming mine daily, and I've yet to be able to distinguish
>> it from a no-op.  As far as I can tell fstrim -v always outputs 0
>> bytes trimmed.
>
> Ah, well that's quite different from my Atom box with its 64GB SSD; before I
> remove the -v a few weeks ago it was reporting many megabytes trimmed most
> times it ran. That's on ext4 and running Gentoo with http-replicator service.
>

So, I was inspired to look into this yet again.  Looks like it is the
subject of this:
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org/msg40618.html

It doesn't look like this is in 3.18 yet.  So, I'm basically running
without trimming.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Marc Joliet]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1198 bytes --]

Am Tue, 19 May 2015 10:53:26 -0400
schrieb Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>:

> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Incidentally, what's the received wisdom on frequency of file-system trimming
> > on SSDs these days? I've seen values quoted between twice a day and once a
> > week. And how does trimming affect btrfs?
> >
> 
> I've been trimming mine daily, and I've yet to be able to distinguish
> it from a no-op.  As far as I can tell fstrim -v always outputs 0
> bytes trimmed.

(Note that I'm also a btrfs user.)

I've been using the systemd timer that comes with util-linux upstream without
modification, which runs fstrim weekly.  That seems to work well, but to be
quite honest, I wouldn't know how to tell.  Sometimes I wasn't even sure it
ran, so I would run it manually, and it always finished nigh-instantaneously.

Before that, I used the discard mount option, but apparently that's only a good
idea with high-end SSDs (not that I noticed much of a difference in everyday
usage).

-- 
Marc Joliet
--
"People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we
don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup

[-- Attachment #2: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[gottlieb]

On Tue, May 19 2015, Peter Humphrey wrote:

> On Tuesday 19 May 2015 10:53:26 Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> 
> wrote:
>> > Incidentally, what's the received wisdom on frequency of file-system
>> > trimming on SSDs these days? I've seen values quoted between twice a day
>> > and once a week. And how does trimming affect btrfs?

I included "discard" in fstab for my ssd filesystems, presumably
following some installation guide.  For example I have

  /dev/sda5         /         ext4    noatime,discard   0 1
  /dev/vg/local     /local    ext4    noatime,discard   0 2

Is it preferred to instead issue explicit trim's via cron?

thanks,
allan

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Rich Freeman]

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 11:22 AM,  <gottlieb@nyu.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, May 19 2015, Peter Humphrey wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday 19 May 2015 10:53:26 Rich Freeman wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>> > Incidentally, what's the received wisdom on frequency of file-system
>>> > trimming on SSDs these days? I've seen values quoted between twice a day
>>> > and once a week. And how does trimming affect btrfs?
>
> I included "discard" in fstab for my ssd filesystems, presumably
> following some installation guide.  For example I have
>
>   /dev/sda5         /         ext4    noatime,discard   0 1
>   /dev/vg/local     /local    ext4    noatime,discard   0 2
>
> Is it preferred to instead issue explicit trim's via cron?
>

It depends.

In theory giving your drive useful information about allocation now is
better than giving it the information later.  The drive can make use
of that information to improve performance.

In practice some drives have brain-dead firmware and they'll do stupid
things with that information.  If you trim part of an erase block, the
drive should just file that info away and make use of that information
when it can.  However, some drives will immediately copy/erase the
rest of the block at that moment, which creates an unnecessary erase
cycle and creates IO load at a moment that the drive is already busy.

So, if your drive isn't brain-dead discard is better.  If your drive
is brain-dead fstrim is almost as good if the drive isn't too full.
I've yet to test discard and see how well it works.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[gottlieb]

On Tue, May 19 2015, Rich Freeman wrote:

> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 11:22 AM,  <gottlieb@nyu.edu> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 19 2015, Peter Humphrey wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday 19 May 2015 10:53:26 Rich Freeman wrote:
>>>> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>> > Incidentally, what's the received wisdom on frequency of file-system
>>>> > trimming on SSDs these days? I've seen values quoted between twice a day
>>>> > and once a week. And how does trimming affect btrfs?
>>
>> I included "discard" in fstab for my ssd filesystems, presumably
>> following some installation guide.  For example I have
>>
>>   /dev/sda5         /         ext4    noatime,discard   0 1
>>   /dev/vg/local     /local    ext4    noatime,discard   0 2
>>
>> Is it preferred to instead issue explicit trim's via cron?
>>
>
> It depends.
>
> In theory giving your drive useful information about allocation now is
> better than giving it the information later.  The drive can make use
> of that information to improve performance.
>
> In practice some drives have brain-dead firmware and they'll do stupid
> things with that information.  If you trim part of an erase block, the
> drive should just file that info away and make use of that information
> when it can.  However, some drives will immediately copy/erase the
> rest of the block at that moment, which creates an unnecessary erase
> cycle and creates IO load at a moment that the drive is already busy.
>
> So, if your drive isn't brain-dead discard is better.  If your drive
> is brain-dead fstrim is almost as good if the drive isn't too full.
> I've yet to test discard and see how well it works.

