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

Groups > linux.debian.user > #171616 > unrolled thread

Jessie (8.0) slow to boot

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-31 16:20 +0200
    Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-08-31 16:30 +0200
      Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-31 17:00 +0200
        Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-08-31 17:10 +0200
          Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-08-31 18:10 +0200
          Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-31 18:10 +0200
        Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2016-08-31 17:50 +0200
          Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-31 18:30 +0200
            Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2016-08-31 18:50 +0200
              Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-09-01 13:00 +0200
                Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-09-01 16:00 +0200
            Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-08-31 20:50 +0200
            Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-09-01 14:10 +0200
              Re: Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2016-09-01 14:20 +0200
                Re: Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-09-01 16:50 +0200
                  Re: Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Michael Biebl <biebl@debian.org> - 2016-09-02 09:50 +0200
                    Re: Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-09-02 17:40 +0200
                      Re: Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2016-09-02 17:50 +0200
                        Re: Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-09-02 21:40 +0200
                      Re: Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2016-09-02 18:30 +0200
              Re: Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot claude juif <claude.juif@gmail.com> - 2016-09-01 16:00 +0200
                Re: Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-09-02 15:10 +0200
      Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Dominic Knight <dominicknight@gmx.com> - 2016-08-31 18:20 +0200
    Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2016-08-31 17:10 +0200
    Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Alan McConnell <alan@his.com> - 2016-08-31 20:50 +0200
      Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2016-09-01 11:20 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#171616 — Jessie (8.0) slow to boot

I have Jessie installed on a desktop and a laptop. They both take 
about 105-110 seconds to boot. Squeeze on the desktop takes ~15 
seconds to boot.

Most of the delay seems to be in something that states approximately
"A start job is running for dev-disk-by\x2duuid?????.device (ttttt}"
Where ????? is a long alphanumeric string
       ttttt is a timer display
That is followed by two message identified as "Warning" in bright 
yellow.[they pass by to fast to read].

What's going on?
Are the messages that scroll past preserved anywhere?
TIA

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#171617

On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 09:16:00AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> What's going on?
> Are the messages that scroll past preserved anywhere?

When booting with systemd, the boot messages are stored in RAM
automatically, and can be viewed by running "journalctl" as root.
I'd definitely start there.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171620

On 8/31/2016 9:24 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 09:16:00AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
>> What's going on?
>> Are the messages that scroll past preserved anywhere?
>
> When booting with systemd, the boot messages are stored in RAM
> automatically, and can be viewed by running "journalctl" as root.
> I'd definitely start there.
>

The relevant section appears to be

Aug 31 09:12:11 deb8-2ndtry kernel: psmouse serio2: alps: Unknown 
ALPS touchpad: E7=10 00 64, EC=10 00 64
Aug 31 09:12:13 deb8-2ndtry kernel: psmouse serio2: trackpoint: 
IBM TrackPoint firmware: 0x0e, buttons: 3/3
Aug 31 09:12:13 deb8-2ndtry kernel: input: TPPS/2 IBM TrackPoint 
as /devices/platform/i8042/serio1/serio2/input/inp
Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Job 
dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x2daf89\x2d33ba51934630.de
Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Timed out waiting for 
device dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x
Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for 
/dev/disk/by-uuid/0a344714-ae06-43ed-af89-33ba5193463
Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for Swap.
Aug 31 09:13:33 deb8-2ndtry anacron[493]: Anacron 2.3 started on 
2016-08-31
Aug 31 09:13:33 deb8-2ndtry anacron[493]: Normal exit (0 jobs run)

What is this trying to tel me?
Where could I have gone to find answer to above?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171621

On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 09:58:39AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Job 
> dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x2daf89\x2d33ba51934630.de
> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Timed out waiting for 
> device dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x
> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for 
> /dev/disk/by-uuid/0a344714-ae06-43ed-af89-33ba5193463
> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for Swap.

