[03:01] <squinty> exit
[05:14] <pmatulis> webmin doesn't work well with ubuntu
[07:09] <Seveas> s/ well.*//
[07:11] <RoyK> !webmin
[07:13] <RoyK> ubottu: webmin is also Learning to administer Ubuntu using the commandline isn't very hard, and that way you may even learn something.
[09:43] <ArchaicLord> Hi all. First time on IRC a friend suggest to me..
[09:43] <ArchaicLord> I was hoping to ask if anyone one could help me sorting out a problem I have in ubuntu server 16.04 please
[09:50] <ArchaicLord> ok.. well maybe someone will reply...
[09:50] <ArchaicLord> I installed 16.04 onto a usb.. I then manually made a raid5 disk array using madam..
[09:51] <ArchaicLord> I can see the array is active.. it should have file system of ext4
[09:51] <ArchaicLord> but i can't for the life of me cd to it.. teh array is md0 ... i can't cd /dev/md0
[09:51] <ArchaicLord> any ideas what I need to do to be able to add files to it
[10:03] <RoyK> ArchaicLord: md0 is a block device, it's not a directory ;)
[10:04] <ArchaicLord> how do access the directory on it? I want to be able to create a samba share
[10:04] <RoyK> ArchaicLord: on md0, you can either put a filesystem, or as I prefer it, first put an LVM volume group (VG) there and then create a logical volume (LV) on top and then a filesystem on the LV
[10:04] <RoyK> !lvm
[10:04] <RoyK> ArchaicLord: I guess you're pretty new to linux - welcome - to the real life :D
[10:05] <ArchaicLord> not new to linux.. but new as in doing raid
[10:05] <ArchaicLord> and more serious things
[10:05] <RoyK> md0 is just a block device like sda or sdb
[10:05] <RoyK> so better put a pv on md0 (pvcreate /dev/md0), then a vg on that (vgcreate myraidvg-or-something /dev/md0)
[10:07] <RoyK> and then an lv on that vg (lvcreate -n mytestdata -L 100G myraidvg-or-something) and then you can create a filesystem on that one (that is, in this case, /dev/myraidvg-or-something/mytestdata )
[10:07] <RoyK> as in mkfs -t ext4 /dev/myraidvg-or-something/mytestdata
[10:07] <RoyK> if it's something big (as in lots of terabytes), consider using xfs instead of ext4
[10:07] <ArchaicLord> the pool is 1.8tb
[10:08] <RoyK> can you pastebin /proc/mdstat, please?
[10:08] <RoyK> !pastebin
[10:08] <ArchaicLord>  thats a cat command?
[10:09] <ArchaicLord> http://paste.ubuntu.com/23465125/
[10:10] <RoyK> ok, good - btw how large are the disks?
[10:11] <RoyK> ArchaicLord: also - where is  your rootfs?
[10:12] <ArchaicLord> my root os is on usb
[10:12] <RoyK> ok
[10:12] <ArchaicLord> eash disk is 2tb
[10:13] <ArchaicLord> i baliscy have a pc £25 from ebay with 4 sata ports ( i have no money) I use d 32gigi usb for server isntall
[10:13] <ArchaicLord> i added 4x2tb drives and created the raid manually
[10:13] <RoyK> right, so do as I said above - that'll give you a 6TB VG onto which you can place LVs onto which you can place filesystems
[10:14] <ArchaicLord> I thought when i ran the comand ext4 it woudl creat all that
[10:14] <ArchaicLord> ok will do
[10:14] <ArchaicLord> the tutorials i found only tell u how to create teh raid not what to do after
[10:14] <RoyK> and for 6TB, given it may grow to something bigger in a year or three, better use xfs
[10:14] <ArchaicLord>  can i change to the other file system
[10:15] <ArchaicLord>           xfs i
[10:16] <ArchaicLord> RoyK i dont have any sata ports spare for it to grow..
[10:16] <ArchaicLord> I am just using it for my own home media
[10:17] <ArchaicLord>          i wanna run plex or something
[10:17] <ArchaicLord> and also use to back up to my pc and wifes mac
[10:17] <RoyK> ArchaicLord: but one day you'll get another controller and some more drives etc - I know how these things work :D
[10:17] <RoyK> a friend of mine said the same as you did some years back, she just started off with 2x3TB. Now she's at 10x2TB and I doubt it's the end of it all
[10:17] <ArchaicLord>   or just store it on the cloud
[10:18] <RoyK> mass storage in the cloud is still either horribly slow or terribly expensive (or both, as a bonus)
[10:20] <ArchaicLord> fair enough
[10:21] <ArchaicLord> I starting to think getting a full rack server and putting it in my loft might not be a bad idea
[10:24] <ArchaicLord> can i just run mkfs.xfs /dev/md0 as it is or do i need to stop the array first?
