Mailing List Archive: Gentoo: User

what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6?

1 2

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

mr.jarry at gmail

Mar 13, 2010, 11:15 AM

Post #1 of 30 (787 views)
Permalink

what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6?

Hi, I noticed this error when I try to sync my portage tree:

---------------
obelix ~ # emerge --sync
>>> Starting rsync with rsync://134.68.220.73/gentoo-portage...
>>> Checking server timestamp ...
timed out
rsync error: received SIGINT, SIGTERM, or SIGHUP (code 20) at
rsync.c(544) [receiver=3.0.6]
>>> Retrying...

>>> Starting retry 1 of 3 with rsync://134.68.220.74/gentoo-portage
>>> Checking server timestamp ...
timed out
rsync error: received SIGINT, SIGTERM, or SIGHUP (code 20) at
rsync.c(544) [receiver=3.0.6]
>>> Retrying...
---------------

It started about month ago and it happens quite frequently, I'd say
there is ~30% chance I get this message when I try "emerge --sync".
What could be the reason for this, and how could I fix it?

Jarry

--
_______________________________________________________________
This mailbox accepts e-mails only from selected mailing-lists!
Everything else is considered to be spam and therefore deleted.

peterk2 at coolmail

Mar 13, 2010, 3:42 PM

Post #2 of 30 (760 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On 2010-03-13 20:15, Jarry wrote:

> obelix ~ # emerge --sync
>>>> Starting rsync with rsync://134.68.220.73/gentoo-portage...
>>>> Checking server timestamp ...
> timed out
> rsync error: received SIGINT, SIGTERM, or SIGHUP (code 20) at
> rsync.c(544) [receiver=3.0.6]
>>>> Retrying...

It's the server, not rsync that's at fault. rsync is merely telling you
that it cannot connect and is retrying to connect. Just choose another
mirror (emerge mirrorselect if you haven't already and then do
'mirrorselect -i' - of course without the '').

Best regards

Peter K

lists at f_philipp

Mar 14, 2010, 7:21 AM

Post #3 of 30 (761 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

Am 14.03.2010 00:42, schrieb pk:
> On 2010-03-13 20:15, Jarry wrote:
>
>> obelix ~ # emerge --sync
>>>>> Starting rsync with rsync://134.68.220.73/gentoo-portage...
>>>>> Checking server timestamp ...
>> timed out
>> rsync error: received SIGINT, SIGTERM, or SIGHUP (code 20) at
>> rsync.c(544) [receiver=3.0.6]
>>>>> Retrying...
>
> It's the server, not rsync that's at fault. rsync is merely telling you
> that it cannot connect and is retrying to connect. Just choose another
> mirror (emerge mirrorselect if you haven't already and then do
> 'mirrorselect -i' - of course without the '').
>
> Best regards
>
> Peter K
>

It can also happen if you are one a slow or lossy connection or have
other network problems. I, for example, experienced similar problems
when reverse DNS lookups did not work.

In this case, you can try to set a longer timeout. For this, add
PORTAGE_RSYNC_INITIAL_TIMEOUT=60
or something similar to /etc/make.conf

Hope this helps,
Florian Philipp

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.26 KB)

sgtphou at fire-eyes

Mar 14, 2010, 7:44 PM

Post #4 of 30 (751 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

Jarry wrote:
> Hi, I noticed this error when I try to sync my portage tree:
>
> ---------------
> obelix ~ # emerge --sync
> >>> Starting rsync with rsync://134.68.220.73/gentoo-portage...
> >>> Checking server timestamp ...
> timed out
> rsync error: received SIGINT, SIGTERM, or SIGHUP (code 20) at
> rsync.c(544) [receiver=3.0.6]
> >>> Retrying...
>
> >>> Starting retry 1 of 3 with rsync://134.68.220.74/gentoo-portage
> >>> Checking server timestamp ...
> timed out
> rsync error: received SIGINT, SIGTERM, or SIGHUP (code 20) at
> rsync.c(544) [receiver=3.0.6]
> >>> Retrying...
> ---------------
>
> It started about month ago and it happens quite frequently, I'd say
> there is ~30% chance I get this message when I try "emerge --sync".
> What could be the reason for this, and how could I fix it?
>
> Jarry
>

It's not rsync it's the servers. Are you using the EU pool? I am, and I
have that problem frequently. In my opinion, the EU pool is of rather
poor quality.

peter at humphrey

Mar 15, 2010, 3:10 AM

Post #5 of 30 (749 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On Monday 15 March 2010 02:44:56 fire-eyes wrote:

> Are you using the EU pool? I am, and I have that problem frequently.