Understood. Thank you.
allan

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[covici]

Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 11:22 AM,  <gottlieb@nyu.edu> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 19 2015, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> >
> >> On Tuesday 19 May 2015 10:53:26 Rich Freeman wrote:
> >>> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk>
> >> wrote:
> >>> > Incidentally, what's the received wisdom on frequency of file-system
> >>> > trimming on SSDs these days? I've seen values quoted between twice a day
> >>> > and once a week. And how does trimming affect btrfs?
> >
> > I included "discard" in fstab for my ssd filesystems, presumably
> > following some installation guide.  For example I have
> >
> >   /dev/sda5         /         ext4    noatime,discard   0 1
> >   /dev/vg/local     /local    ext4    noatime,discard   0 2
> >
> > Is it preferred to instead issue explicit trim's via cron?
> >
> 
> It depends.
> 
> In theory giving your drive useful information about allocation now is
> better than giving it the information later.  The drive can make use
> of that information to improve performance.
> 
> In practice some drives have brain-dead firmware and they'll do stupid
> things with that information.  If you trim part of an erase block, the
> drive should just file that info away and make use of that information
> when it can.  However, some drives will immediately copy/erase the
> rest of the block at that moment, which creates an unnecessary erase
> cycle and creates IO load at a moment that the drive is already busy.
> 
> So, if your drive isn't brain-dead discard is better.  If your drive
> is brain-dead fstrim is almost as good if the drive isn't too full.
> I've yet to test discard and see how well it works.

Do you know if the Samsung 850 evo or similar are considered brain-dead?

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Nuno Magalhães]

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> Hmm. Looks like I'm hijacking Nuno's thread. Apologies if that's ruffled any
> feathers, but I think I'm still on-topic, more or less, and he may still be
> interested in the conversation.

No sweat, i intend to get an SSD for my laptop. It interests me and
it's on topic. :)

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Rich Freeman]

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 12:23 PM,  <covici@ccs.covici.com> wrote:
>
> Do you know if the Samsung 850 evo or similar are considered brain-dead?
>

That's what I'm using, and I couldn't find anything too useful on
Google, so I might just test it out.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 2015-05-19 um 22:17 schrieb Rich Freeman:
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 12:23 PM,  <covici@ccs.covici.com> wrote:
>>
>> Do you know if the Samsung 850 evo or similar are considered brain-dead?
>>
> 
> That's what I'm using, and I couldn't find anything too useful on
> Google, so I might just test it out.

wow, that thread is rather active

my 2 cents: one samsung 850 evo 500gb here in my main desktop, with
btrfs on it, and I decided to run "fstrim -va" every few days manually
... kind of when I am at keeping things in shape or so ... along "btrfs
scrub" on fridays ...

I also have "written" / cut-and-pasted systemd-timers for that but I
disabled them for now.

"discard" in fstab was documented to slow down things and who wants
*that* ??

;)

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Peter Humphrey]

On Sunday 17 May 2015 10:09:11 Rich Freeman wrote:
> Just a few clarifications below.
> 
> One thing this discussion is missing is any mention of BIOS / EFI.

Which reminds me: can anyone here confirm whether grub-legacy can handle GPT? 
I'm getting close to building my new system and I don't want to change too 
many things at once. By which I mean that I'm going to try btrfs (my fingers 
will learn how to type that one day), and I might go for GPT if it's not going 
to cause a lot of trouble, but I really don't want to have to wrestle with 
grub-2 at the same time. Maybe later.

So, GPT with legacy grub, anyone?

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 995 bytes --]

On Wed, 20 May 2015 10:16:09 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:

> Which reminds me: can anyone here confirm whether grub-legacy can
> handle GPT? I'm getting close to building my new system and I don't
> want to change too many things at once. By which I mean that I'm going
> to try btrfs (my fingers will learn how to type that one day), and I
> might go for GPT if it's not going to cause a lot of trouble, but I
> really don't want to have to wrestle with grub-2 at the same time.
> Maybe later.
> 
> So, GPT with legacy grub, anyone?

It should do, as long as you create the BIOS Boot partition at the start
of the drive. It shouldn't care what the BIOS is trying to load. But if
it's a new system, doesn't it use UEFI? In which case, grubosaurus won't
work but you can avoid GRUB2 by using Gummiboot, which is even simpler
that GRUB<1.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

There is so much sand in Northern Africa that if it were spread out it
would completely cover the Sahara Desert.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Peter Humphrey]

On Wednesday 20 May 2015 10:23:55 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 20 May 2015 10:16:09 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > Which reminds me: can anyone here confirm whether grub-legacy can
> > handle GPT? I'm getting close to building my new system and I don't
> > want to change too many things at once. By which I mean that I'm going
> > to try btrfs (my fingers will learn how to type that one day), and I
> > might go for GPT if it's not going to cause a lot of trouble, but I
> > really don't want to have to wrestle with grub-2 at the same time.
> > Maybe later.
> > 
> > So, GPT with legacy grub, anyone?
> 
> It should do, as long as you create the BIOS Boot partition at the start
> of the drive. It shouldn't care what the BIOS is trying to load.

OK; I'll try it then. Thanks.

