Last week I observed something in the GNU/Linux kernel
logs that I have never ever seen before.

My main drive, which contains my OS and other important
stuff, was reporting a reduction in speed from the usual
SATA 6 mbs/sec to 3 mbs/sec and then to 1.5 mbs/sec.

I first noticed this when some MP3 files I was playing
suddenly stalled and then restarted.

WTF!

I have NEVER experienced such behavior. NEVER.

But then I recalled the phenomenon of the hard drive
crash.

Immediately, I shut down my system and then replaced
the main drive with a backup drive and then rebooted.
All was fine.

Because the backup drive was of a lower quality I
immediately ordered another drive from Western Digital
that was shipped next day air.

Then I copied everything over to the new drive and all
is fine.

What I want to know is what are the symptoms of an HDD
failure?

The problem drive, after a shutdown and subsequent power
up and reboot, behaves normally -- for a while. After
about 24 hours of operation it will once again begin
to shift from 6 mbs/sec to 3 mbs/sec and then to 1.5 mbs/sec.

Is this this the behavior of a dying HDD?

The drive is relatively new and I would never have
expected a failure from this drive.

C'mon lackeys, cough up some advice.

Or does your distro do it all for you including wiping
your shit besotted ass?

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

On 11/22/24 3:53 PM, Farley Flud wrote:
> {snip!}
>
> C'mon lackeys, cough up some advice.

Sure:

"Anyone who's not a loser...got SSD boot drives years & years ago..."
-hh, 7 Feb 2018.

On Fri, 22 Nov 2024 17:04:39 -0500, -hh wrote:

>
> "Anyone who's not a loser...got SSD boot drives years & years ago..."
> -hh, 7 Feb 2018.
>

Nope. Only losers use SSD.

HDD is for winners.

But, regardless, backups are critical and it is backups
which saved me much grief.

Yet my original question remains unanswered. What are
the usual symptoms, if there are usual symptoms, of a
failing HDD drive?

What's matter, lackeys? Mamma Ubuntu/Mint has taped your
fucking mouths shut?

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

On 11/22/24 5:02 PM, Farley Flud wrote:
> But, regardless, backups are critical and it is backups
> which saved me much grief.

What is the size of your backups?

I always hesitate it because the amount of material is huge and it takes
so much time.

Music alone is like close to one terabyte. I'm not one of those who
listens to country music and plays with his "230 grain" and feels he's
got the world under his belt. Neither am I some Bozo who plays a Dylan
and calls that "culture." The variety of what I listen is remarkable.

And then is literature... Jesus. That's like another two terabytes. I've
divided them into three computers. How can one easily back up such
things? Cloud storage? The cloud storage I have is matter of gigabytes
not terabytes.

Then is history!... I don't even want to get into that.

And then of course physics. There's not a week or so that passes where I
don't find it necessary to refer to one or more of those books.

Biology? Biotech? Math? Some chemistry? Some evolution? I have
everything that Stephen Jay Gould has published (for laymen), as an
example, and I don't want to lose the access to them if my storage
crashes. Because I access them every now and then. Now add to this
sample, some 200 other collections that I don't want to lose.

How the hell does one back up all that?

Thank god I only have three computer books on my computer. Two for
programming and one for Linux. I'm no "DFS". That Bozo even collects
usenet posts.

I don't keep movies. When I see one, it is discarded. About 20 years
later I might see it again if it was a particularly good movie, but that
doesn't happen often for obvious reasons.

On Fri, 22 Nov 2024 20:53:10 +0000, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote in
<pan$8b2e9$1f456269$6b5d1b4$196ab5f6@linux.rocks>:

