Curiosity got the better of me, so I installed "whois" and gave it
a try.
Below are the responses I get, for "$whois 191.96.36.56" and I tried
a whois on the ip in "%ERROR:201: access denied for 190.112.52.14"
I wonder what this information might mean to anyone? How would this
information be u
On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 1:51 AM Timothy M Butterworth <
timothy.m.butterwo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 4:02 PM vi...@wlcr.net wrote:
>
>> Can anyone explain why whois on a Debian server gets a rejection as if
>> through a proxy server?
>>
>> Does the Debian command "whois"
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 4:02 PM vi...@wlcr.net wrote:
> Can anyone explain why whois on a Debian server gets a rejection as if
> through a proxy server?
>
> Does the Debian command "whois" not connect directly to the various
> databases?
>
>
> $whois 191.96.36.56
> % IP Client: 64.25x.xx.xx
> %
On Mon 25 Nov 2024 at 22:03:33 (-0800), Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> But, as I expected, all my stuff is gone. Well, sort of.
> I plugged the hard drive back in, and all my files are
> there. But there are no icons left on the desktop - no
> more Portal, and none of the utilities I downloaded were
> o
On 11/25/24 22:03, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
Many thanks to all of you who have replied to my questions.
YW. :-)
It seems that I've been creating trouble for myself by trying
to kludge something together from the old installation.
The only reason I tried this was the age-old problem I
have when
On Tuesday, 26 November 2024 17:52:51 -03 vi...@wlcr.net wrote:
> Can anyone explain why whois on a Debian server gets a rejection as if
> through a proxy server?
>
> Does the Debian command "whois" not connect directly to the various
> databases?
>
>
> $whois 191.96.36.56
> % IP Client: 64.25x.xx.
Can anyone explain why whois on a Debian server gets a rejection as if
through a proxy server?
Does the Debian command "whois" not connect directly to the various
databases?
$whois 191.96.36.56
% IP Client: 64.25x.xx.xx
% This is the RIPE Database query service.
% The objects are in RPSL fo
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 1:45 PM Bruno Volpi wrote:
>
> When I try to scan ( x-sane or simple-scan) from my canon MF643 since few
> day I get this error message :
>
> *** buffer overflow detected ***: terminated
>
> Printing work fine.
>
> I tried from two PC with same configuration : same probl
Hello
When I try to scan ( x-sane or simple-scan) from my canon MF643 since
few day I get this error message :
*** buffer overflow detected ***: terminated
Printing work fine.
I tried from two PC with same configuration : same problem
info on my system :
Debian Release: 12.8
Architectur
On 11/26/24 12:59, Mario Marietto wrote:
2)
# apt install nvidia-detect nvidia-driver
You first did an `update`.
Also the wiki at [1] suggest to install other PKGs.
[1]
https://www.reddit.com/r/debian/comments/1h08w9v/ssl_error8002system_libraryno_such/?rdt=41730
--
John Doe
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 04:35:13PM +0100, Roger Price wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 03:53:28PM +0100, Roger Price wrote:
> > > "except via mdadm" : exactly the point I would like to make. mdadm needs
> > > to
> > > be able to address the indi
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 03:53:28PM +0100, Roger Price wrote:
"except via mdadm" : exactly the point I would like to make. mdadm needs to
be able to address the individual underlying devices. Only /dev/sdxn style
addressing can do this, not duplicat
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 09:11:58AM +0100, Roger Price wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, George at Clug wrote:
>
> > "$ lsblk -f" output is very nice ! Thanks.
>
> I tried this and noticed UUID duplication in the output. I attach a small
> text file which shows what I saw. UUID sdg6 = UUID sdh6
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 03:53:28PM +0100, Roger Price wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, Felix Miata wrote:
>
> > > The use of LABELs is attractive, but I notice you have the same label for
> > > sda5
> > > and sdb5. This means you cannot intervene on "msi85:0tmp". You have to
> > > specify
> > > s
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, Felix Miata wrote:
The use of LABELs is attractive, but I notice you have the same label for sda5
and sdb5. This means you cannot intervene on "msi85:0tmp". You have to specify
sda5 or sdb5.
Not at all. hr18md0tmp is an ext4 filesystem LABEL. I wouldn't want to disturb
Charlie Gibbs writes:
> How do the rest of you deal with all the user-added stuff
> that vanishes when you do a fresh install?
I don't do fresh installs as a rule, not when changing hardware or
shuffling files around like in your case, or when I wanted to switch
from MBR partition table to GPT o
Roger Price composed on 2024-11-26 03:57 (UTC-0500):
> Felix Miata wrote:
>> Members of a raid filesystem have to be seen as an integral part of one
>> filesystem,
>> a special case. It's another reason I stick to use of LABELs.
>> # lsblk -f | egrep -A1 'raid|NAME'
>> NAME FSTYPE
>> On Tue 26 Nov 2024 at 01:21:31 (-0500), Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
> How do the rest of you deal with all the user-added stuff that vanishes
> when you do a fresh install? Are there some tricks I can use, rather
> than painstakingly re-installing all my utilities one by one?
I do two things:-
1
> Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2024 at 2:51 AM
> From: "Roger Price"
> To: "debian-user Mailing List"
> Subject: The "uniqueness" of UUIDs
>
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, George at Clug wrote:
>
> > "$ lsblk -f" output is very nice ! Thanks.
>
> I tried this and noticed UUID duplication in the out
Hello.