Look for swap partitions defined in /etc/fstab and see if one of them
is on a device that no longer exists (or exists only intermittently,
such as a removable USB drive).  Chances are you'll find one with
UUID=0a344714-something on it.  Try commenting it out.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171631

On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 11:00:27AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 8/31/2016 10:06 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> >Look for swap partitions defined in /etc/fstab and see if one of them
> >is on a device that no longer exists (or exists only intermittently,
> >such as a removable USB drive).  Chances are you'll find one with
> >UUID=0a344714-something on it.  Try commenting it out.
> 
> Commented out relevant line on both machines.
> They both boot promptly now ;/

OK, good.  Now the final step is to review your fstab vs. your actual
disk partitions and add whatever you may be missing (e.g. a swap
partition whose UUID got changed, as someone else speculated).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171632

On 8/31/2016 10:06 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 09:58:39AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
>> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Job
>> dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x2daf89\x2d33ba51934630.de
>> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Timed out waiting for
>> device dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x
>> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for
>> /dev/disk/by-uuid/0a344714-ae06-43ed-af89-33ba5193463
>> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for Swap.
>
> Look for swap partitions defined in /etc/fstab and see if one of them
> is on a device that no longer exists (or exists only intermittently,
> such as a removable USB drive).  Chances are you'll find one with
> UUID=0a344714-something on it.  Try commenting it out.
>

Commented out relevant line on both machines.
They both boot promptly now ;/
Thanks

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171629

Richard Owlett composed on 2016-08-31 09:58 (UTC-0500):
...
> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Job
> dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x2daf89\x2d33ba51934630.de
> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Timed out waiting for
> device dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x
> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for
> /dev/disk/by-uuid/0a344714-ae06-43ed-af89-33ba5193463
> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for Swap.

Which was installed last, Squeeze, or Jessie? You can expect this message 
trying to boot the earlier installed installation after having done the later 
install. Unless you take affirmative action to deny it, an existing swap 
partition used by the earlier installation will be reformatted by the later 
installation. Reformatting creates a new UUID, thus making the UUID referring 
to it in the earlier installation's fstab invalid. The earlier needs to have 
its fstab edited to use the correct swap partition UUID, or volume label, or 
device name, if swap is actually desired or needed.
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

  Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171635

On 8/31/2016 10:44 AM, Felix Miata wrote:
> Richard Owlett composed on 2016-08-31 09:58 (UTC-0500):
> ...
>> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Job
>> dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x2daf89\x2d33ba51934630.de
>>
>> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Timed out waiting for
>> device dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x
>> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for
>> /dev/disk/by-uuid/0a344714-ae06-43ed-af89-33ba5193463
>> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for
>> Swap.
>
> Which was installed last, Squeeze, or Jessie? You can expect this
> message trying to boot the earlier installed installation after
> having done the later install. Unless you take affirmative action
> to deny it, an existing swap partition used by the earlier
> installation will be reformatted by the later installation.
> Reformatting creates a new UUID, thus making the UUID referring
> to it in the earlier installation's fstab invalid. The earlier
> needs to have its fstab edited to use the correct swap partition
> UUID, or volume label, or device name, if swap is actually
> desired or needed.

There may be some subtle problems still lurking somewhere which 
show up only for people like me doing many installs of *nearly* 
identical systems.

Commenting out the line in /etc/fstab DID allow it to boot 
without warning messages.

However,taking into account Darac's comments, does this now mean 
that the machines are now operating without a swap partition?

IIRC the current instance of Jessie on the laptop was the 
chronologically the last OS installed so by the comments in this 
thread should not have had the problem. The laptop is my 
designated "Guinea pig" so I'll do a fresh install to see if 
problem persists.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171637

Richard Owlett composed on 2016-08-31 11:25 (UTC-0500):

> Commenting out the line in /etc/fstab DID allow it to boot
> without warning messages.

> However,taking into account Darac's comments, does this now mean
> that the machines are now operating without a swap partition?

If fstab has no uncommented lines for swap, then there will no swap enabled. 
Among ways to see if swap is currently active are top and free.
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

  Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171661

On 8/31/2016 11:48 AM, Felix Miata wrote:
> Richard Owlett composed on 2016-08-31 11:25 (UTC-0500):
>
>> Commenting out the line in /etc/fstab DID allow it to boot
>> without warning messages.
>
>> However,taking into account Darac's comments, does this now mean
>> that the machines are now operating without a swap partition?
>
> If fstab has no uncommented lines for swap, then there will no
> swap enabled. Among ways to see if swap is currently active are
> top and free.

