Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.sys.acorn.programmer > #135

Re: Limiting the the size of log files

Date 2011-03-31 21:27 +0100
From Matthew Phillips <mnews@sinenomine.freeserve.co.uk>
Newsgroups comp.sys.acorn.programmer
Subject Re: Limiting the the size of log files
Message-ID <e652c2bc51.Matthew@sinenomine.freeserve.co.uk> (permalink)
References (3 earlier) <mpro.litl1z006h2um033o@wingsandbeaks.org.uk.invalid> <51bb9b357dbob@sick-of-spam.invalid> <51bc9619f8steve@revi11.plus.com> <51bca01fcebob@sick-of-spam.invalid> <52a5bbbc51.davehigton@dsl.pipex.com>

Show all headers | View raw


In message <52a5bbbc51.davehigton@dsl.pipex.com>
 on 31 Mar 2011 Dave Higton  wrote:

> In message <51bca01fcebob@sick-of-spam.invalid>
>           Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > I have one of these at work and another at home. When the drive is empty,
> > they boot in a reasonable time. However, stick any data on the discs and
> > they take forever to allow read/write access. Yes, around 40 minutes
> > before I can read it or write it. They've both been like that for a
> > couple of years now.
> > 
> > I don't think they are faulty, my guess is that it runs through the disc
> > and catalogues the contents before allowing anything to be changed but
> > that's just a guess.
> 
> Yes, they verify the integrity of the disc(s) before allowing
> access.  Lots of files -> a long time.

I cannot remember what OS the NSLU2 comes with by default: it's Linux-based
and locked down.  We reflashed ours, and so run a fairly recent Debian on it
instead.  The hard drive we boot off doesn't have a vast amount on.  I expect
it runs fsck on boot every so often, but it doesn't take too long.  The drive
with our backups on is removed and kept elsewhere, and mounted manually when
required.  I don't think it appears to run fsck for that, so we don't have
any trouble.

The processor in the NSLU2 is much the same as in the Iyonix, I believe, but
the USB system is faster, I suspect.  Nice little machine, though it's
incredibly hair-raising doing an upgrade of the distribution when you have no
keyboard or screen attached.  The only means of access to the machine is
through the network.  We were wanting to use the NSLU2 to run a script to
build an Ubuntu boot disc for the BeagleBoard, but the Debian distribution
was too old to run the script.  In the course of upgrading the NSLU2
something went wrong and we lost network access, which might nearly have been
a disaster.  Fortunately I could plug the NSLU2's boot drive into the
Beagleboard and use the Angstrom distribution which came with the board to
access the drive and fix the faulty config file.  Rebooting the NSLU2 we were
relieved to regain network access to log in.  Then we proceeded to run the
script to produce the Ubuntu boot card for the BeagleBoard!  Convoluted, but
good fun in the end.

I mainly use it for web development, with Apache, PHP and MySQL.  Apart from
the 486 processor in the 2nd hand RISC PC with non-functioning PSU over in
the corner of the room, all of our computers are 100% ARM.  Two Z80-based
machines in boxes in the garage as well.

-- 
Matthew Phillips
Durham

Back to comp.sys.acorn.programmer | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: Limiting the the size of log files Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2011-03-29 12:59 +0100
  Re: Limiting the the size of log files Ian Hamilton <Ian.Hamilton@AAUG.net> - 2011-03-29 13:26 +0100
    Re: Limiting the the size of log files Dr Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> - 2011-03-29 15:02 +0100
    Re: Limiting the the size of log files Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2011-03-29 15:37 +0100
    Re: Limiting the the size of log files Steve Fryatt <news@stevefryatt.org.uk> - 2011-03-29 22:24 +0100
      Re: Limiting the the size of log files Ian Hamilton <Ian.Hamilton@AAUG.net> - 2011-03-30 06:34 +0100
  Re: Limiting the the size of log files Jeremy Nicoll - news posts <jn.nntp.scrap007@wingsandbeaks.org.uk> - 2011-03-29 13:51 +0100
    Re: Limiting the the size of log files Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2011-03-29 15:43 +0100
      Re: Limiting the the size of log files Jeremy Nicoll - news posts <jn.nntp.scrap007@wingsandbeaks.org.uk> - 2011-03-29 16:10 +0100
      Re: Limiting the the size of log files "Ste (news)" <steve@revi11.plus.com> - 2011-03-31 13:24 +0100
        Re: Limiting the the size of log files Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2011-03-31 15:13 +0100
          Re: Limiting the the size of log files Dave Higton <davehigton@dsl.pipex.com> - 2011-03-31 20:14 +0100
            Re: Limiting the the size of log files Matthew Phillips <mnews@sinenomine.freeserve.co.uk> - 2011-03-31 21:27 +0100
            Re: Limiting the the size of log files Jeremy Nicoll - news posts <jn.nntp.scrap007@wingsandbeaks.org.uk> - 2011-03-31 21:45 +0100
              Re: Limiting the the size of log files Dave Higton <davehigton@dsl.pipex.com> - 2011-04-01 21:41 +0100
                Re: Limiting the the size of log files Jeremy Nicoll - news posts <jn.nntp.scrap007@wingsandbeaks.org.uk> - 2011-04-02 00:33 +0100

csiph-web