Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26

Thread: Unofficial cheatcode for those who miss the old official home= cheatcode

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    123
    excuse me for my noobyness forrester, but if I were to apply those patches, do I need to use the commands described here:http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/appy-pa...patch-command/ ? (I have never used a patch before)

    I really like things like this getting released. It'll keep knoppix a bit more 'alive' and makes knoppix even more usable.
    now we just need to get klaus knopper's attention to this thread.
    He should really implement the knoppix_data, knoppixsh and mountbypath while considering moving to squashfs?

  2. #12
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Germany/ Dietzenbach
    Posts
    1,124
    Quote Originally Posted by dinosoep View Post
    it is about 200 % faster to compress
    .. I can't believe this result. What did you compress, Knoppix CD or DVD? How long (exact) will it take to compress with sqashfs and with cloop (create_compressed_fs)?

    And which command-line for "create_compressed_fs" did you use?

    Greetings Werner * http://www.wp-schulz.de/knoppix/summary.html
    Own Rescue-CD with Knoppix (Knoppix V6.4.4 remaster)

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    242
    Quote Originally Posted by dinosoep View Post
    excuse me for my noobyness
    Noobyness excused.

    Quote Originally Posted by dinosoep View Post
    if I were to apply those patches, do I need to use the commands described here:http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/appy-pa...patch-command/ ?
    Yes, the patch is a simple one to apply. You should get some messages about offsets and possibly fuzz. That's OK. A message that says hunk failed is not OK.

    Here's a tip for noobyness ...

    Every Linux command comes with a man page. To find out about patch(1) from a console terminal, type in man patch. To find out more, try man man.

    If you don't like man pages (and I can see why) but you do like html, you can find the man pages on-line. Here's two I use ..http://linux.die.net/man/1/man2html and http://www.linuxmanpages.com/man1/man2html.1.php.

    I also cheat. I've the MAXI (aka DVD) edition so I've KDE and I've Konqueror. For installed software, I simply type into the Konqueror address bar something like #bash to call up in html format the man page for bash(1). If I type in ##sed I get the GNU project info pages on sed(1) in a form I can actually use.

    BTW, patch(1) means section 1 of the man pages - that means user command. Compare with passwd(5), which describes the format of the passwd file, not the command passwd(1) while mount(8\) and mount(2) mean the system administration command and the operating system call respectively.

    Quote Originally Posted by dinosoep View Post
    I really like things like this getting released.

    Thank you for your enthusiasm but I would not go so far as to call what I done a release. Without other people trying it, it cannot be called tested thoroughly and so cannot be called released.

    Quote Originally Posted by dinosoep View Post
    now we just need to get klaus knopper's attention to this thread.
    KK has a mailing list. He does not need a forum - he already knows all the answers.

    Quote Originally Posted by dinosoep View Post
    He should really implement the knoppix_data, knoppixsh and mountbypath while considering moving to squashfs?
    First you would have to ask politely why there is no home=anymore. If he he does not have a good reason why such a thing is a bad idea (and he might) then you might ask if he would welcome a patch that might do the job.

    Have you ever tried to get a 'developer' to accept a patch from someone he has never heard of before ? Camels and the eye of a needle come to mind.

  4. #14
    Senior Member registered user
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Columbia, Maryland USA
    Posts
    1,631
    Re this whole thread: Nicely done, Forester; My thanks as well.

  5. #15
    Senior Member registered user
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    423
    Quote Originally Posted by Forester View Post
    Have you ever tried to get a 'developer' to accept a patch from someone he has never heard of before ? Camels and the eye of a needle come to mind.
    A lot of wisdom in this paragraph.

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    123
    mkisofs & mksquashfs
    well, it wasn't really that accurate. I used mkisofs the first time I remastered and mksquashfs the second time, a lot had changed in the meantime. But mkisofs took really a lot of time while mksquashfs took considerably less.

    Quote Originally Posted by Werner P. Schulz View Post
    .. I can't believe this result. What did you compress, Knoppix CD or DVD? How long (exact) will it take to compress with sqashfs and with cloop (create_compressed_fs)?

    And which command-line for "create_compressed_fs" did you use?

    Greetings Werner * http://www.wp-schulz.de/knoppix/summary.html
    Own Rescue-CD with Knoppix (Knoppix V6.4.4 remaster)

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    242
    Quote Originally Posted by dinosoep View Post
    it is about 200 % faster
    @ werner

    The only thing more versatile than the English language is the users of the English language in their use of the English language.

    Take a time interval of 2 hours. 50 % longer is 3 hours, 50 % shorter is 1 hour. 100 % longer is 4 hours, 100 % shorter is no time at all.

    If I take 2 hours to do something and dinosoep takes twice as long, then he does it 100 % slower than I and do it 100 % faster than he.

    When dinosoep says squashfs compression is 200 % faster, he is saying it takes only one third the time but I do not think that is what he meant to say and that is almost certainly not what you understood him to mean.