I don't have /that/ problem at all. The only problem I have with it is
the Irish server in the pool - it wouldn't be enough to go for a cuppa
while it's running; I'd have to come back tomorrow if I let it continue
at its own pace*. So I watch the beginning of --sync and if I get that
server I kill it and try again.

I haven't complained about it because I assume that other places get
better service. Ireland, for instance.

* I'm serious. To satisfy my curiosity, not long ago I did let it run,
and after an hour it was still in dev-*.

--
Rgds
Peter.

neil at digimed

Mar 15, 2010, 5:28 AM

Post #6 of 30 (747 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:10:52 +0000, Peter Humphrey wrote:

> I don't have /that/ problem at all. The only problem I have with it is
> the Irish server in the pool - it wouldn't be enough to go for a cuppa
> while it's running; I'd have to come back tomorrow if I let it continue
> at its own pace*.

Is that heanet.ie? I always get decent speeds from there.

--
Neil Bothwick

Windows artificial intelligence: Unable to FORMAT A: Having a go at C:

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.19 KB)

dwnoon at ntlworld

Mar 15, 2010, 7:15 AM

Post #7 of 30 (747 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:10:02 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote about Re:
[gentoo-user] what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6?:

>On Monday 15 March 2010 02:44:56 fire-eyes wrote:
>
>> Are you using the EU pool? I am, and I have that problem frequently.
>
>I don't have /that/ problem at all. The only problem I have with it is
>the Irish server in the pool - it wouldn't be enough to go for a cuppa
>while it's running; I'd have to come back tomorrow if I let it
>continue at its own pace*. So I watch the beginning of --sync and if I
>get that server I kill it and try again.

You run your emerge --sync jobs by hand?!!!

I run mine from the root crontab. Consequently, I don't give a
monkey's how long it takes. I also have it update the eix and esearch
databases while it is at it. If anybody wants a copy of my shell
script to do this, just ask.
--
Regards,

Dave [RLU #314465]
======================================================================
dwnoon [at] ntlworld (David W Noon)
======================================================================

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.19 KB)

peter at humphrey

Mar 15, 2010, 7:56 AM

Post #8 of 30 (747 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On Monday 15 March 2010 14:15:08 David W Noon wrote:

> You run your emerge --sync jobs by hand?!!!
>
> I run mine from the root crontab.

My boxes aren't allowed to run all night, so I call a script that runs
the updating process when I fire them up in the morning. No sweat.

> I also have it update the eix and esearch databases while it is at it.

Me too.

--
Rgds
Peter.

peter at humphrey

Mar 15, 2010, 8:00 AM

Post #9 of 30 (741 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On Monday 15 March 2010 12:28:49 Neil Bothwick wrote:

> Is that heanet.ie?

Yes.

> I always get decent speeds from there.

Just shows what oddities show up from time to time in complex networks.
My speed is far better from eastern Europe (Ukraine, Latvia, ...) than
from just across the Irish Sea. Maybe I should have a word with my ISP
to see if anything can be done.

--
Rgds
Peter.

wwong at Math

Mar 15, 2010, 8:55 AM

Post #10 of 30 (747 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 02:15:08PM +0000, David W Noon wrote:
> You run your emerge --sync jobs by hand?!!!

Why is that surprising? My laptop does not have an always-on internet
connection, nevermind it sits silently and off for most of the day. I
"sync by hand" when I have time, roughly twice each week.

W
--
Willie W. Wong wwong [at] math
Data aequatione quotcunque fluentes quantitae involvente fluxiones invenire
et vice versa ~~~ I. Newton

paul.hartman+gentoo at gmail

Mar 15, 2010, 9:01 AM

Post #11 of 30 (748 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 5:10 AM, Peter Humphrey
<peter [at] humphrey> wrote:
> On Monday 15 March 2010 02:44:56 fire-eyes wrote:
>
>> Are you using the EU pool? I am, and I have that problem frequently.
>
> I don't have /that/ problem at all. The only problem I have with it is
> the Irish server in the pool - it wouldn't be enough to go for a cuppa
> while it's running; I'd have to come back tomorrow if I let it continue
> at its own pace*. So I watch the beginning of --sync and if I get that
> server I kill it and try again.