Thank you.
For we of tri-focal generation I recommend using free.
The relavant info is more easily found ;/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171667

On Thursday 01 September 2016 06:50:13 Richard Owlett wrote:

> On 8/31/2016 11:48 AM, Felix Miata wrote:
> > Richard Owlett composed on 2016-08-31 11:25 (UTC-0500):
> >> Commenting out the line in /etc/fstab DID allow it to boot
> >> without warning messages.
> >>
> >> However,taking into account Darac's comments, does this now mean
> >> that the machines are now operating without a swap partition?
> >
> > If fstab has no uncommented lines for swap, then there will no
> > swap enabled. Among ways to see if swap is currently active are
> > top and free.
>
> Thank you.
> For we of tri-focal generation I recommend using free.
> The relavant info is more easily found ;/

As a glasses wearer for 75 years, and one of the tri-focal crowd for 
about 65 years, I cheat, making use of the multiple workspaces windowing 
system, I have a multitab terminal-4.8 session open on workspace 1. The 
first tab has a 'sudo htop' run on it, first thing after a reboot, so I 
can always kill a runaway session of firefox or iceweasel that refuses 
to die on request. Accessable in 2 clicks no matter how stuffed the 
system is.

Next tab has a "sudo tail -fn400 /var/log/messages" on it so I can look 
at the whole boot log if I want, and the next 3 or 4 tabs are tailing 
other stuff that automate much of what I do here.

workspace 2 has a duplicate of a multitab terminal-4.8 on it, each tab 
logged into a different machine on my local network with an 
"ssh -Y machine-alias".

I could go on for 8 more "workspaces", but you get the idea.;-)
And after 19+ days of uptime, I have 39 megs of stuff in swap. And I'm 
still on wheezy LTS.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171647

On Wed 31 Aug 2016 at 11:25:17 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 8/31/2016 10:44 AM, Felix Miata wrote:
> >Richard Owlett composed on 2016-08-31 09:58 (UTC-0500):
> >...
> >>Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Job
> >>dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x2daf89\x2d33ba51934630.de
> >>
> >>Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Timed out waiting for
> >>device dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x
> >>Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for
> >>/dev/disk/by-uuid/0a344714-ae06-43ed-af89-33ba5193463
> >>Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for
> >>Swap.
> >
> >Which was installed last, Squeeze, or Jessie? You can expect this
> >message trying to boot the earlier installed installation after
> >having done the later install. Unless you take affirmative action
> >to deny it, an existing swap partition used by the earlier
> >installation will be reformatted by the later installation.
> >Reformatting creates a new UUID, thus making the UUID referring
> >to it in the earlier installation's fstab invalid. The earlier
> >needs to have its fstab edited to use the correct swap partition
> >UUID, or volume label, or device name, if swap is actually
> >desired or needed.
> 
> There may be some subtle problems still lurking somewhere which show
> up only for people like me doing many installs of *nearly* identical
> systems.

There way well be. One possible scenario is installing Debian, then
installing again but overwriting the filesystems. To all intents
and purposes, the same responses will get you to the same place,
*but* the swap partition will have been recreated with a new UUID.

To avoid having the swap partition recreated is slightly tedious.
I do it as a matter of course because my swap is referenced by
LABEL rather than UUID. You have to force d-i to install without
one, and then enable it afterwards in VC2 (if you actually need it
for the d-i's use, which I don't) which is disapproved of.

> Commenting out the line in /etc/fstab DID allow it to boot without
> warning messages.
> 
> However,taking into account Darac's comments, does this now mean
> that the machines are now operating without a swap partition?

Quite possibly. Do you need it, particularly on the desktop (which
I assume you don't hibernate). Maybe on the laptop.

> IIRC the current instance of Jessie on the laptop was the
> chronologically the last OS installed so by the comments in this
> thread should not have had the problem. The laptop is my designated
> "Guinea pig" so I'll do a fresh install to see if problem persists.