> But if it's a new system, doesn't it use UEFI? In which case, grubosaurus
> won't work but you can avoid GRUB2 by using Gummiboot, which is even simpler
> that GRUB<1.

No, it's only new SSDs, not the whole system, which is six years old. Does 
that mean my choice is restricted to just the two versions of GRUB?

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Alec Ten Harmsel]

On 05/20/2015 05:23 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 20 May 2015 10:16:09 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
>
>> Which reminds me: can anyone here confirm whether grub-legacy can
>> handle GPT? I'm getting close to building my new system and I don't
>> want to change too many things at once. By which I mean that I'm going
>> to try btrfs (my fingers will learn how to type that one day), and I
>> might go for GPT if it's not going to cause a lot of trouble, but I
>> really don't want to have to wrestle with grub-2 at the same time.
>> Maybe later.
>>
>> So, GPT with legacy grub, anyone?
> It should do, as long as you create the BIOS Boot partition at the start
> of the drive. It shouldn't care what the BIOS is trying to load. But if
> it's a new system, doesn't it use UEFI? In which case, grubosaurus won't
> work but you can avoid GRUB2 by using Gummiboot, which is even simpler
> that GRUB<1.
>
>


I do not find grub2 complicated, although I've never had a setup with
LVM or RAID. It's always just been:

    grub-install --recheck /dev/sda
    # cosmetic changes to /etc/default/grub like changing the boot delay
    grub-mkconfig -o /boot/grub/grub.cfg

I was raised on grub2, so I guess that probably makes a difference;
maybe it was difficult when I first started, but I can't remember.

Alec

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 794 bytes --]

On Wed, 20 May 2015 06:19:52 -0400, Alec Ten Harmsel wrote:

> I do not find grub2 complicated, although I've never had a setup with
> LVM or RAID. It's always just been:

It's not more complicated, just different.

>     grub-install --recheck /dev/sda
>     # cosmetic changes to /etc/default/grub like changing the boot delay
>     grub-mkconfig -o /boot/grub/grub.cfg
> 
> I was raised on grub2, so I guess that probably makes a difference;
> maybe it was difficult when I first started, but I can't remember.

It was, so was grub-legacy. The thing is people using that have been doing
so for so long they have forgotten about that particular learning curve.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

One difference between a man and a machine is that a machine is quiet
when well oiled.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 323 bytes --]

On Wed, 20 May 2015 10:42:41 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:

> No, it's only new SSDs, not the whole system, which is six years old.
> Does that mean my choice is restricted to just the two versions of GRUB?

No, you could use LiLo ;-)


-- 
Neil Bothwick

System halted - hit any Microsoft employee to continue.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Rich Freeman]

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 5:42 AM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>
> No, it's only new SSDs, not the whole system, which is six years old. Does
> that mean my choice is restricted to just the two versions of GRUB?
>

Well, you could always use syslinux or something else.  However, GRUB
is probably your best bet.

You should really consider moving to GRUB2 though.  I don't know about
legacy GRUB, but GRUB2 can handle your boot partition being on btrfs.
I still left space on my drives for a boot partition anyway, since it
will be needed when I move to EFI.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[covici]

Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 5:42 AM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > No, it's only new SSDs, not the whole system, which is six years old. Does
> > that mean my choice is restricted to just the two versions of GRUB?
> >
> 
> Well, you could always use syslinux or something else.  However, GRUB
> is probably your best bet.
> 
> You should really consider moving to GRUB2 though.  I don't know about
> legacy GRUB, but GRUB2 can handle your boot partition being on btrfs.
> I still left space on my drives for a boot partition anyway, since it
> will be needed when I move to EFI.

How did you makr the boot partition, or is it just linux?  Did you use
gpt or mbr?  I am about to convert to ssd, and I may as well do it in
such a way that future mbs will work much easier.

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Peter Humphrey]

On Wednesday 20 May 2015 11:23:21 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 20 May 2015 10:42:41 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > No, it's only new SSDs, not the whole system, which is six years old.
> > Does that mean my choice is restricted to just the two versions of GRUB?
> 
> No, you could use LiLo ;-)

Ho ho ho!  :-)

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Peter Humphrey]

On Wednesday 20 May 2015 06:26:08 Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 5:42 AM, Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> > No, it's only new SSDs, not the whole system, which is six years old. Does
> > that mean my choice is restricted to just the two versions of GRUB?
> 
> Well, you could always use syslinux or something else.  However, GRUB
> is probably your best bet.
> 
> You should really consider moving to GRUB2 though.

Last time I looked, it couldn't handle all the kernels and options I have.
This is my grub.conf:

root (hd0,0)
timeout 10
default 0
fallback 3
color white/blue black/light-gray
splashimage /grub/splash.xpm.gz

title=Gentoo Linux 3.18.12
        kernel /boot/kernel-x86_64-3.18.12-gentoo root=/dev/md5 net.ifnames=0 irqpoll

title=Gentoo Linux 3.18.12, no X
        kernel /boot/kernel-x86_64-3.18.12-gentoo root=/dev/md5 softlevel=nox net.ifnames=0 irqpoll

title=Gentoo Linux 3.18.12, no network
        kernel /boot/kernel-x86_64-3.18.12-gentoo root=/dev/md5 softlevel=nonet net.ifnames=0 irqpoll

title=Rescue System 3.18.11
        kernel /boot/kernel-x86_64-3.18.11-gentoo-rescue root=/dev/sda8 net.ifnames=0 irqpoll

title=Rescue System 3.18.12
        kernel /boot/kernel-x86_64-3.18.12-gentoo-rescue root=/dev/sda8 net.ifnames=0 irqpoll

Can grub-2 manage that for me?

