Re: [arch-general] pdftk - almost build but died - need help figuring out if I can find a work-around

2010-03-14 Thread David C. Rankin
On 03/15/2010 01:06 AM, David C. Rankin wrote: > On 03/14/2010 10:37 AM, Edgar Kalkowski wrote: >> Am oder ungefähr am Freitag, 12. März 2010, schrieb David C. Rankin: >>> Guys, >>> >>> I need pdftk for a script I use that does fax processing. I ran into >>> this >>> problem 6-7 months ago, bu

Re: [arch-general] pdftk - almost build but died - need help figuring out if I can find a work-around

2010-03-14 Thread David C. Rankin
On 03/14/2010 10:37 AM, Edgar Kalkowski wrote: > Am oder ungefähr am Freitag, 12. März 2010, schrieb David C. Rankin: >> Guys, >> >> I need pdftk for a script I use that does fax processing. I ran into >> this >> problem 6-7 months ago, but still had another server with pdftk on it so it >> w

Re: [arch-general] Btrfs more than twice as fast compared to ext4

2010-03-14 Thread Nilesh Govindarajan
On 03/13/2010 08:35 AM, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: Hi, Just wanted to share an interesting experience I had today. Check http://ghodechhap.net/btrfs.performance.txt Great. A stable version released ? -- Nilesh Govindarajan Site & Server Adminstrator www.itech7.com

Re: [arch-general] Bad attitude in flyspray again!

2010-03-14 Thread Isaac Dupree
On 03/14/10 13:05, Aaron Griffin wrote: On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Heiko Baums wrote: Am Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:58:34 -0600 schrieb Aaron Griffin: So you wanted to add a comment totally unrelated to the bug itself to the bug? Isn't that polluting the bug report? What happened here is exact

Re: [arch-general] Hacking into HAL's mount process

2010-03-14 Thread Isaac Dupree
On 03/14/10 12:30, Ray Rashif wrote: Anyway, a slightly off-topic complaint I have is that my 32GB Cruzer is slow as hell to write to at just a measly 3MB/s. My SanDisk Sansa Clip in mass-storage mode is excessively slow (also, Linux used to have difficulty mounting it in USB 2.0 mode and eith

Re: [arch-general] Hacking into HAL's mount process

2010-03-14 Thread Rogutės Sparnuotos
f...@kokkinizita.net (2010-03-14 17:03): > On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 08:58:45PM +0530, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote: > > > On 03/14/2010 08:50 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote: > > > > >Just put the device in /etc/fstab with whatever options > > >you want, (u)mount it manually and forget about hal. > >

[arch-general] newsbeuter 2.2 PKGBUILD (diff)

2010-03-14 Thread Kitty
Hi all, Here's the diff to update newsbeuter to 2.2, it's a fresh release, as of this morning. It builds and installs. --- --- /home/kitty/Downloads/PKGBUILD(2) 2010-03-14 10:19:35.533972938 -0700 +++ PKGBUILD2010-03-14 10:09:43.734084982 -0700 @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ # Contributor

Re: [arch-general] Bad attitude in flyspray again!

2010-03-14 Thread Aaron Griffin
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Heiko Baums wrote: > Am Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:58:34 -0600 > schrieb Aaron Griffin : > >> So you wanted to add a comment totally unrelated to the bug itself to >> the bug? Isn't that polluting the bug report? What happened here is >> exactly what I'd expect - you cont

Re: [arch-general] Bad attitude in flyspray again!

2010-03-14 Thread Aaron Griffin
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Heiko Baums wrote: > Am Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:58:34 -0600 > schrieb Aaron Griffin : > >> So you wanted to add a comment totally unrelated to the bug itself to >> the bug? Isn't that polluting the bug report? What happened here is >> exactly what I'd expect - you cont

Re: [arch-general] Hacking into HAL's mount process

2010-03-14 Thread Nilesh Govindarajan
Hacked mount options by hal finally. There is not much gain after disabling flush. I was getting 1-2 MB/s before flush and now 3-4 MB/s Approximately twice. I used to get around 7-10 MB/s some time ago with my same pen drives. I'm researching more to force async option. I edited /usr/share/hal/

Re: [arch-general] Hacking into HAL's mount process

2010-03-14 Thread Ray Rashif
On 15 March 2010 00:03, wrote: > On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 08:58:45PM +0530, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote: > >> On 03/14/2010 08:50 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote: >> >> >Just put the device in /etc/fstab with whatever options >> >you want, (u)mount it manually and forget about hal. >> >> Doesn't do g