Are you copying in a pre-existing /etc/fstab by any chance? Fine if
you use LABELs, but it needs checking/editing if you rely on UUIDs.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171663 — Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot

On 8/31/2016 11:25 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 8/31/2016 10:44 AM, Felix Miata wrote:
>> Richard Owlett composed on 2016-08-31 09:58 (UTC-0500):
>> ...
>>> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Job
>>> dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x2daf89\x2d33ba51934630.de
>>>
>>>
>>> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Timed out waiting for
>>> device dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x
>>> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for
>>> /dev/disk/by-uuid/0a344714-ae06-43ed-af89-33ba5193463
>>> Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for
>>> Swap.
>>
>> Which was installed last, Squeeze, or Jessie? You can expect this
>> message trying to boot the earlier installed installation after
>> having done the later install. Unless you take affirmative action
>> to deny it, an existing swap partition used by the earlier
>> installation will be reformatted by the later installation.
>> Reformatting creates a new UUID, thus making the UUID referring
>> to it in the earlier installation's fstab invalid. The earlier
>> needs to have its fstab edited to use the correct swap partition
>> UUID, or volume label, or device name, if swap is actually
>> desired or needed.
>
> There may be some subtle problems still lurking somewhere which
> show up only for people like me doing many installs of *nearly*
> identical systems.
>
> Commenting out the line in /etc/fstab DID allow it to boot
> without warning messages.
>
> However,taking into account Darac's comments, does this now mean
> that the machines are now operating without a swap partition?
>
> IIRC the current instance of Jessie on the laptop was the
> chronologically the last OS installed so by the comments in this
> thread should not have had the problem. The laptop is my
> designated "Guinea pig" so I'll do a fresh install to see if
> problem persists.

My procedure was:
1. Using the Live edition of Gparted, remove all partitions on 
hard disk.
2. Using install DVD 1 of Debian 8.0.0
    a. install Debian to /dev/sda1
    b. create swap on /dev/sda2
3. Verify Debian boots without problems
4. Using the same DVD
    a. install Debian to /dev/sda5
    b. re-create swap on /dev/sda2
5. Attempt to boot both instances
    a. Booting the install on /dev/sda1 generates the warning 
message and use
       of free shows swap does not exist.
    b. Booting the install on /dev/sda5 generates no warning 
message and use
       of free shows swap does exist.

I believe this justifies a bug report against the installer.
My expected behavior would be to check to see if a swap area 
already exists before "creating" a swap partition. Especially 
since replacing a swap partition can break a previously 
functioning install in a multi-boot situation.

Comments?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171664 — Re: Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 07:02:14AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
>On 8/31/2016 11:25 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>On 8/31/2016 10:44 AM, Felix Miata wrote:
>>>Richard Owlett composed on 2016-08-31 09:58 (UTC-0500):
>>>...
>>>>Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Job
>>>>dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x2daf89\x2d33ba51934630.de
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Timed out waiting for
>>>>device dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x
>>>>Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for
>>>>/dev/disk/by-uuid/0a344714-ae06-43ed-af89-33ba5193463
>>>>Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for
>>>>Swap.
>>>
>>>Which was installed last, Squeeze, or Jessie? You can expect this
>>>message trying to boot the earlier installed installation after
>>>having done the later install. Unless you take affirmative action
>>>to deny it, an existing swap partition used by the earlier
>>>installation will be reformatted by the later installation.
>>>Reformatting creates a new UUID, thus making the UUID referring
>>>to it in the earlier installation's fstab invalid. The earlier
>>>needs to have its fstab edited to use the correct swap partition
>>>UUID, or volume label, or device name, if swap is actually
>>>desired or needed.
>>
>>There may be some subtle problems still lurking somewhere which
>>show up only for people like me doing many installs of *nearly*
>>identical systems.
>>
>>Commenting out the line in /etc/fstab DID allow it to boot
>>without warning messages.
>>
>>However,taking into account Darac's comments, does this now mean
>>that the machines are now operating without a swap partition?
>>
>>IIRC the current instance of Jessie on the laptop was the
>>chronologically the last OS installed so by the comments in this
>>thread should not have had the problem. The laptop is my
>>designated "Guinea pig" so I'll do a fresh install to see if
>>problem persists.
>
>My procedure was:
>1. Using the Live edition of Gparted, remove all partitions on hard 
>disk.
>2. Using install DVD 1 of Debian 8.0.0
>   a. install Debian to /dev/sda1
>   b. create swap on /dev/sda2
>3. Verify Debian boots without problems
>4. Using the same DVD
>   a. install Debian to /dev/sda5
>   b. re-create swap on /dev/sda2
>5. Attempt to boot both instances
>   a. Booting the install on /dev/sda1 generates the warning message 
>and use
>      of free shows swap does not exist.
>   b. Booting the install on /dev/sda5 generates no warning message 
>and use
>      of free shows swap does exist.
>
>I believe this justifies a bug report against the installer.
>My expected behavior would be to check to see if a swap area already 
>exists before "creating" a swap partition. Especially since replacing 
>a swap partition can break a previously functioning install in a 
>multi-boot situation.
>
>Comments?