> I don't know about legacy GRUB, but GRUB2 can handle your boot partition
> being on btrfs. I still left space on my drives for a boot partition anyway,
> since it will be needed when I move to EFI.

I was planning to keep /boot out of the btrfs setup, at least to start with.

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1256 bytes --]

On Wed, 20 May 2015 06:51:53 -0400, covici@ccs.covici.com wrote:

> > You should really consider moving to GRUB2 though.  I don't know about
> > legacy GRUB, but GRUB2 can handle your boot partition being on btrfs.
> > I still left space on my drives for a boot partition anyway, since it
> > will be needed when I move to EFI.  
> 
> How did you makr the boot partition, or is it just linux?  Did you use
> gpt or mbr?  I am about to convert to ssd, and I may as well do it in
> such a way that future mbs will work much easier.

If you want t be able to use UEFI, you need to use GPT. UEFI needs a FAT
partition at the start of the drive, type FE00, but booting a GPT disk
with MBR requires a small BIOS boot partition, type EF02, at the start of
the drive (mine is 1MB).

For ease of switching to UEFI later, I'd do

sda1 1MB BIOS boot, type EF00
sda2 /boot, type 8300
everything else.

You can make sda2 ext2, then, when it is time to switch, simply backup
the contents of /boot, replace sda1 and sda2 with a single EF00
partition, formatted with FAT, and copy the contents of /boot back.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

How is it that we put man on the moon before we figured out it would be a
good idea to put wheels on luggage?

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 621 bytes --]

On Wed, 20 May 2015 13:01:20 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:

> > You should really consider moving to GRUB2 though.  
> 
> Last time I looked, it couldn't handle all the kernels and options I
> have.

GRUB2 can handle anything GRUB1 can. You probably mean that
grub2-mkconfig couldn't do what you want, but you can either create
grub.conf manually or put your manual configuration in one of the files
in /etc/grub.d.

Copy 40_custom to 05_gentoo, edit it to boot whatever you need and run
grub2-mkconfig.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

"Ubuntu" is an ancient African word, meaning "I can't configure
Slackware".

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Alan Mackenzie]

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 12:56:36PM +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Wednesday 20 May 2015 11:23:21 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 May 2015 10:42:41 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > > No, it's only new SSDs, not the whole system, which is six years old.
> > > Does that mean my choice is restricted to just the two versions of GRUB?

> > No, you could use LiLo ;-)

> Ho ho ho!  :-)

No no no!  LiLo, on a six year old machine actually works well.  It does
exactly what it says on the packet, i.e. it boots up the machine, and
nothing more.  I use LiLo, mainly to avoid the complexities of Grub.

> -- 
> Rgds
> Peter

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany)

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[covici]

Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:

> On Wed, 20 May 2015 06:51:53 -0400, covici@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> 
> > > You should really consider moving to GRUB2 though.  I don't know about
> > > legacy GRUB, but GRUB2 can handle your boot partition being on btrfs.
> > > I still left space on my drives for a boot partition anyway, since it
> > > will be needed when I move to EFI.  
> > 
> > How did you makr the boot partition, or is it just linux?  Did you use
> > gpt or mbr?  I am about to convert to ssd, and I may as well do it in
> > such a way that future mbs will work much easier.
> 
> If you want t be able to use UEFI, you need to use GPT. UEFI needs a FAT
> partition at the start of the drive, type FE00, but booting a GPT disk
> with MBR requires a small BIOS boot partition, type EF02, at the start of
> the drive (mine is 1MB).
> 
> For ease of switching to UEFI later, I'd do
> 
> sda1 1MB BIOS boot, type EF00
> sda2 /boot, type 8300
> everything else.
> 
> You can make sda2 ext2, then, when it is time to switch, simply backup
> the contents of /boot, replace sda1 and sda2 with a single EF00
> partition, formatted with FAT, and copy the contents of /boot back.

Thanks, does the 1mb partition have to have anything in it?

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 948 bytes --]

On Wed, 20 May 2015 08:21:34 -0400, covici@ccs.covici.com wrote:

> > If you want to be able to use UEFI, you need to use GPT. UEFI needs a
> > FAT partition at the start of the drive, type FE00, but booting a GPT
> > disk with MBR requires a small BIOS boot partition, type EF02, at the
> > start of the drive (mine is 1MB).
> > 
> > For ease of switching to UEFI later, I'd do
> > 
> > sda1 1MB BIOS boot, type EF00
> > sda2 /boot, type 8300
> > everything else.
> > 
> > You can make sda2 ext2, then, when it is time to switch, simply backup
> > the contents of /boot, replace sda1 and sda2 with a single EF00
> > partition, formatted with FAT, and copy the contents of /boot back.  
> 
> Thanks, does the 1mb partition have to have anything in it?

