Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.acorn.programmer > #135
| 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> |
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 | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll 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