I think that sounds sensible. A swap partition should be considered 
scratch space, and its contents only relevant to the currently-booted 
OS.

The only fly in the ointment is hibernation. It's been a while since I 
played with hibernation, but I believe it stores the RAM image into 
Swap, so installing Debian while another OS is hibernated could even 
cause data loss. The solution there is A) to use a swap FILE for the 
hibernation image and B) for Debian to point-blank refuse to re-create a 
swap partition when it detects a hibernation image there.

-- 
For more information, please reread.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171670 — Re: Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot

On Thu 01 Sep 2016 at 13:11:22 (+0100), Darac Marjal wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 07:02:14AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> >On 8/31/2016 11:25 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
> >>On 8/31/2016 10:44 AM, Felix Miata wrote:
> >>>Richard Owlett composed on 2016-08-31 09:58 (UTC-0500):
> >>>...
> >>>>Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Job
> >>>>dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x2daf89\x2d33ba51934630.de
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Timed out waiting for
> >>>>device dev-disk-by\x2duuid-0a344714\x2dae06\x2d43ed\x
> >>>>Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for
> >>>>/dev/disk/by-uuid/0a344714-ae06-43ed-af89-33ba5193463
> >>>>Aug 31 09:13:32 deb8-2ndtry systemd[1]: Dependency failed for
> >>>>Swap.
> >>>
> >>>Which was installed last, Squeeze, or Jessie? You can expect this
> >>>message trying to boot the earlier installed installation after
> >>>having done the later install. Unless you take affirmative action
> >>>to deny it, an existing swap partition used by the earlier
> >>>installation will be reformatted by the later installation.
> >>>Reformatting creates a new UUID, thus making the UUID referring
> >>>to it in the earlier installation's fstab invalid. The earlier
> >>>needs to have its fstab edited to use the correct swap partition
> >>>UUID, or volume label, or device name, if swap is actually
> >>>desired or needed.
> >>
> >>There may be some subtle problems still lurking somewhere which
> >>show up only for people like me doing many installs of *nearly*
> >>identical systems.
> >>
> >>Commenting out the line in /etc/fstab DID allow it to boot
> >>without warning messages.
> >>
> >>However,taking into account Darac's comments, does this now mean
> >>that the machines are now operating without a swap partition?
> >>
> >>IIRC the current instance of Jessie on the laptop was the
> >>chronologically the last OS installed so by the comments in this
> >>thread should not have had the problem. The laptop is my
> >>designated "Guinea pig" so I'll do a fresh install to see if
> >>problem persists.
> >
> >My procedure was:
> >1. Using the Live edition of Gparted, remove all partitions on
> >hard disk.
> >2. Using install DVD 1 of Debian 8.0.0
> >  a. install Debian to /dev/sda1
> >  b. create swap on /dev/sda2
> >3. Verify Debian boots without problems
> >4. Using the same DVD
> >  a. install Debian to /dev/sda5
> >  b. re-create swap on /dev/sda2
> >5. Attempt to boot both instances
> >  a. Booting the install on /dev/sda1 generates the warning
> >message and use
> >     of free shows swap does not exist.
> >  b. Booting the install on /dev/sda5 generates no warning message
> >and use
> >     of free shows swap does exist.
> >
> >I believe this justifies a bug report against the installer.
> >My expected behavior would be to check to see if a swap area
> >already exists before "creating" a swap partition. Especially
> >since replacing a swap partition can break a previously
> >functioning install in a multi-boot situation.
> >
> >Comments?
> 
> I think that sounds sensible. A swap partition should be considered
> scratch space, and its contents only relevant to the
> currently-booted OS.

I disagree. If you want to share swap space, then you've got to
take appropriate action yourself. The easy way is to LABEL it in
/etc/fstab rather than UUID it, unless you like reading and typing
long strings of hex.

> The only fly in the ointment is hibernation. It's been a while since
> I played with hibernation, but I believe it stores the RAM image
> into Swap, so installing Debian while another OS is hibernated could
> even cause data loss. The solution there is A) to use a swap FILE
> for the hibernation image and B) for Debian to point-blank refuse to
> re-create a swap partition when it detects a hibernation image
> there.

I disagree. Is d-i expected to have a list of partition types, and
contents, that shouldn't be overwritten? Are all the flavours of fdisk
to test all the partitions on a disk before they allow you to
repartition it? If yes, then what about C> FDISK ? This just lulls
people into a false sense of security. Then Windows comes along...

Just as you can install 145 OSes on one PC, you can share swap space
among them, but it's then up to you to work out how to do this safely,
not just file a bug against an innocent installer doing what's asked
of it. The OP has enjoyed help from a sizeable thread entitled
"Problem with NON-STANDARD install" (his emphasis) which focussed
mainly on Grub. Perhaps we have to look forward to more problems
arising from the non-standard circumstances, but these will all
help with the OP's desired learning process.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171696 — Re: Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Am 01.09.2016 um 16:44 schrieb David Wright:
> On Thu 01 Sep 2016 at 13:11:22 (+0100), Darac Marjal wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 07:02:14AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>> On 8/31/2016 11:25 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>> I believe this justifies a bug report against the installer.
>>> My expected behavior would be to check to see if a swap area
>>> already exists before "creating" a swap partition. Especially
>>> since replacing a swap partition can break a previously
>>> functioning install in a multi-boot situation.
>>>
>>> Comments?
>>
>> I think that sounds sensible. A swap partition should be considered
>> scratch space, and its contents only relevant to the
>> currently-booted OS.
> 
> I disagree. If you want to share swap space, then you've got to
> take appropriate action yourself. The easy way is to LABEL it in
> /etc/fstab rather than UUID it, unless you like reading and typing
> long strings of hex.

Well, you can assign labels, but this won't help you. As soon as you
install a new system on the same hardware, the (debian)-installer will
reformat your existing swap partition and the label will be gone along
with it. I've run into this myself a couple of times.

This has been the case forever basically. The only difference was, that
sysvinit didn't care, and you simply ended up with your system having no
swap partition set up. Systemd is much more picky in that regard (and
rightfully so, imho).

I think treating an *existing* swap partition like a non-empty partition
and not reformatting it by default would be right thing to do.

Michael

-- 
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171706 — Re: Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot

On Fri 02 Sep 2016 at 09:40:55 (+0200), Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 01.09.2016 um 16:44 schrieb David Wright:
> > On Thu 01 Sep 2016 at 13:11:22 (+0100), Darac Marjal wrote:
> >> On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 07:02:14AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> >>> On 8/31/2016 11:25 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
> >>> I believe this justifies a bug report against the installer.
> >>> My expected behavior would be to check to see if a swap area
> >>> already exists before "creating" a swap partition. Especially
> >>> since replacing a swap partition can break a previously
> >>> functioning install in a multi-boot situation.
> >>>
> >>> Comments?
> >>
> >> I think that sounds sensible. A swap partition should be considered
> >> scratch space, and its contents only relevant to the
> >> currently-booted OS.
> > 
> > I disagree. If you want to share swap space, then you've got to
> > take appropriate action yourself. The easy way is to LABEL it in
> > /etc/fstab rather than UUID it, unless you like reading and typing
> > long strings of hex.
> 
> Well, you can assign labels, but this won't help you. As soon as you
> install a new system on the same hardware, the (debian)-installer will
> reformat your existing swap partition and the label will be gone along
> with it. I've run into this myself a couple of times.

I already wrote that in this thread:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/08/msg01052.html
and hadn't realised I had to repeat myself just because the thread's
subject line was modified. Or maybe because the month clicked forward.

> This has been the case forever basically. The only difference was, that
> sysvinit didn't care, and you simply ended up with your system having no
> swap partition set up. Systemd is much more picky in that regard (and
> rightfully so, imho).