No. If doesn't even need a filesystem, just create the partition with the
correct type and GRUB will work.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

One-seventh of life is spent on Monday.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[covici]

Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:

> On Wed, 20 May 2015 08:21:34 -0400, covici@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> 
> > > If you want to be able to use UEFI, you need to use GPT. UEFI needs a
> > > FAT partition at the start of the drive, type FE00, but booting a GPT
> > > disk with MBR requires a small BIOS boot partition, type EF02, at the
> > > start of the drive (mine is 1MB).
> > > 
> > > For ease of switching to UEFI later, I'd do
> > > 
> > > sda1 1MB BIOS boot, type EF00
> > > sda2 /boot, type 8300
> > > everything else.
> > > 
> > > You can make sda2 ext2, then, when it is time to switch, simply backup
> > > the contents of /boot, replace sda1 and sda2 with a single EF00
> > > partition, formatted with FAT, and copy the contents of /boot back.  
> > 
> > Thanks, does the 1mb partition have to have anything in it?
> 
> No. If doesn't even need a filesystem, just create the partition with the
> correct type and GRUB will work.

I have been usinglilo, so till I need to go to a uefi mb, that seems to
work.


-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1964 bytes --]

On Wednesday 20 May 2015 13:55:27 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 20 May 2015 08:21:34 -0400, covici@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> > > If you want to be able to use UEFI, you need to use GPT. UEFI needs a
> > > FAT partition at the start of the drive, type FE00, but booting a GPT
> > > disk with MBR requires a small BIOS boot partition, type EF02, at the
> > > start of the drive (mine is 1MB).
> > > 
> > > For ease of switching to UEFI later, I'd do
> > > 
> > > sda1 1MB BIOS boot, type EF00
> > > sda2 /boot, type 8300
> > > everything else.
> > > 
> > > You can make sda2 ext2, then, when it is time to switch, simply backup
> > > the contents of /boot, replace sda1 and sda2 with a single EF00
> > > partition, formatted with FAT, and copy the contents of /boot back.
> > 
> > Thanks, does the 1mb partition have to have anything in it?
> 
> No. If doesn't even need a filesystem, just create the partition with the
> correct type and GRUB will work.

From what I recall gdisk just starts at sector 2048, doesn't this leave space 
for MBR code?  Note the message "MBR: protective" below:

# gdisk /dev/sda
GPT fdisk (gdisk) version 0.8.10

Partition table scan:
  MBR: protective
  BSD: not present
  APM: not present
  GPT: present

Found valid GPT with protective MBR; using GPT.

Command (? for help): p
Disk /dev/sda: 468862128 sectors, 223.6 GiB
Logical sector size: 512 bytes
Disk identifier (GUID): E682BFC8-0C85-459B-BA14-87F4E68CD711
Partition table holds up to 128 entries
First usable sector is 34, last usable sector is 468862094
Partitions will be aligned on 2048-sector boundaries
Total free space is 27368557 sectors (13.1 GiB)

Number  Start (sector)    End (sector)  Size       Code  Name
   1            2048         1093631   533.0 MiB   EF00  ESP
   2         1093632        43036671   20.0 GiB    8300  root
   3        43036672       441495551   190.0 GiB   8300  home

-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1776 bytes --]

On Wed, 20 May 2015 14:29:27 +0100, Mick wrote:

> > > Thanks, does the 1mb partition have to have anything in it?  
> > 
> > No. If doesn't even need a filesystem, just create the partition with
> > the correct type and GRUB will work.  
> 
> From what I recall gdisk just starts at sector 2048, doesn't this leave
> space for MBR code?  Note the message "MBR: protective" below:

So does fdisk with an MBR partition table. It defaults to 2048 to avoid
alignment problems with disks using 4k blocks.

> # gdisk /dev/sda
> GPT fdisk (gdisk) version 0.8.10
> 
> Partition table scan:
>   MBR: protective
>   BSD: not present
>   APM: not present
>   GPT: present
> 
> Found valid GPT with protective MBR; using GPT.

You still need the BIOS boot partition. This is about BIOS vs UEFI
booting.

% sudo gdisk -l /dev/sda
GPT fdisk (gdisk) version 1.0.0

Partition table scan:
  MBR: protective
  BSD: not present
  APM: not present
  GPT: present

Found valid GPT with protective MBR; using GPT.
Disk /dev/sda: 5860533168 sectors, 2.7 TiB
Logical sector size: 512 bytes
Disk identifier (GUID): 04EFD165-FDDF-4C24-BA81-868B97BF9949
Partition table holds up to 128 entries
First usable sector is 34, last usable sector is 5860533134
Partitions will be aligned on 2048-sector boundaries
Total free space is 2014 sectors (1007.0 KiB)

Number  Start (sector)    End (sector)  Size       Code  Name
   1            2048            4095   1024.0 KiB  EF02  BIOS boot partition
   2            4096         2101247   1024.0 MiB  8300  boot0
   3         2101248        35655679   16.0 GiB    8200  swap0
   4        35655680      5860533134   2.7 TiB     8300  silastic0


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Top Oxymorons Number 2: Exact estimate

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 716 bytes --]

On Wed, 20 May 2015 09:24:12 -0400, covici@ccs.covici.com wrote:

> > > Thanks, does the 1mb partition have to have anything in it?  
> > 
> > No. If doesn't even need a filesystem, just create the partition with
> > the correct type and GRUB will work.  
> 
> I have been usinglilo, so till I need to go to a uefi mb, that seems to
> work.