I'm using Ubuntu 24.04 right now,but what I'm trying to do is to virtualize
Debian 12 as a vm using qemu + kvm + virt-manager and I want to passthru my
gpu from Ubuntu to Debian. And infact this is what I did. Debian is running
now,but I'm facing a problem with the nvidia driver. This is ho
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 12:16:59PM +0100, Roger Price wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, Nicolas George wrote:
>
> > Roger Price (12024-11-26):
> > > You have to specify sda5 or sdb5.
> > There is nothing wrong with having to specify sda5 or sdb5.
>
> Indeed, and it's the only way for Raid specificati
Roger Price (12024-11-26):
> I'm guessing that this feature is something systemd has given us.
Your hate is making you guess wrong.
--
Nicolas George
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, Nicolas George wrote:
Roger Price (12024-11-26):
You have to specify sda5 or sdb5.
There is nothing wrong with having to specify sda5 or sdb5.
Indeed, and it's the only way for Raid specification. For example /proc/mdstat
contains no mention of device UUIDs.
It is o
>> On Tue 26 Nov 2024 at 01:21:31 (-0500), Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> How do the rest of you deal with all the user-added stuff that vanishes
> when you do a fresh install? Are there some tricks I can use, rather
> than painstakingly re-installing all my utilities one by one?
I use a filesystem "/
to...@tuxteam.de (12024-11-26):
> The UUID is in a slot of the /file system/.
Not only.
There is an UUID in the header of swap partitions (and files). Swap is
not a file system.
There is an UUID in the header of LVM physical volumes. PVs are not
filesystems.
> Of course, if the RAID system allo
Hi again,
Am 26.11.2024 um 09:24 schrieb Arno Lehmann:
Hi Roger,
Am 26.11.2024 um 08:51 schrieb Roger Price:
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, George at Clug wrote:
"$ lsblk -f" output is very nice ! Thanks.
I tried this and noticed UUID duplication in the output. Here is part
of what I saw:
...
On Tuesday, 26-11-2024 at 20:08 Roger Price wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, Hans wrote:
>
> > What about juste enter blkid as root?
> > Will also give UUID and Label.
>
> # blkid /dev/sdg6
> /dev/sdg6: UUID="f5e37a29-357a-e3f2-c731-e29eddce5e91"
> UUID_SUB="8ae02b9d-d818-1d8a-88f6-5c
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 09:57:59AM +0100, Roger Price wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, Felix Miata wrote:
>
> > Members of a raid filesystem have to be seen as an integral part of one
> > filesystem,
> > a special case. It's another reason I stick to use of LABELs.
> >
> > # lsblk -f | egrep -A1 'r
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, Hans wrote:
What about juste enter blkid as root?
Will also give UUID and Label.
# blkid /dev/sdg6
/dev/sdg6: UUID="f5e37a29-357a-e3f2-c731-e29eddce5e91"
UUID_SUB="8ae02b9d-d818-1d8a-88f6-5cb77b15d0eb"
LABEL="10.218.0.100:3" TYPE="linux_raid_member"
Roger Price (12024-11-26):
> You have
> to specify sda5 or sdb5.
There is nothing wrong with having to specify sda5 or sdb5.
It is only a problem if you want to specify now and expect it to be
still valid after the next reboot.
Re
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, Felix Miata wrote:
Members of a raid filesystem have to be seen as an integral part of one
filesystem,
a special case. It's another reason I stick to use of LABELs.
# lsblk -f | egrep -A1 'raid|NAME'
NAME FSTYPEFSVER LABEL UUID FSAVAIL FSUSE%
Am Dienstag, 26. November 2024, 09:11:58 CET schrieb Roger Price:
What about juste enter
blkid
as root?
Will also give UUID and Label.
Best
Hans
> Sorry, the formatting was messed up and the message unreadable.
>
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, George at Clug wrote:
> > "$ lsblk -f" output is ver
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 08:51:21AM +0100, Roger Price wrote:
[...]
> Aren't UUIDs supposed to be unique? Roger
Not if someone copies them, not. They are numbers. There's no magic.
Cheers
--
t
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, Nicolas George wrote:
Roger Price (12024-11-26):
UUID sdg6 = UUID sdh6 !
Aren't UUIDs supposed to be unique?
Yes, they are: somebody did something wrong on your suystem. Odds it was
you. It sure was not me :-Þ
When did you add the most recent of these drives? How did you
Nicolas George (12024-11-26):
> Yes, they are: somebody did something wrong on your suystem. Odds it was
> you. It sure was not me :-Þ
>
> When did you add the most recent of these drives? How did you add it?
My bad, I read the output on my system incorrectly. Forget these two
paragraphs please.
Hi Roger,
Am 26.11.2024 um 08:51 schrieb Roger Price:
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, George at Clug wrote:
"$ lsblk -f" output is very nice ! Thanks.
I tried this and noticed UUID duplication in the output. Here is part
of what I saw:
NAME FSTYPE FSVER LABEL
UUID
Roger Price composed on 2024-11-26 08:51 (UTC+0100):
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, George at Clug wrote:
>> "$ lsblk -f" output is very nice ! Thanks.
> I tried this and noticed UUID duplication in the output. Here is part of
> what I
> saw:
> NAMEFSTYPEFSVER LABEL UUI
Sorry, the formatting was messed up and the message unreadable.
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, George at Clug wrote:
"$ lsblk -f" output is very nice ! Thanks.
I tried this and noticed UUID duplication in the output. I attach a small text
file which shows what I saw. UUID sdg6 = UUID sdh6 !
NAME
Roger Price (12024-11-26):
> UUID sdg6 = UUID sdh6 ! If I wanted to retire /dev/sdg6 from the Raid
> array, I would not be able to use the UUID, only the unique SDxn.
UUIDs are important if you want the system to choose the right drive
with nu human supervision. Do you often retire drives from a
39 matches
Mail list logo