There was a distfiles mirror that would always hang and timeout for
me, so I added it to my hosts file with a bogus IP so it just fails
instantly and tries a different server. Maybe you could do the same
for the server that's bothering you, then you won't have to worry
about it.

dwnoon at ntlworld

Mar 15, 2010, 10:08 AM

Post #12 of 30 (739 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:00:02 +0100, Willie Wong wrote about Re:
[gentoo-user] what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6?:

>On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 02:15:08PM +0000, David W Noon wrote:
>> You run your emerge --sync jobs by hand?!!!
>
>Why is that surprising?

Because emerge jobs produce copious amounts of output that is difficult
to read as it scrolls past. I much prefer the cron daemon or at daemon
to send me the output as email, so I can scroll backwards and forwards
through it at my leisure.

>My laptop does not have an always-on internet
>connection, nevermind it sits silently and off for most of the day. I
>"sync by hand" when I have time, roughly twice each week.

Well, when your laptop is powered off the cron daemon won't run the
emerge jobs, so that's really a non-issue.
--
Regards,

Dave [RLU #314465]
======================================================================
dwnoon [at] ntlworld (David W Noon)
======================================================================

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.19 KB)

stroller at stellar

Mar 15, 2010, 11:12 AM

Post #13 of 30 (742 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On 15 Mar 2010, at 17:08, David W Noon wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:00:02 +0100, Willie Wong wrote about Re:
> [gentoo-user] what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6?:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 02:15:08PM +0000, David W Noon wrote:
>>> You run your emerge --sync jobs by hand?!!!
>>
>> Why is that surprising?
>
> Because emerge jobs produce copious amounts of output that is
> difficult
> to read as it scrolls past. I much prefer the cron daemon or at
> daemon
> to send me the output as email, so I can scroll backwards and forwards
> through it at my leisure.

`man screen`

:P

Stroller.

dwnoon at ntlworld

Mar 15, 2010, 1:46 PM

Post #14 of 30 (734 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:20:02 +0100, Stroller wrote about Re:
[gentoo-user] what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6?:

>On 15 Mar 2010, at 17:08, David W Noon wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:00:02 +0100, Willie Wong wrote about Re:
>> [gentoo-user] what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6?:
>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 02:15:08PM +0000, David W Noon wrote:
>>>> You run your emerge --sync jobs by hand?!!!
>>>
>>> Why is that surprising?
>>
>> Because emerge jobs produce copious amounts of output that is
>> difficult
>> to read as it scrolls past. I much prefer the cron daemon or at
>> daemon
>> to send me the output as email, so I can scroll backwards and
>> forwards through it at my leisure.
>
>`man screen`

I don't have a man page for "screen".

I do know `man less`, `man more`, etc., and output redirection to file.
Heck, I'm even old enough to know Ctl+S and Ctl+Q, as I used to
program PDP-11s back in the 1970s. But none of those addresses the
fundamental issue of sitting there watching all this crap. Hence I
normally use fcron or at to run my emerge jobs in the background, which,
as a fringe benefit, gives me easily scrollable output in my MUA.
--
Regards,

Dave [RLU #314465]
======================================================================
dwnoon [at] ntlworld (David W Noon)
======================================================================

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.19 KB)

wwong at Math

Mar 15, 2010, 3:14 PM

Post #15 of 30 (727 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 05:08:06PM +0000, David W Noon wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:00:02 +0100, Willie Wong wrote about Re:
> [gentoo-user] what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6?:
>
> >On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 02:15:08PM +0000, David W Noon wrote:
> >> You run your emerge --sync jobs by hand?!!!
> >
> >Why is that surprising?
>
> Because emerge jobs produce copious amounts of output that is difficult
> to read as it scrolls past. I much prefer the cron daemon or at daemon
> to send me the output as email, so I can scroll backwards and forwards
> through it at my leisure.

What output do you actually read from syncs? For builds, is it really
wise to do all updates unattended? Also, for builds, there is such a
thing as elogs (which allows you to save all messages to
/var/log/portage for ease of reading at your leisure. You can even
configure it to select what types of messages are saved): I neither
need nor want to scroll through pages and pages of mostly useless
output only to find the ewarn messages.

I'm sure you have a good reason for wanting to do things your way, and
I do not claim mine is better. I am just surprised that you sounded
surprised to find out some people don't do things your way.