Once you have a working bootloader on a system, I see little need to
change it unless the hardware changes. Until a few weeks ago I was still
using GRUB 0.97 on my MythTV frontend, because that was current when I
installed it. The new box is UEFI so it uses Gummiboot.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Experience is what you get when you didn't get what you wanted.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Peter Humphrey]

On Wednesday 20 May 2015 13:08:42 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 20 May 2015 13:01:20 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > > You should really consider moving to GRUB2 though.
> > 
> > Last time I looked, it couldn't handle all the kernels and options I
> > have.
> 
> GRUB2 can handle anything GRUB1 can. You probably mean that
> grub2-mkconfig couldn't do what you want,

I did, yes.

> but you can either create grub.conf manually or put your manual configuration
> in one of the files in /etc/grub.d.
> 
> Copy 40_custom to 05_gentoo, edit it to boot whatever you need and run
> grub2-mkconfig.

That's a lot simpler than the rigmarole I was expecting, from the first time I 
tried to switch to GRUB2. Looks like I don't have much of an excuse now. I'll 
think of something though...  ;-)

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Peter Humphrey]

On Wednesday 20 May 2015 15:26:59 I wrote:

> Looks like I don't have much of an excuse now. I'll think of something
> though...  ;-)

Never a truer word...

I followed the instructions in https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/GRUB2_Migration, 
after copying my grub.conf as you suggested, but when I rebooted, the GRUB2 
menu text was minuscule, it only included one of the five kernel lines it 
should have, and when it ran it didn't start my RAID devices.

As I said before, maybe later. I need to find out far more about GRUB2 before i 
dive in, and that's not for today.

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Bob Wya]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 910 bytes --]

On Wed, 20 May 2015 16:09 Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:


 I followed the instructions in https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/GRUB2_Migration
,
after copying my grub.conf as you suggested, but when I rebooted, the GRUB2
menu text was minuscule, it only included one of the five kernel lines it
should have, and when it ran it didn't start my RAID devices.

As I said before, maybe later. I need to find out far more about GRUB2
before i
dive in, and that's not for today.

--
Rgds
Peter


 Personally I feel the Grub 2 OS detection script sucks really badly. So
much so that I completely re-wrote it so I got proper entries for my
various Windows installs (version accurately detected using chntpw) and
multiple Linux distros (sorted/detailed listings for all available kernel
versions). OCD probably - but much easier to navigate! One day I might try
and open a dialogue with Upstream... ;-)

Robert

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1257 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[J. Roeleveld]

On 20 May 2015 18:46:26 CEST, Bob Wya <bob.mt.wya@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 20 May 2015 16:09 Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>I followed the instructions in
>https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/GRUB2_Migration
>,
>after copying my grub.conf as you suggested, but when I rebooted, the
>GRUB2
>menu text was minuscule, it only included one of the five kernel lines
>it
>should have, and when it ran it didn't start my RAID devices.
>
>As I said before, maybe later. I need to find out far more about GRUB2
>before i
>dive in, and that's not for today.
>
>--
>Rgds
>Peter
>
>
>Personally I feel the Grub 2 OS detection script sucks really badly. So
>much so that I completely re-wrote it so I got proper entries for my
>various Windows installs (version accurately detected using chntpw) and
>multiple Linux distros (sorted/detailed listings for all available
>kernel
>versions). OCD probably - but much easier to navigate! One day I might
>try
>and open a dialogue with Upstream... ;-)
>
>Robert

Can you share that script with us?
I am interested in a decent one myself.

Thanks,

Joost
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 727 bytes --]

On Wed, 20 May 2015 16:46:26 +0000, Bob Wya wrote:

>  Personally I feel the Grub 2 OS detection script sucks really badly. So
> much so that I completely re-wrote it so I got proper entries for my
> various Windows installs (version accurately detected using chntpw) and
> multiple Linux distros (sorted/detailed listings for all available
> kernel versions). OCD probably - but much easier to navigate! 

Same here. I was prompted to do it when I switch to a FAT filesystem
for /boot, so the old method of relying on symlinks for the kernel names
no longer worked. It turned out to be remarkably simple, it;s just a
script that spits out menuentry stanzas.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Press every key to continue.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 556 bytes --]

On Wed, 20 May 2015 16:08:53 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:

> I followed the instructions in
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/GRUB2_Migration, after copying my
> grub.conf as you suggested, but when I rebooted, the GRUB2 menu text
> was minuscule, it only included one of the five kernel lines it should
> have, and when it ran it didn't start my RAID devices.