    @ dinosoep

    From yesterdays post I see you have 2 Gb of RAM and swap space. There is no excuse for the cloop compression to be so slow. When you did your remastering, how many clever loop devices mounted from files on your (shock horror ) windows partition did you use ?

    Further discussion of squashfs should take place under the relevant thread and that is not this one,

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    123
    Your right, it doesn't really belong here but I will try to find the commands I used and I had one loop device mounted.
    going to try the patches tomorrow and see if it works for me

  9. #19
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Germany/ Dietzenbach
    Posts
    1,124
    Quote Originally Posted by Werner P. Schulz View Post
    .. I can't believe this result. What did you compress, Knoppix CD or DVD? How long (exact) will it take to compress with sqashfs and with cloop (create_compressed_fs)?
    ... now I have done a test for my own.

    using virtual machine (VirtualBox), 1 GB RAM, swap partition 1 GB

    using Knoppix CD-Version 6.4.4

    decompress /KNOPPIX/KNOPPIX (705211 K => 100%) to directory '/remaster' (2054135 K)
    Code:
    losetup /dev/cloop0 /media/sr0/KNOPPIX/KNOPPIX
    mount -t iso9660 /dev/cloop0 /knoppix/loop
    rsync -aH /knoppix/loop/* /remaster
    a) compress '/remaster' to KNOPPIX
    Code:
    genisoimage -R -U -no-bak -quiet \
        /remaster | create_compressed_fs -q -B 65536 \
        -f /tmp/knoppix_tmp - /knoppix/KNOPPIX/KNOPPIX
    size of new KNOPPIX: 740461 K (104,96%)

    compression time: 7 min 03 sec


    b) compress '/remaster' to KNOPPIX.squasfs
    Code:
    mksquashfs-lzma /remaster 
       \/knoppix/KNOPPIX/KNOPPIX.squashfs
    size of KNOPPIX.squashfs: 719876 K (102,08%)

    compression time: 6 min 42 sec

    I think the differences are not worth the trouble to leave a well established compression method.


    Greetings Werner * http://www.wp-schulz.de/knoppix/summary.html
    Own Rescue-CD with Knoppix (Knoppix V6.4.4 remaster)

  10. #20
    Senior Member registered user
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Columbia, Maryland USA
    Posts
    1,631
    @ Werner

    Would a comparison of expansion times be comparable?
    Thanks.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


HP Workstation Z640 2x Xeon E5-2623V4 32GB Ram Dual 256GB SSD K420 Linux GA picture

HP Workstation Z640 2x Xeon E5-2623V4 32GB Ram Dual 256GB SSD K420 Linux GA

$214.98



Dell Precision T3600 XEON E5-1607 3.0GHz 16GB RAM 500GB HD WIN10 Pro Workstation picture

Dell Precision T3600 XEON E5-1607 3.0GHz 16GB RAM 500GB HD WIN10 Pro Workstation

$99.00



Dell PowerEdge T420 2x Xeon E5-2430 V2 2.50GHZ 32GB DDR3-1600MHZ 2x 550W PSU picture

Dell PowerEdge T420 2x Xeon E5-2430 V2 2.50GHZ 32GB DDR3-1600MHZ 2x 550W PSU

$149.95



Dell Precision 5810 Workstation Xeon E5-1650 6C 3.5GHz 16GB 500GB Win10 K2200 picture

Dell Precision 5810 Workstation Xeon E5-1650 6C 3.5GHz 16GB 500GB Win10 K2200

$115.94



SR1XP Intel Xeon E5-2680 v3 12 Core 30MB 2.5GHz LGA 2011-3 Grade A Processor picture

SR1XP Intel Xeon E5-2680 v3 12 Core 30MB 2.5GHz LGA 2011-3 Grade A Processor

$4.50



Genuine Intel Xeon E5-2680V4 2.40Ghz 14-Core 35MB LGA2011 CPU P/N: SR2N7 picture

Genuine Intel Xeon E5-2680V4 2.40Ghz 14-Core 35MB LGA2011 CPU P/N: SR2N7

$14.99



Intel Xeon E5-2690 v2 10-Core 3.0GHz 25M 8GTs LGA2011 Server CPU Processor SR1A5 picture

Intel Xeon E5-2690 v2 10-Core 3.0GHz 25M 8GTs LGA2011 Server CPU Processor SR1A5

$17.99



Intel Xeon E5-2690v4 2.6Ghz 14-Core 135W 35MB LGA2011-3 CPU Processor *TESTED* picture

Intel Xeon E5-2690v4 2.6Ghz 14-Core 135W 35MB LGA2011-3 CPU Processor *TESTED*

$24.99



HP Z2 Mini G3 Workstation Xeon E3-1225 V5 8GB RAM 256GB SSD Used No OS picture

HP Z2 Mini G3 Workstation Xeon E3-1225 V5 8GB RAM 256GB SSD Used No OS

$140.00



Intel Xeon E5-2697 v4 2.3GHz 18-Core Processor CPU LGA2011 SR2JV picture

Intel Xeon E5-2697 v4 2.3GHz 18-Core Processor CPU LGA2011 SR2JV

$49.99