> >My laptop does not have an always-on internet
> >connection, nevermind it sits silently and off for most of the day. I
> >"sync by hand" when I have time, roughly twice each week.
>
> Well, when your laptop is powered off the cron daemon won't run the
> emerge jobs, so that's really a non-issue.

Actually, the cron daemon won't run because I don't have a cron daemon
installed on the laptop. And I don't have a cron daemon because having
periodic jobs only make sense if the computer is likely to be on when
cron is triggered.

Cheers,

W
--
Willie W. Wong wwong [at] math
Data aequatione quotcunque fluentes quantitae involvente fluxiones invenire
et vice versa ~~~ I. Newton

dwnoon at ntlworld

Mar 15, 2010, 4:10 PM

Post #16 of 30 (720 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 23:20:03 +0100, Willie Wong wrote about Re:
[gentoo-user] what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6?:

>On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 05:08:06PM +0000, David W Noon wrote:
[snip]
>> Because emerge jobs produce copious amounts of output that is
>> difficult to read as it scrolls past. I much prefer the cron daemon
>> or at daemon to send me the output as email, so I can scroll
>> backwards and forwards through it at my leisure.
>
>What output do you actually read from syncs?

I look at the differences in the Portage tree before and after.

>For builds, is it really wise to do all updates unattended?

Perfectly. The emerge runs the same whether in background or
foreground. If it's going to trash something, it will do it the same
way whether you use an "at" job or run it directly in the console.

> Also, for builds, there is such a
>thing as elogs (which allows you to save all messages to
>/var/log/portage for ease of reading at your leisure.

I have mine go to /var/log/portage/log. But these only log the
activities within a single ebuild, not the other housekeeping that goes
on in an emerge job. The output of a batch job contains the lot.

>I'm sure you have a good reason for wanting to do things your way, and
>I do not claim mine is better. I am just surprised that you sounded
>surprised to find out some people don't do things your way.

Perhaps it is because I became used to running long-winded jobs in the
background years ago on mainframes. It was always the case that using
the terminal as the primary output device slowed down the job, because
spooling the output to disk was always faster than displaying it on the
terminal. I believe that to be so to this very day.

>Actually, the cron daemon won't run because I don't have a cron daemon
>installed on the laptop. And I don't have a cron daemon because having
>periodic jobs only make sense if the computer is likely to be on when
>cron is triggered.

Using a modern cron daemon is a convenient way to run regular jobs,
even on a machine that is powered off for much of the time. One can
use the "first" option to kick off jobs relative to power-on time
instead of wall clock time.
--
Regards,

Dave [RLU #314465]
======================================================================
dwnoon [at] ntlworld (David W Noon)
======================================================================

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.19 KB)

neil at digimed

Mar 15, 2010, 4:14 PM

Post #17 of 30 (728 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 20:46:11 +0000, David W Noon wrote:

> I do know `man less`, `man more`, etc., and output redirection to file.
> Heck, I'm even old enough to know Ctl+S and Ctl+Q, as I used to
> program PDP-11s back in the 1970s. But none of those addresses the
> fundamental issue of sitting there watching all this crap.

emerge --sync | cat

It only produces all that output when stdout is a terminal.
Alternatively, redirect to /dev/null and you'll only see stderr.

--
Neil Bothwick

Will the last human please uninstall internet.exe.

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.19 KB)

neil at digimed

Mar 15, 2010, 4:17 PM

Post #18 of 30 (725 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 23:10:41 +0000, David W Noon wrote:

> > Also, for builds, there is such a
> >thing as elogs (which allows you to save all messages to
> >/var/log/portage for ease of reading at your leisure.
>
> I have mine go to /var/log/portage/log. But these only log the
> activities within a single ebuild, not the other housekeeping that goes
> on in an emerge job. The output of a batch job contains the lot.

As do the log files in $PORT_LOGDIR, they contain exactly the same output
you would see in the terminal. I emerge packages with the -j 2 option,
which hides all the output unless an ebuild fails, but it is still in
the logs. Elog information is mailed to me.

--
Neil Bothwick

One of the nice things about standards is that there are so many of them.

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.19 KB)

dwnoon at ntlworld

Mar 15, 2010, 6:00 PM

Post #19 of 30 (721 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 00:20:02 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote about Re:
[gentoo-user] what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6?:

>On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 23:10:41 +0000, David W Noon wrote:
>
>> > Also, for builds, there is such a
>> >thing as elogs (which allows you to save all messages to
>> >/var/log/portage for ease of reading at your leisure.
>>
>> I have mine go to /var/log/portage/log. But these only log the
>> activities within a single ebuild, not the other housekeeping that
>> goes on in an emerge job. The output of a batch job contains the
>> lot.
>
>As do the log files in $PORT_LOGDIR, they contain exactly the same
>output you would see in the terminal.