Can you post the contents of grub.conf, /etc/defaults/grub and any custm
scripts in /etc/grub.d.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Fill what's empty, empty what's full, scratch where it itches.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Peter Humphrey]

On Wednesday 20 May 2015 21:35:11 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 20 May 2015 16:08:53 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > I followed the instructions in
> > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/GRUB2_Migration, after copying my
> > grub.conf as you suggested, but when I rebooted, the GRUB2 menu text
> > was minuscule, it only included one of the five kernel lines it should
> > have, and when it ran it didn't start my RAID devices.
> 
> Can you post the contents of grub.conf, /etc/defaults/grub and any custm
> scripts in /etc/grub.d.

This is my grub.conf (copied in from my e-mail yesterday):

root (hd0,0)
timeout 10
default 0
fallback 3
color white/blue black/light-gray
splashimage /grub/splash.xpm.gz

title=Gentoo Linux 3.18.12
        kernel /boot/kernel-x86_64-3.18.12-gentoo root=/dev/md5 net.ifnames=0 irqpoll

title=Gentoo Linux 3.18.12, no X
        kernel /boot/kernel-x86_64-3.18.12-gentoo root=/dev/md5 softlevel=nox net.ifnames=0 irqpoll

title=Gentoo Linux 3.18.12, no network
        kernel /boot/kernel-x86_64-3.18.12-gentoo root=/dev/md5 softlevel=nonet net.ifnames=0 irqpoll

title=Rescue System 3.18.11
        kernel /boot/kernel-x86_64-3.18.11-gentoo-rescue root=/dev/sda8 net.ifnames=0 irqpoll

title=Rescue System 3.18.12
        kernel /boot/kernel-x86_64-3.18.12-gentoo-rescue root=/dev/sda8 net.ifnames=0 irqpoll

I copied it into /etc/grub.d/05_linux.  /etc/defaults/grub is all comments.

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1469 bytes --]

On Thu, 21 May 2015 09:13:44 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:

> This is my grub.conf (copied in from my e-mail yesterday):
> 
> root (hd0,0)
> timeout 10
> default 0
> fallback 3
> color white/blue black/light-gray
> splashimage /grub/splash.xpm.gz
> 
> title=Gentoo Linux 3.18.12
>         kernel /boot/kernel-x86_64-3.18.12-gentoo root=/dev/md5
> net.ifnames=0 irqpoll
> 
> title=Gentoo Linux 3.18.12, no X
>         kernel /boot/kernel-x86_64-3.18.12-gentoo root=/dev/md5
> softlevel=nox net.ifnames=0 irqpoll
> 
> title=Gentoo Linux 3.18.12, no network
>         kernel /boot/kernel-x86_64-3.18.12-gentoo root=/dev/md5
> softlevel=nonet net.ifnames=0 irqpoll
> 
> title=Rescue System 3.18.11
>         kernel /boot/kernel-x86_64-3.18.11-gentoo-rescue root=/dev/sda8
> net.ifnames=0 irqpoll
> 
> title=Rescue System 3.18.12
>         kernel /boot/kernel-x86_64-3.18.12-gentoo-rescue root=/dev/sda8
> net.ifnames=0 irqpoll
> 
> I copied it into /etc/grub.d/05_linux.  /etc/defaults/grub is all
> comments.
> 
That's a GRUB1 file, GRUB2 uses a different syntax so your first entry
would become

menuentry "Gentoo Linux 3.18.12" {
  linux /boot/kernel-x86_64-3.18.12-gentoo root=/dev/md5 net.ifnames=0 irqpoll
}

Also, you need to copy 40_custom and then add your lines to that. This is
because files in /etc/grub.d are executed, so it needs to be a shell
script.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

A wok is what you throw at a wabbit.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Rich Freeman]

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 4:33 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> That's a GRUB1 file, GRUB2 uses a different syntax so your first entry
> would become
>
> menuentry "Gentoo Linux 3.18.12" {
>   linux /boot/kernel-x86_64-3.18.12-gentoo root=/dev/md5 net.ifnames=0 irqpoll
> }

Correct.

>
> Also, you need to copy 40_custom and then add your lines to that. This is
> because files in /etc/grub.d are executed, so it needs to be a shell
> script.
>

If you're just going to hand-edit your config file, I don't see much
point in sticking this stuff in /etc/grub.d.  Just hand-edit your
config file and forget about grub2-mkconfig.

40_custom is more about adding one more entry to an auto-generated
menu, such as having an entry for booting another OS, or a rescue CD
image, or whatever.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Peter Humphrey]

On Thursday 21 May 2015 07:34:58 Rich Freeman wrote:

> If you're just going to hand-edit your config file, I don't see much
> point in sticking this stuff in /etc/grub.d.  Just hand-edit your
> config file and forget about grub2-mkconfig.

You mean: copy grub.conf to grub.cfg and change its syntax to suit GRUB2? I'm 
well used to hand editing grub.conf, so it'll be no big change to operate on 
grub.cfg instead. I can cope with that.

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 643 bytes --]

On Thu, 21 May 2015 12:44:42 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:

> > If you're just going to hand-edit your config file, I don't see much
> > point in sticking this stuff in /etc/grub.d.  Just hand-edit your
> > config file and forget about grub2-mkconfig.  
> 
> You mean: copy grub.conf to grub.cfg and change its syntax to suit
> GRUB2? I'm well used to hand editing grub.conf, so it'll be no big
> change to operate on grub.cfg instead. I can cope with that.

You'd need to run grub2-mkconfig once, to generate a grub.cfg to which
you can add your entries.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

The facts, although interesting, are irrelevant.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1137 bytes --]

On Thu, 21 May 2015 07:34:58 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:

> > Also, you need to copy 40_custom and then add your lines to that.
> > This is because files in /etc/grub.d are executed, so it needs to be
> > a shell script.

> If you're just going to hand-edit your config file, I don't see much
> point in sticking this stuff in /etc/grub.d.  Just hand-edit your
> config file and forget about grub2-mkconfig.

You sill need to edit something each time you update your kernel, unless
you can use symlinks, and running grub2-mkconfig may give you useful
fallback entries from 10_linux.

> 40_custom is more about adding one more entry to an auto-generated
> menu, such as having an entry for booting another OS, or a rescue CD
> image, or whatever.

40_custom is also just and example. You can have any script you want in
there. I wrote a script that auto-generates the entries *I* want and
removed the executable bit from 10_linux. Now I get multiple entries for
all my installed kernels with the correct boot options.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Despite the cost of living, have you noticed how it remains so popular?

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 569 bytes --]

On Thu, 21 May 2015 13:10:02 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote:

> > You mean: copy grub.conf to grub.cfg and change its syntax to suit
> > GRUB2? I'm well used to hand editing grub.conf, so it'll be no big
> > change to operate on grub.cfg instead. I can cope with that.  
> 
> You'd need to run grub2-mkconfig once, to generate a grub.cfg to which
> you can add your entries.

I forgot to mention, run grub2-script-check over your new config file to
check its syntax.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Not one shred of evidence supports the notion that life is serious.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Rich Freeman]

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 21 May 2015 12:44:42 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
>
>> > If you're just going to hand-edit your config file, I don't see much
>> > point in sticking this stuff in /etc/grub.d.  Just hand-edit your
>> > config file and forget about grub2-mkconfig.
>>
>> You mean: copy grub.conf to grub.cfg and change its syntax to suit
>> GRUB2? I'm well used to hand editing grub.conf, so it'll be no big
>> change to operate on grub.cfg instead. I can cope with that.
>
> You'd need to run grub2-mkconfig once, to generate a grub.cfg to which
> you can add your entries.
>

It is just a text file.  I think the only challenge is that there
aren't a lot of decent examples floating around because all the docs
tend to say to run grub2-mkconfig.  I found this extremely frustrating
when I first migrated to grub2.  In my case grub2-mkconfig wouldn't
find anything, since it looks at filenames and my kernels/initramfs
files didn't follow any standard naming convention (they were not
installed using make install).  These days I do use grub2-mkconfig.

That said, the canned config files output by grub2-mkconfig are a bit
smarter about auto-setting things like the grub2 root.  I wouldn't
bother putting anything in 40_custom though.  Just run it once and
edit the file.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1683 bytes --]

On Thu, 21 May 2015 09:19:26 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:

> >> You mean: copy grub.conf to grub.cfg and change its syntax to suit
> >> GRUB2? I'm well used to hand editing grub.conf, so it'll be no big
> >> change to operate on grub.cfg instead. I can cope with that.  
> >
> > You'd need to run grub2-mkconfig once, to generate a grub.cfg to which
> > you can add your entries.
> >  
> 
> It is just a text file.  I think the only challenge is that there
> aren't a lot of decent examples floating around because all the docs
> tend to say to run grub2-mkconfig.  I found this extremely frustrating
> when I first migrated to grub2.

Same here, but running grub2-mkconfig generates a better starting point
than an empty file. That's your example.

> In my case grub2-mkconfig wouldn't
> find anything, since it looks at filenames and my kernels/initramfs
> files didn't follow any standard naming convention (they were not
> installed using make install).  These days I do use grub2-mkconfig.
> 
> That said, the canned config files output by grub2-mkconfig are a bit
> smarter about auto-setting things like the grub2 root.  I wouldn't
> bother putting anything in 40_custom though.  Just run it once and
> edit the file.

That's certainly an option if your needs are not going to change. If you
need to edit the file from time to time, I'd prefer to just edit the
short file tweaked to my needs than the whole thing. It's really a matter
of personal choice but one advantage of continuing to use grub2-mkconfig
is that if GRUB upstream changes things, your config will keep track.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Save the whales. Collect the whole set.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Tips for fresh install with GRUB2+RAID1+LVM2

[Bruce Hill]

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 12:20:29PM +0000, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> 
> No no no!  LiLo, on a six year old machine actually works well.  It does
> exactly what it says on the packet, i.e. it boots up the machine, and
> nothing more.  I use LiLo, mainly to avoid the complexities of Grub.
> -- 
> Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany)

ack