[10:25] <RoyK> just make sure you have sufficient cooling
[10:25] <RoyK> you can put xfs directly on top of md0, but again, for various reasons, I'd suggest using LVM on the md and then a filesystem on top of that instead
[10:25] <ArchaicLord> ha yeah .. loft gets dam hot lol.. a very bad place to put it
[10:26] <RoyK> if you stop md0 first, you obviously won't be able  to use it with anything, it'll be like unplugging a drive
[10:27] <ArchaicLord> they are 2tb each
[10:27] <ArchaicLord> they are wd green
[10:28] <ArchaicLord> omg ingore that... i scrolled up and replied to an old post again
[10:28] <ArchaicLord> I am reading hte LVM guide u sent
[10:29] <ArchaicLord> so I have messed with ubuntu desktop on and off.. I like linux.. I just don't like that no one develops for it main stream... ie games and things.. (not ones I play anyway) I been learning web developemt...
[10:30] <ArchaicLord> I ran a freenas box previously but it just kept falling over... I not long set up a websever in unutnu for the first time without a desktop environment
[10:30] <ArchaicLord> that went ok.. and then i figured running it at home instead of Freenas might be better so here I am
[10:41] <ArchaicLord> I am right in thinking Raid 5 will give me the best use of space, speed and redundancy for a small system?
[10:44] <maxb> Possibly, depends how small is small
[10:45] <maxb> For a home server, maybe. For any kind of business application, you need to take a hard look at whether you really want something as weak as RAID 5
[10:50] <ArchaicLord> 8tb made up of 4*2tb drives.. I do have a web server I set up that is samller than this but sounds like i might need to back it up and change it
[10:50] <ArchaicLord> but that 6tb is my home one
[10:55] <maxb> ArchaicLord: For a 4 drive array, I've have to ask just how much you think you need 6TB capacity rather than the 4TB you'd get from RAID 10.... and if you need 6TB maybe you'd be better doing 6*2TB in RAID 10 instead
[10:57] <maxb> Of course, if write performance isn't all that important, and you don't mind that any 2 simultaneous drive failures kill the array, RAID 5 is still an option
[10:58] <ArchaicLord> No was trying to maximise the space.. as affording more drives is an issue
[10:58] <maxb> But RAID 10 will get you better write performance, an ability to survive _some_ patterns of 2 drive failures, and rebuilds that only need to read back from 1 drive instead of all 3 others
[10:58] <ArchaicLord> I want to back up my pc, my wifes mac and my mac..... and then I also want to run a media server to host films and music
[10:59] <ArchaicLord> just between the 2 macs.. thats 1tb of data..
[10:59] <ArchaicLord> and that wouldonly be 1 back up each..
[11:02] <maxb> Seems like RAID 5 is reasonable under the constraints, but you should either keep a spare drive on hand or be prepared to order one next day delivery if one fails
[11:02] <ArchaicLord> when i get a job I can prob justify it..
[11:23] <RoyK> ArchaicLord: you can't convert from ext4 to xfs - you'll have to backup your data and recreate the filesystem
[11:23] <RoyK> ArchaicLord: the only thing I know of that ext4 can do that xfs can't, is to be shrunk - xfs can only be grown
[11:23] <ArchaicLord> thats not an issue there isn't any data on it.. the data i thought was on it is on the usb drive
[11:24] <RoyK> ok, just create a new fs, then
[11:24] <ArchaicLord> oh bother.. i need to destroy the curernt array completly and rebuild from scratch?
[11:24] <RoyK> maxb: for async writes, the performance is likely to be better with raid5 than raid10, since you'll have more data drives
[11:25] <RoyK> maxb: but don't use raid5 with a lot of drives, use raid6
[11:26] <RoyK> ArchaicLord: no, listen.... you have disks or ssds that together make up a raidset, represented by a blockdevice, like /dev/md0. on top of this, you put lvm2, meaning you create a volume group with one physical volume, md0, and on the vg, you create a logical volume, lv, onto which you place a filesystem
[11:27] <RoyK> ArchaicLord: it's all layered nicely, so if you change something on one layer, whatever's below won't care, that is, if you have lvm setup and recreate the fs, all lvm will see is a bunch of i/o
[11:27] <RoyK> so will the raid
[11:30] <ArchaicLord> ahhh ok so it matters not what file system my raid is currently
[11:33] <ArchaicLord> that will make life happyier..I shall give it a go... so I gotta create volume groupd then create a logical volume then apply xfs to the lv.
[11:48] <RoyK> ArchaicLord: they are separate enteties
[11:49] <RoyK> ArchaicLord: yes, create a vg with the raid as a pv and then put an lv on top of that and then a filesystem on the lv
[11:50] <RoyK> ArchaicLord: most things are like that in linux, the exceptions are btrfs and zfs, where the roles with raid/volume management/filesystems are mixed up, which gives some interesting opportunities
[12:18] <ArchaicLord> Freenas was zfs
[12:20] <ArchaicLord> ok for the vg do I create that as the entire size of my array?
[13:28] <ArchaicLord> when creating the vg.. for a pool of 6tb would 128m be enough for the physical extent size?
[13:31] <ArchaicLord> so I done 6,000,000 / 65,000 = 92.307.. I figure that rounded up would be 128
[14:25] <ArchaicLord> ok now I am confused I ran this
[14:26] <ArchaicLord> mount /dev/lvm-raid/lvm0 /mnt
[14:26] <ArchaicLord> df -h /mnt
[14:27] <ArchaicLord> which gives me
[14:27] <ArchaicLord> Filesystem                 Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
[14:27] <ArchaicLord> /dev/mapper/lvm_raid-lvm0  5.5T   34M  5.5T   1% /mnt
[14:28] <ArchaicLord> so now would    mkdir test /mnt       create a file in the right place?
[14:44] <jelly> "mkdir /mnt/test"
[15:11] <binia> or just cd /mount
[15:11] <binia> mkdir test :d
[15:11] <ArchaicLord> yeah i got it.. was afriad /mnt/ was the os /mnt/ which is why i wanted to check
[17:04] <xibalba> any idea how i can install postgrey w/out postfix as a dependency
[17:05] <xibalba> other than compiling it
[17:17] <TJ-> xibalba: "dpkg --unpack" then edit /var/lib/dpkg/status, finding the debian/control file entries for that package and edit the Depends: line :)
[17:18] <TJ-> xibalba: in theory then you can dpkg --install with the modified dependency
[17:18] <patdk-lap> tj, that seems really overkil
[17:18] <patdk-lap> postfix isn't a dependency of postgrey
[17:19]  * patdk-lap also wonders how you compile perl
[17:20] <TJ-> patdk-lap: that's generally how I hack a binary package's dependencies quickly :)
[17:21] <patdk-lap> but why hack it? if it doesn't even depend on it?
[17:21] <TJ-> xibalba: it looks as if postfix is a recommends so you can just do "apt-get install --no-install-recommends postgrey"
[17:21] <xibalba> patdk-lap , didn't know it was perl based hwne i started
[17:21] <TJ-> patdk-lap: xibalba said it depended; I didn't double-check on that
[17:21] <xibalba> oh thanks
[17:22] <xibalba> i didn't find that option earlier i'll give that a go
[17:22] <TJ-> I used to apply that dpkg status hack to allow side-by-side installation of PC/UEFI grub packages that declare Conflicts
[20:26] <CodeMouse92> #apache
[20:26] <CodeMouse92> Oops
[22:24] <phantoms1> if im using docker do i stil have to runn ubuntu server?
[22:26] <bekks> phantoms1: docker is an application running on a host OS.
[22:26] <bekks> you still need a host OS.
[22:52] <phantoms1> y but it can be alsow desctop version!? or would that stil be a security risk ….
[22:52] <bekks> What are you talking about?
[22:53] <bekks> There is no such thing as "docker without a host which runs docker".
[22:53] <phantoms1> ubuntu desctop with docker
[22:53] <bekks> Yes, you can run docker on Ubuntu Desktop.
[22:54] <phantoms1> and how di i secure it?
[22:54] <phantoms1> i dont have a domain just public ip
[22:55] <bekks> A domain has nothing to do with it at all.