Not quite. The sequence in which the ebuilds were run is lost when the
discrete logs are your only source of tracing through, although one
could attempt to reconstruct it using the timestamps in the file names
of the ebuild logs. They also do not contain the results of the "pretend
depclean" that occurs at the end of an emerge job. Moreover, they do
not contain the report of the number of configuration files that need
updating by cfg-update (or the like).

>I emerge packages with the -j 2
>option, which hides all the output unless an ebuild fails, but it is
>still in the logs. Elog information is mailed to me.

I ended up switching off the emailing of ebuild logs, as it mostly
duplicates text that is already in the emerge job output. These days,
I primarily use the ebuild logs as uploads to Gentoo's bugzilla when
there is a problem to be reported.
--
Regards,

Dave [RLU #314465]
======================================================================
dwnoon [at] ntlworld (David W Noon)
======================================================================

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.19 KB)

waltdnes at waltdnes

Mar 15, 2010, 6:40 PM

Post #20 of 30 (728 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 01:00:21AM +0000, David W Noon wrote
> On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 00:20:02 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote

> >As do the log files in $PORT_LOGDIR, they contain exactly the same
> >output you would see in the terminal.
>
> Not quite. The sequence in which the ebuilds were run is lost when the
> discrete logs are your only source of tracing through, although one
> could attempt to reconstruct it using the timestamps in the file names
> of the ebuild logs.

I use mc (Midnight Commander), bring up /var/log/portage/elog, and
with "Sort Order" in the left panel set to "Modify Time", I get a
chronological listing of all the warnings. What could be easier?

--
Walter Dnes <waltdnes [at] waltdnes>

neil at digimed

Mar 16, 2010, 2:00 AM

Post #21 of 30 (725 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 01:00:21 +0000, David W Noon wrote:

> >As do the log files in $PORT_LOGDIR, they contain exactly the same
> >output you would see in the terminal.
>
> Not quite. The sequence in which the ebuilds were run is lost when the
> discrete logs are your only source of tracing through, although one
> could attempt to reconstruct it using the timestamps in the file names
> of the ebuild logs.

genlop -l gives you that, in a more useful format.

> They also do not contain the results of the "pretend
> depclean" that occurs at the end of an emerge job.

Do you means the autoclean? That never picks up anything here. I think it
only will if you have an unclean system.

>Moreover, they do
> not contain the report of the number of configuration files that need
> updating by.
> cfg-update (or the like).

You can get that at the end of any emerge command.

Parsing all that information in one large email without missing anything
important sounds like a nightmare. I prefer each warning in a separate
mail that I can mark as read when I have dealt with that particular
issue, but each to their own.

--
Neil Bothwick

I used to live in the real world, but I got evicted.

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.19 KB)

stroller at stellar

Mar 16, 2010, 12:35 PM

Post #22 of 30 (714 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On 15 Mar 2010, at 20:46, David W Noon wrote:
>>> ...
>>> Because emerge jobs produce copious amounts of output that is
>>> difficult
>>> to read as it scrolls past. I much prefer the cron daemon or at
>>> daemon
>>> to send me the output as email, so I can scroll backwards and
>>> forwards through it at my leisure.
>>
>> `man screen`
>
> I don't have a man page for "screen".

This is obviously because it isn't installed.

I'm going to assume that you're not being facetious, however I'm
amazed you don't know `screen`. Everyone should know `screen`! It's
amazing, and I can't believe that if you had tried it then you
wouldn't have it installed. I sure you'll wonder how you lived without
it.

You should try it:

`emerge screen` (don't sync just yet)

Now type:

`screen sudo eix-sync`

Wait for syncing to start, then press ctrl-a (together) then the d key.

Close the terminal window you're working in, if you like. Open
another. Or ssh in from another box.

Type:

`screen -Rd`

You should see all the sync output scrolling past. So press ctrl-a
followed by the escape key. Use ctrl-u to scroll up and see what you
missed. ctrl-d scrolls down and hitting escape 2 or 3 times exits the
"scrollback mode".