In which regard. I'm running systemd with no swap and it doesn't care.
Basically, if "KiB Swap: ... 0 used," is anything but zero, I might as
well reboot; any idea of getting work done while swapping is risible,
disk access is so slow. But I guess you may just mean that systemd
cares about /etc/fstab in a way that sysvinit didn't, rather than the
swap line in particular. Ironic, as systemd plays fast and loose with
fstab as far as the fstab documentation is concerned.

> I think treating an *existing* swap partition like a non-empty partition
> and not reformatting it by default would be right thing to do.

OTOH the people who benefit are likely to be the people who understand
the issues. I would prefer a Non-defaulting option to save the
tediousness of working round the current default. That way, the naïve
tyro gets exactly what they expect from the installer, a clean slate.

Doing it my way (see ref) contravenes the recommendations of the
Installation Manual. But, while we're on the topic, perhaps you can
explain the reasoning behind this paragraph from §6.3.8.2:

"Note: Although you can do basically anything in a shell that the
available commands allow you to do, the option to use a shell is
really only there in case something goes wrong and for debugging.

"Doing things manually from the shell may interfere with the
installation process and result in errors or an incomplete
installation. In particular, you should always use let the installer
activate your swap partition and not do this yourself from a shell."

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171707 — Re: Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Le septidi 17 fructidor, an CCXXIV, David Wright a écrit :
> Basically, if "KiB Swap: ... 0 used," is anything but zero, I might as
> well reboot; any idea of getting work done while swapping is risible,

If you have to look at the output of a command do notice the swap is in use,
that means you were able to getting work done very well.

>			  But I guess you may just mean that systemd
> cares about /etc/fstab in a way that sysvinit didn't

sysvinit is just a bunch of shell script. Error codes were lost all the time
and nobody cared.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171711 — Re: Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot

On Fri 02 Sep 2016 at 17:44:39 (+0200), Nicolas George wrote:
> Le septidi 17 fructidor, an CCXXIV, David Wright a écrit :
> > Basically, if "KiB Swap: ... 0 used," is anything but zero, I might as
> > well reboot; any idea of getting work done while swapping is risible,
> 
> If you have to look at the output of a command do notice the swap is in use,
> that means you were able to getting work done very well.

Clever, but clearly not correct.

If the computer is nearby, as is typical, then the first two things
you notice are the noise from the disk and the slowdown.

So then the question is whether the computer is just generally
overloaded or, more usually, the browser is out of control.
The latter can be no more than the browser consuming more than
100% CPU in which case simply killing it is enough to restore order.

On the laptop, it might be possible to tell high CPU consumption
(obviously accompanied by disk activity) from swapping by the pitch of
the fan and the increasing discomfort in the right thigh, but $ top
is easier just so long as fvwm is able to switch to a suitable screen,
which is not a given.

There have been kernels when the right thigh has cried "wolf" for
too long, and then the best indication of increasing CPU temperature
is the colour of the root window, which switches to red at 80° and
brown at 85°, though that's not much help if a video is playing
full-screen. (My current record temperature peak is 96.5°.)

Forget all this if I'm doing the work on the computer in the basement¹
or the one in the attic². How am I going to hear disk swapping when I'm
sitting under a ceiling fan with the radio on? More than 80% of the
former's and 100% of the latter's use is remotely from the laptop.

> >			  But I guess you may just mean that systemd
> > cares about /etc/fstab in a way that sysvinit didn't
> 
> sysvinit is just a bunch of shell script. Error codes were lost all the time
> and nobody cared.

Looks like my guess was correct, then.

¹ anti-tornado.  ² anti-flash flooding.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171708 — Re: Problem source verified -Re: Jessie (8.0) slow to boot

On 2016-09-02, David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
>
> "Doing things manually from the shell may interfere with the
> installation process and result in errors or an incomplete
> installation. In particular, you should always use let the installer
                                                 ******* 
> activate your swap partition and not do this yourself from a shell."
>

Shouldn't the "use" be stricken out (struck out? I'm stricken with doubt)
entirely, or the "let" be removed so that it reads: "use the installer to
activate..."?

-- 
"I always say to people, ‘No one earns $100 million. You steal $100 million.’
People earn $10 an hour. People earn $40,000 a year. ‘Earn’ means work. Okay?
It doesn’t mean steal, which with these vast amounts of money, of course you
steal them." — Fran Lebowitz

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web