Re: [arch-general] Hacking into HAL's mount process

2010-03-14 Thread Ray Rashif
Anyway, a slightly off-topic complaint I have is that my 32GB Cruzer is slow as hell to write to at just a measly 3MB/s. Sheesh. I wonder if it's the size and technical limitation or whether there might be some untested hackery. I was thinking of formatting it in Windows and changing the allocatio

Re: [arch-general] Hacking into HAL's mount process

2010-03-14 Thread Edgar Kalkowski
Am oder ungefähr am Sonntag, 14. März 2010, schrieb f...@kokkinizita.net: > On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 05:02:47PM +0100, Edgar Kalkowski wrote: > > > In this case you can either use labels or uuids to identify them in > > /etc/fstab, e.g. > > > > /dev/disk/by-label/Data /mnt/Data vfat > > uid=root

Re: [arch-general] Hacking into HAL's mount process

2010-03-14 Thread fons
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 05:02:47PM +0100, Edgar Kalkowski wrote: > In this case you can either use labels or uuids to identify them in > /etc/fstab, e.g. > > /dev/disk/by-label/Data /mnt/Data vfat > uid=root,gid=users,showexec,user,noauto,umask=002,utf8,shortname=mixed 0 0 > /dev/disk/by-uuid/5

Re: [arch-general] Hacking into HAL's mount process

2010-03-14 Thread fons
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 08:58:45PM +0530, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote: > On 03/14/2010 08:50 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote: > > >Just put the device in /etc/fstab with whatever options > >you want, (u)mount it manually and forget about hal. > > Doesn't do good. I have multiple pen drives :) Same

Re: [arch-general] Hacking into HAL's mount process

2010-03-14 Thread Edgar Kalkowski
Am oder ungefähr am Sonntag, 14. März 2010, schrieb Nilesh Govindarajan: > On 03/14/2010 08:50 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 07:51:28PM +0530, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote: > > > > Just put the device in /etc/fstab with whatever options > > you want, (u)mount it manually

Re: [arch-general] pdftk - almost build but died - need help figuring out if I can find a work-around

2010-03-14 Thread Edgar Kalkowski
Am oder ungefähr am Freitag, 12. März 2010, schrieb David C. Rankin: > Guys, > > I need pdftk for a script I use that does fax processing. I ran into > this > problem 6-7 months ago, but still had another server with pdftk on it so it > wasn't critical. Now, I need to solve it. Hi David!

Re: [arch-general] Hacking into HAL's mount process

2010-03-14 Thread Nilesh Govindarajan
On 03/14/2010 08:50 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote: On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 07:51:28PM +0530, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote: @Ray, If the device has small buffer size, then it takes lot of time. Who want's to shell out more bucks for this simple flush thing to get a device with bigger buffer size.

Re: [arch-general] Hacking into HAL's mount process

2010-03-14 Thread fons
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 07:51:28PM +0530, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote: > @Ray, > If the device has small buffer size, then it takes lot of time. Who > want's to shell out more bucks for this simple flush thing to get a > device with bigger buffer size. > > @Robert, > Power would fail if there was n

Re: [arch-general] Hacking into HAL's mount process

2010-03-14 Thread Mauro Santos
On 03/14/2010 02:21 PM, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote: > On 03/14/2010 07:41 PM, Robert Howard wrote: >> Yes, it's all placebo effect. What seems like faster transfers is >> really the >> use of write caching and not a good idea for removable media. Could leave >> the data and filesystem in inconsisten

Re: [arch-general] Hacking into HAL's mount process

2010-03-14 Thread Nilesh Govindarajan
On 03/14/2010 07:41 PM, Robert Howard wrote: Yes, it's all placebo effect. What seems like faster transfers is really the use of write caching and not a good idea for removable media. Could leave the data and filesystem in inconsistent states if the device were accidentally removed or if power fa

Re: [arch-general] Hacking into HAL's mount process

2010-03-14 Thread Robert Howard
Yes, it's all placebo effect. What seems like faster transfers is really the use of write caching and not a good idea for removable media. Could leave the data and filesystem in inconsistent states if the device were accidentally removed or if power failed. On Mar 14, 2010 4:33 AM, "Ray Rashif" w

Re: [arch-general] Hacking into HAL's mount process

2010-03-14 Thread Ray Rashif
On 13/03/2010, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote: > By default HAL adds the flush flag when USB devices are mounted... I > think which is what making WRITEs slow. > I want that HAL shouldn't add the flush flag. How to ? Funny..I remember the very reason for making "flush" a default mount option was becau