Subject: Re: newcomer problems

From: [email-masked] (Markus Illenseer)
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1993 17:19:18 MET

On Sep 29,  8:14pm, Alan Bair wrote:
[...]
> SIDE NOTE: As I have mentioned before, I am working on a new rootfs. Ron's
> statement about root filling up immediately is especially true after the 
> latest binaries, 644, are installed. So for the new rootfs, I was planning
> on making it larger, say 10MB. Does anyone have a problems with this?

 No. Just 'copy'  the stuff with 'tar' using the 'save permissions' flag.

[...]
> > 2) df always reports wrong information, whether it's on the original rootfs,
> > my new root fs, or any partitions I attach.  It invariably ends up giving
> > me negative blocks free, with over 100% usage results. (and if I delete
> > enough files to make it positive again, the numbers still don't total up
> > by a long shot.  Is this a bug in df? or in the filesystem? and is there
> > a fix for it?
> 
> Sounds like a filesystem bug, since I have never seen any strange values.

 It isn't. The ufs is able to handle upto 120% :-) This is a feature of the
 fs. Unlike other fs, ufs does automaticically arrange the files in order
 to have fast access. If the holes can't be filled in a good manner anymore,
 there is no chance to have a defragmentated fs, thus it fills the small
 holes, too. This is made until the partition is really full (120 % even :-).

 df is not currupt, if you like, install the GNU-df.

-- 
Markus Illenseer

---

From: Bill Squier <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1993 12:27:56 -0400

>From:	Alan Bair <[email-masked]>
>> 5)  Since I'm new to all this, is there some file I can request from
>> some place that will explain things more than the existing FAQ does?
>> (which is considerably outdated methinks).  Everything I have here I got
>> directly from ftp.eunet.ch, so I think it's a safe bet to say I got the
>> latest stuff, no?  Any help would be appreciated greatly.
>
>That site is the best place. Yes, the FAQ can use some updating. What you
>really need is to read back copies of the netbsd postings. Are these being
>archived anywhere?
>

I've got about the last 100 - 150 messages, and are now saving all
messages that come in.  If you want, I can archive these and mail
them to you.  If anyone is doing this archiving on an automated
basis, that would be preferable...

-wps

---



Hello!

> basis, that would be preferable...

I've got all since 1st September, all automatically archived and put
on both my anonymous FTP site and on my BBS.

-- 
Keep Cool |_x__x_x_|       Philippe Brand
          |x x  x x|\   Email: [email-masked]  Fido: 2:320/104.21
Have a    | o o  o | |   ___ ___  ___  __  __  __   _   _  __  
Nice Beer | o  . o | |  (   (___)( | )(_  (_  (_   /_) /_)(_   
          |. .  . .|/ 	 \   \ /  \ / __) (__ __) /__)/__)__) Co-SysOp
          `--------'      * To avoid headaches stay drunk *

---

From: [email-masked] (Ronald A Stanions) (Ron Stanions)
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 93 00:04:25 EST

Hi Markus (Markus Wild), in <[email-masked]> on Sep 30 you wrote:

> > such.)  My method was to: create a new partition, newfs it, copy everything
> > off the root fs into the new partition, relabel the new partition as the
> 
> How did you do the copy? Something that should work (assume new partition
> on /mnt):
>   (cd /; tar clf - . )|(cd /mnt; tar xvpSf -)
> 
> > rootfs, and everything's fine, except that the /dev/log device (apparently
> > a socket?) didn't copy, and syslogd keeps complaining about it.  I can
> 
> Huh? syslogd should recreate this socket.. did you perhaps generate a 
> bogous /dev/log when copying over the fs? If so, remove it and retry
> syslogd.

I did use tar, and it copied everything except /dev/log.  I haven't had a chance
to find out why syslogd wouldn't create it so I just commented it out for now.

> A filesystem which is completely full will give you about 112% full in df. 
> This is normal, not a bug, and is explained by the nature of the used
> filesystem.

Ok, I'm not familiar with that type of filesystem. (I've worked with xenix, some
OLD xenix, mostly.)

However, another problem with the filesystem is that it continually gets minor
corruptions.  fsck almost always finds something minor wrong with the system,
after editing only about four or five files, fsck finds something to complain
about. only once was it ever actually fatal to a file, though.  Is this a
common happening?

Also, as long as I'm being annoying }-), how can I get getty on /dev/tty00 to
stay in 8,n,1 after someone enters the name at the login prompt?  It invariably
switches to 7,e,1, and I can't figure out what file to make the change in. ttys
and gettytab have to do with getty, but once getty has passed control over to
login, the parity is wrong.

 Ron Stanions -- DragonSoft Development     [email-masked]
 The Dragon's Weyr BBS -- Livingston, NJ    [email-masked]