I'm not saying that this is better than having syncs performed by cron
job and the output emailed to you. In fact, that's something I've been
meaning to get round to setting up here. If I had the output of
(sync'd) `emerge -upv world` emailed to me weekly then it might ensure
that my irregular habits don't cause me to overlook updates.

HOWEVER, this branch of the thread has followed from your surprise
that people might run emerge by hand, and your reasons for this (very
first quoted above). I'm just saying there's nothing wrong with
emerging or syncing by hand. You can easily scroll back and review any
output that you need to - in fact the obvious way to do this is using
a conventional GUI terminal emulator in a windowing environment.

Also: grep PORTAGE_ELOG_MAIL /usr/share/portage/config/make.conf.example
This ensures you see all the *important* output of portage, without
having to watch the whole darn compiler output, which is pretty
useless. You just get an email for every package upon which Portage
has a comment to make.

Other stuff you can do with `screen`:

ctrl-a c - create a new screen "window"
ctrl-a n - next screen "window"
ctrl-a p - previous
ctrl-a ? - help
ctrl-a " - list open screen windows, select one
ctrl-a A - name a screen window, see above (capital "A")

Stroller.

wonko at wonkology

Mar 16, 2010, 3:26 PM

Post #23 of 30 (711 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

Stroller writes:

> I'm going to assume that you're not being facetious, however I'm
> amazed you don't know `screen`. Everyone should know `screen`! It's
> amazing, and I can't believe that if you had tried it then you
> wouldn't have it installed. I sure you'll wonder how you lived without
> it.

Yes screen is quite essential. But I also too quite a while until I
started using it. I think it's because you have to learn a bit about it
first. I was confused by the -dDrR options, and by the many key bindings.
Didn't know then that you only need a few to work with it, and I still do
not use most of them. Now I use screen a lot, sometimes I use screen
inside a screen session.

[screen summary]

Now that's a nice summary! If I weren't already using it, I'd give it a
try now.

I want to add one thing: I suggest changing the defscrollback value in
/etc/screenrc from 100 to something much larger, I have 100000. If not,
you can only scroll back 100 lines, which is not that much.

Wonko

stroller at stellar

Mar 16, 2010, 3:50 PM

Post #24 of 30 (712 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

On 16 Mar 2010, at 22:26, Alex Schuster wrote:
> ...
> I want to add one thing: I suggest changing the defscrollback value in
> /etc/screenrc from 100 to something much larger, I have 100000. If
> not,
> you can only scroll back 100 lines, which is not that much.

I don't *think* the default is as low as 100 lines. I don't seem to
have a .screenrc on my system (the system I've just checked; and I
would edit it there, rather than /etc/screenrc) and it has always had
sufficient scrollback buffer for my needs. By all means it should be
enlarged this way if necessary.

Stroller.

wonko at wonkology

Mar 16, 2010, 4:23 PM

Post #25 of 30 (703 views)
Permalink

Re: what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6? [In reply to]

Stroller writes:

> On 16 Mar 2010, at 22:26, Alex Schuster wrote:
> > ...
> > I want to add one thing: I suggest changing the defscrollback value
> > in /etc/screenrc from 100 to something much larger, I have 100000.
> > If not, you can only scroll back 100 lines, which is not that much.
>
> I don't *think* the default is as low as 100 lines. I don't seem to
> have a .screenrc on my system (the system I've just checked; and I
> would edit it there, rather than /etc/screenrc) and it has always had
> sufficient scrollback buffer for my needs. By all means it should be
> enlarged this way if necessary.

I just checked, the original screenrc I had when I emerged screen on this
system around April has these lines:

# Change default scrollback value for new windows
defscrollback 1000 # default: 100

So it's 1000 already in Gentoo, ten times larger than the default. Still
not large enough I think, as we have lots of memory nowadays, don't we.
And I often go back many pages, 100 lines is not that much.
BTW, I did not know about Ctrl-U/D, after Ctrl-A-Esc I just use PgUp/PgDn
to scroll up and down.

I prefer to edit /etc/screenrc so everyone has a reasonable large
scrollback buffer. Other screen settings go into the user's .screenrc.
There's so much that can be set, I'm only using a fraction of screen's
features.

Another thing I sometimes use: With screen -r <user>/<pid> you can join a
session that is attached by another user. I am using this sometimes when
another person has trouble with their Gentoo installation. I log in into
their server, attach to the screen session, and we can both do things in
it. screen needs the multiuser USE flag for this, though.

Wonko

1 2

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads