[12:20] <ajmitch> morning Plug
[12:20] <nandemonai> greetings
[12:23] <nandemonai> I've just installed tripwire and set it up (via apt-get install tripwire) but it appears I've missed something.. when trying to run a test I get /var/lib/tripwire/inserthostnamehere.twd No such file or directory
[12:23] <nandemonai> Any ideas?
[12:25] <allee> nandemonai: dpkg -L tripwire | grep -i inserthostnamehere  should tell you if the file is at a different location or missing from the pkg
[12:26] <spike> yeah, sounds like the hostname hasnt been configured at install time
[12:26] <nandemonai> ok I'll give it a go, thanks
[12:27] <nandemonai> That command returned nothing..
[12:27] <nandemonai> And yes I did replace it with the REAL hostname :P
[12:29] <spike> nandemonai: have you checked config in /etc/ ? maybe the value hasnt been correctly stored in there
[12:30] <nandemonai> You mean the tripwire conf?
[12:31] <nandemonai> I'm new to tripwire btw..
[12:34] <nandemonai> the twcfg.txt has this line.. DBFILE =/var/lib/tripwire/$(HOSTNAME).twd I assume the parsed version is taken from that..
[12:36] <nandemonai> I'll try running through tripwire --init and see if that creates the db properly..
[12:38] <nandemonai> Oh wait.. I think I know what's wrong.. I assumed that the apt-get install did all that when I ran through setting up the pass phrases etc.. Guess I assumed wrong. My apologies.
[12:40] <Plug> hi ajmitch
[12:40] <spike> nandemonai: what does "hostname" command gives back to you?
[12:43] <nandemonai> my hostname, like it should.. nvm me, just having a blode moment..
[12:43] <nandemonai> *blonde
[12:43] <nandemonai> The db hadn't been created..
[12:44] <nandemonai> All appears well now tripwire --init went through
[12:44] <nandemonai> I just figured that was done in the initial config options after I apt-get installed it.. Never assume! :)
[12:45] <Plug> allee: thanks, adding arcmsr to the modules file indeed makes the system boot
[12:46] <allee> good guess eh? :) congrats plug!
[12:51] <allee> Plug: curious: what vendor/model (the computer, not the controler) showed this bug?
[12:52] <Plug> It's a SuperMicro mainboard
[12:53] <allee> 'k thx
[12:54] <Plug> (raised bug 40075)
[12:58] <Overand> So, I've got an ubuntu-server install (Dapper, FC6), and I've got a kernel with a PREEMPT tag
[12:59] <Overand> I thought one of the ideas of ubuntu-server was to avoid the preempt kernel features.
[01:20] <Plug> Now to learn all about LVM snapshots.
[01:46] <AviaX> hi all
[01:46] <AviaX> @Overand what is it about preempt?
[02:07] <neuralis> Overand: that's probably because you haven't got the -server kernel running (it might still not be enabled by default). you'll want to install the server kernel package.
[02:11] <Overand> neuralis: yeah?
[02:12] <Overand> ahh
[02:12] <Overand> linux-image-amd64-server
[02:12] <Overand> Hope that's an SMP kernel
[02:12] <Overand> holy nuggets, the package is 21 megs
[02:15] <Overand> neuralis: thanks. =] 
[02:15] <Overand> now to see if my grub config is correct and will load that kernel by default
[02:16] <Overand> Fortunately I haven't colocated the server yet, so if it doesn't, it's not a big deal.
[02:17] <Overand> Rad.  Works.
[02:19] <neuralis> which version of ubuntu-server did you download?
[02:20] <Overand> Dapper, Flight 6
[02:20] <neuralis> flight6, or a more recent daily?
[02:20] <neuralis> ah.
[02:20] <Overand> I also haven't yet done an apt-get upgrade
[02:21] <Overand> Just for kicks I'm running bonnie++ to see if there's any difference, but since there's nothing else really eating CPU time on the box, I seriously doubt it
[02:22] <neuralis> the current seeds show that the server kernel should be installed by default, so the dailies should have this problem removed.
[02:25] <AviaX> im using the daily version from april 17th and uname says:Linux fireball 2.6.15-20-386 #1 PREEMPT Tue Apr 4 17:48:51 UTC 2006 i686 GNU/Linux
[02:26] <neuralis> hm.
[02:26] <neuralis> fabbione: can you look into this? it seems like we're still installing the desktop kernel by default on u-s installations.
[02:26] <neuralis> AviaX: did the installation work well with you otherwise?
[02:26] <neuralis> s/with/for/
[02:27] <AviaX> yes without problems
[02:27] <neuralis> good to hear.
[02:27] <AviaX> :-)
[02:28] <AviaX> should i switch kernels?
[02:28] <neuralis> AviaX: yes.
[02:28] <neuralis> Overand: you? any issues or problems with the install or deployment that i should know about?
[02:28] <Overand> I had serious problems with my install of flight 6 actually
[02:28] <Overand> I installed with XFS
[02:28] <Overand> and grub didn't install
[02:29] <Overand> got the 'unsupported arch.' message
[02:29] <Overand> "GRUB didn't install.  This may have been because you were..." etc
[02:29] <Overand> Ubuntu-server, Flgiht 6, AMD64, and my drives were on a 3ware raid card.
[02:29] <Overand> I installed with EXT3 and it was fine.
[02:29] <Overand> I had another problem, but I'm not sure what it was.  I had to use a different CD drive...
[02:30] <Overand> It's on a 1U server, and it has a built-in laptop CD drive.
[02:30] <Overand> The install 'hung' past a certain point, checked dmesg, DriveReady SeekComplete errors
[02:30] <Overand> so i figured, bad burn, made a new one.
[02:30] <Overand> same problem, similar spot.
[02:30] <Overand> so i swapped out the laptop drive for another laptop drive, same problem, different spot
[02:30] <Overand> so using the *same controller* on the board, I put in a standard IDE CD drive
[02:31] <Overand> and the installation went fine...
[02:31] <Overand> And yes, I verified the CDs, verified fine on another computer, verify hung on the laptop drives.
[02:31] <Overand> I don't think I can really blame that on ubuntu-server though, that could be *so* many different things
[02:31] <Overand> But a brand new laptop CD drive, and a known-good one both having problems in the same area, while a 'normal' cd drive hooked to the same port on the board worked fine?  Very odd.
[02:33] <AviaX> which kernel should i'll take then, linux-image-2.6.15-20-server?
[02:34] <Overand> AviaX: what's your processor?
[02:34] <AviaX> athlon 2500+
[02:34] <AviaX> eh sorry, athlon mp 1600+
[02:35] <Overand> ohh.
[02:35] <Overand> dual?
[02:35] <AviaX> nope
[02:35] <Overand> or just one MP?  =] 
[02:35] <Overand> just one MP?
[02:35] <AviaX> yes
[02:35] <Overand> ... is it a dual proc board?
[02:35] <Overand> well either way that is probably the right package for you
[02:35] <AviaX> nope, just a mobile athlon in a standard desktop board
[02:36] <AviaX> k i see
[02:36] <Overand> MP isn't "mobile athlon"
[02:36] <Overand> the MP is the 'dual CPU capable' athlon
[02:36] <AviaX> oh ok i see, good to know :-/
[02:36] <Overand> hey, pick up another and find a cheap MP board
[02:36] <Overand> or not
[02:36] <Overand> I love my Dual MP 1900+ system
[02:37] <Overand> Of course, it's running 'that other operating system' right now =/
[02:37] <AviaX> so i have a mobile athlon not a MP :-(
[02:37] <Overand> k
[02:38] <AviaX> so what i need for switching kernels, i made my last kernel over a year ago on a gentoo system
[02:40] <Overand> WOW.
[02:40] <Overand> file creation speed more or less doubled between these two kernels
[02:40] <Overand> 1500/sec on the preempt, 3200/sec on the -server one
[02:41] <Overand> diskwrite being sliiightly slower
[02:41] <Overand> like a percent at most
[02:41] <AviaX> i see
[02:41] <AviaX> do i just need the kernel package?
[02:43] <Overand> wow.
[02:43] <neuralis> Overand: the server kernel uses a different IO scheduler.
[02:43] <Overand> performance is better in terms of responsiveness when I have ~16 instances of nice -9 bzip2 -9 </dev/urandom >/dev/null
[02:44] <Overand> now i'll try my 'bonnie while that's running' thing
[02:44] <Overand> I'm still sort of 'eh' about running EXT3
[02:44] <neuralis> Overand: please post a detailed report of your installation problems to the ubuntu-server list; this is pretty critical information.
[02:44] <Overand> neuralis: I'm not sure how detailed I can make it, but I'll do what I can.
[02:44] <Overand> URL for the list?
[02:45] <Overand> I'm relatively new to the ubuntu community, and haven't participated on any lists.
[02:45] <neuralis> Overand: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
[02:45] <neuralis> Overand: welcome on board.
[02:45] <Overand> =] 
[02:45] <Overand> Thanks.
[02:45] <Overand> Should I bother with the DriveReady SeekComplete one?
[02:46] <neuralis> probably not; it doesn't sound like it's a software issue.
[02:46] <Overand> It feels like a compatability problem, but it could just be a case of laptop CD drives not liking the CD-R
[02:46] <Overand> It's just odd that two different laptop drives on the same controller would fail, but a standard one on the same one would work.
[02:46] <Overand> The XFS thing was too bad, though.
[02:47] <neuralis> Overand: i don't know what your experiences with xfs are in production, but i'd never recommend using it in a serious environment.
[02:52] <Overand> neuralis: I've heard very mixed reports.
[02:52] <Overand> I went mostly on the word of someone who I trust, but...
[02:53] <neuralis> Overand: i've had nothing but grief with xfs blowing up in several production and testing environments.
[02:54] <Overand> cute
[02:57] <neuralis> ajmitch: agreed.
[02:58] <neuralis> Overand: ext3 is about as rock-solid as journaling filesystems come these days. unless you have to have breakneck performance, it's good enough that the other FSes don't even merit much consideration.
[02:58] <ajmitch> I still don't have access to those T2000s, thanks to uni ITS :)
[03:00] <Overand> neuralis: that's sort of how I Fel
[03:00] <Overand> ...feel
[03:01] <Overand> I'll see how the system works out.  As it stands, it's already grossly overpowered for what I need, but with luck it'll get busy.
[03:02] <ajmitch> how overpowered is it?
[03:04] <Overand> Athlon X2 4200+, 2 gigs of CAS2 ram, but just two 250 gig SATA drives (16 meg cache) in RAID 1 on a 2 port 3ware controller
[03:05] <ajmitch> not too bad
[03:05] <Overand> So I didn't go nutso 15k RPM SCSI drives in 0+1 or anything
[03:05] <h3sp4wn> having /var/spool on reiser-fs significantly improves the response time of webcaching
[03:05] <Overand> The X2 thing was sort of a no-brainer
[03:06] <Overand> found a Tyan barebones system that sells for ~$600 that's 1U and supports the X2 chips, but is a pretty decent board, has 4 built-in hot-swappable HDs, etc
[03:07] <Overand> yeah
[03:07] <Overand> same here
[03:14] <neuralis> Overand: thanks for the report.
[03:15] <Overand> No problem.
[03:15] <Overand> Apparnetly my e-mail client uses my first name.  Oh well, heh.
[06:44] <fabbione> neuralis: yes we know. Kamion planned to fix it today
[06:45] <fabbione> neuralis: it will be there for Beta. no phear
[08:36] <neuralis> fabbione: have you seen http://kerneltrap.org/node/6492 ?
[08:37] <fabbione> neuralis: no i don't read kerneltrap
[08:42] <neuralis> fair enough
[08:57] <fabbione> i will look at it later
[09:52] <nawty> Guys, what's the major difference with the -server kernel?
[09:58] <neuralis> nawty: no kernel preemption, deadline io scheduler, 100hz clockfreq.
[09:59] <neuralis> nawty: + smp and basic numa.
[10:05] <infinity> s/smp/smp support for hideously large numbers of CPUs/
[10:05] <infinity> (The desktop kernel does SMP)
[10:06] <infinity> Err, if by "desktop", I mean "desktop kernel that isn't -386", of course.
[10:11] <neuralis> infinity: right.
[10:11] <neuralis> infinity: what scheduler does the desktop kernel use? cfq?
[10:19] <infinity> Whatever the default is.  I always forget.
[10:20] <infinity> Anticipatory.
[11:38] <nawty> so i should be using the server one then i take it.
[11:39] <nawty> ( for servers )
[11:39] <nawty> http://www.stdlib.net/~colmmacc/2006/04/13/more-ubuntu-on-t2000/
[11:40] <fabbione> nawty: old news
[11:42] <nawty> fabbione: interesting never the less.
[11:43] <fabbione> yeah
[11:43] <nawty> a freind of mine does development work for the Solaris Kernel ( performance benching )
[11:45] <neuralis> nawty: yes, you should be using the server kernel on servers. surprising, isn't it?
[11:49] <nawty> sarcasm, the ultimate in ... help :P
[11:49] <nawty> neuralis: don't be stupid, answer properly, or don't bother.
[11:49] <fabbione> nawty: be nice
[11:50] <neuralis> nawty: there was supposed to be a smiley at the end of that.
[12:11] <nawty> heh ;)
[12:11] <nawty> sorry, too much time on ubutnu-user's made me grumpy.
[05:40] <tarvid> i'd like to run pgadmin3 remotely
[05:40] <tarvid> i am getting the error Error: Unable to initialize gtk, is DISPLAY set properly?
[05:45] <tarvid> or is it pgadmin3?
[05:47] <tarvid> probably not just pgadmin3 xclock returns the following error
[05:47] <tarvid> Error: Can't open display:
[06:02] <tarvid> how much more than xserver-xorg do I need to install
[06:07] <fabbione> tarvid: you are in the wrong channel
[06:07] <fabbione> ask this stuff in #ubuntu
[06:08] <tarvid> that may be but the question is how much do I have to install to get pgadmin to run remotely
[06:08] <tarvid> this is a ralatively spartan ubuntu server install
[06:09] <tarvid> i don't want to install gnome or another window manager if I can avoid it
[06:11] <fabbione> it's not an ubuntu-server question
[06:11] <tarvid> it is precisely an ubuntu server question
[06:12] <tarvid> if ubuntu is going to support postgresql which is a server not a desktop application
[06:12] <tarvid> so what does it take to get pgadmin3 to run on a server installation
[06:13] <tarvid> it is at least a bug in dependencies or configuration
[06:14] <neuralis>   pgadmin3 |  1.2.2-1.1 | http://archive.ubuntu.com dapper/universe Packages
[06:14] <neuralis> tarvid: so ubuntu doesn't support it, and you're asking in the wrong channel; it's a general ubuntu question, so please use #ubuntu.
[06:15] <tarvid> by not supporting pgadmin3, there is less than full support of postgresql
[06:18] <neuralis> tarvid: please stop the fud. pgadmin is not part of postgresql.
[08:36] <redguy> hi there
[08:37] <redguy> is the information concerning this channel on https://wiki.kubuntu.org/InternetRelayChat accurate?
[08:39] <redguy> I mean, isn't this a support channel? The wiki clearly says that this channel is a "team channel". Is pointing users from #ubuntu to this channel for support with ubuntu server wrong?
[08:46] <spike> redguy: point is definition of "related to ubuntu-server"
[08:46] <redguy> spike: indeed
[08:46] <spike> redguy: ppl thinks since they downloaded ubuntu-server, installing vim is a server question, but of course it's not
[08:46] <spike> I guess that's the most common problem
[08:48] <redguy> spike: is ubotu's factoid like this?
[08:49] <spike> redguy: what sorry?
[08:50] <redguy> spike: erm, is ubotu's server factoid correct now? I made ubotu pm you the factoid.
[08:52] <spike> oh, sry, [notice(ubotu)]  Your query got blocked. :)
[08:52] <spike> hang on
[08:52] <redguy> Ubuntu 5.10 Server is out! http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-announce/2005-October/000042.html, for server related questions join #ubuntu-server
[08:53] <spike> yeah, see it in the logs
[08:53] <spike> redguy: well, that sounds like something you'd expected for a new release... dapper is almost out
[08:54] <spike> redguy: I'd rather say something like "ubuntu server edition available. stable breezy 5.10, something else dapper... for server related questions..."
[08:56] <redguy> spike: actually, only the "for server related..." bit is mine... I'll change the other part
[08:56] <spike> maybe a good thing could be referring a page explaining what's a "server related question", just to reduce the noise ration... not that it's unbearable atm.
[08:57] <spike> redguy: https://wiki.kubuntu.org/InternetRelayChat#ubuntu-server, something like that maybe
[08:58] <redguy> spike: is "server related" explained somewhere on the wiki?
[08:59] <spike> I dont think so, we actually havent got a page explaining exactly what a server edition is afaik
[08:59] <spike> guess I can write one and post it on the ML for review
[09:00] <redguy> spike: in fact, I wanted to ask you that question :-)
[09:00] <spike> ok, doing a search on the wiki just in case
[09:00] <redguy> spike: what is the server edition? i presume that server edition != server install
[09:02] <spike> redguy: they're same stuff
[09:02] <spike> server install will install the same stuff installed by the server iso
[09:03] <redguy> spike: ah, so it's the packages on the CD that are different, right?
[09:05] <spike> redguy: thinks so, yeah. actally I d/l'ed a warty cd a long ago, and since then no more iso for me but server ones
[09:08] <redguy> Ubuntu Server Edition is a release of Ubuntu designed especially for server environments. The default install includes a smp kernel and no GUI. The install CD contains many server apprications. Current stable version is 5.10. For server related questions join #ubuntu-server
[09:09] <redguy> spike: that's what it looks like now
[09:09] <redguy> spike: would you include the wiki article later?
[09:12] <spike> redguy: yeah, when the page is ready I'd take off the second and third statements and link the wiki page. and add a "see channel policy: + link to wikipage"
[09:12] <spike> at the end
[09:13] <redguy> cool, thanks