> Last week I observed something in the GNU/Linux kernel logs that I have
> never ever seen before.
>
> My main drive, which contains my OS and other important stuff, was
> reporting a reduction in speed from the usual SATA 6 mbs/sec to 3
> mbs/sec and then to 1.5 mbs/sec.
>
> I first noticed this when some MP3 files I was playing suddenly stalled
> and then restarted.
>
> WTF!
>
> I have NEVER experienced such behavior. NEVER.
>
> But then I recalled the phenomenon of the hard drive crash.
>
> Immediately, I shut down my system and then replaced the main drive with
> a backup drive and then rebooted.
> All was fine.
>
> Because the backup drive was of a lower quality I immediately ordered
> another drive from Western Digital that was shipped next day air.
>
> Then I copied everything over to the new drive and all is fine.
>
> What I want to know is what are the symptoms of an HDD failure?
>
> The problem drive, after a shutdown and subsequent power up and reboot,
> behaves normally -- for a while. After about 24 hours of operation it
> will once again begin to shift from 6 mbs/sec to 3 mbs/sec and then to
> 1.5 mbs/sec.
>
> Is this this the behavior of a dying HDD?
>
> The drive is relatively new and I would never have expected a failure
> from this drive.
>
> C'mon lackeys, cough up some advice.
>
> Or does your distro do it all for you including wiping your shit
> besotted ass?
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

This is always the best way to motivate people to help.

In D movies.

--
-v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090 Ti
OS: Linux 6.12.0 Release: Mint 21.3 Mem: 258G
"Unburdened by the rigors of coherent thought."

vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> wrote:
>On Fri, 22 Nov 2024 20:53:10 +0000, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote in
><pan$8b2e9$1f456269$6b5d1b4$196ab5f6@linux.rocks>:
>
>> Last week I observed something in the GNU/Linux kernel logs that I have
>> never ever seen before.
>>
>> My main drive, which contains my OS and other important stuff, was
>> reporting a reduction in speed from the usual SATA 6 mbs/sec to 3
>> mbs/sec and then to 1.5 mbs/sec.
>>
>> I first noticed this when some MP3 files I was playing suddenly stalled
>> and then restarted.
>>
>> WTF!
>>
>> I have NEVER experienced such behavior. NEVER.
>>
>> But then I recalled the phenomenon of the hard drive crash.
>>
>> Immediately, I shut down my system and then replaced the main drive with
>> a backup drive and then rebooted.
>> All was fine.
>>
>> Because the backup drive was of a lower quality I immediately ordered
>> another drive from Western Digital that was shipped next day air.
>>
>> Then I copied everything over to the new drive and all is fine.
>>
>> What I want to know is what are the symptoms of an HDD failure?
>>
>> The problem drive, after a shutdown and subsequent power up and reboot,
>> behaves normally -- for a while. After about 24 hours of operation it
>> will once again begin to shift from 6 mbs/sec to 3 mbs/sec and then to
>> 1.5 mbs/sec.
>>
>> Is this this the behavior of a dying HDD?
>>
>> The drive is relatively new and I would never have expected a failure
>> from this drive.
>>
>> C'mon lackeys, cough up some advice.
>>
>> Or does your distro do it all for you including wiping your shit
>> besotted ass?
>>
>> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
>This is always the best way to motivate people to help.
>
>In D movies.

I haven't had a problem with my NVMe drive. My external hard drive is
for backups. Not sure what Larry's problem is, frankly, it sounds
like he just bought a defective drive, and has replaced it, what else
is there to say? He's just stupid AF.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 11/22/2024 6:36 PM, Sand Chimp wrote:

> How the hell does one back up all that?

You suffer through a full backup once, then do incrementals.

> Thank god I only have three computer books on my computer. Two for
> programming and one for Linux.

When you're done making pipe bombs and hating on Jews:

https://teachyourselfcs.com/

https://diveintosystems.org/book/

https://www.cs.swarthmore.edu/~newhall/unixlinks.html

> I'm no "DFS".

Silly primate. With 3TB of pirated music and books, you're at least 50x
the hoarder I am.

> That Bozo even collects usenet posts.

https://imgur.com/a/1QsRywW

On Fri, 22 Nov 2024 17:36:35 -0600, Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com>
wrote in <vhr4i3$15lr9$1@solani.org>:

> How the hell does one back up all that?

Thanks to Dufus falling out of my killfile, I saw his reply to
your post.

So I thought I'd answer you:

https://www.amazon.com/Synology-8-Bay-DiskStation-DS1823xs-Diskless/dp/B0BSTNV5TG/

And you'll need 8 of something like this:

https://www.amazon.com/Seagate-IronWolf-Enterprise-Internal-Drive/dp/B0B94NBBJH/

And...size components to fit budget. Consider that you probably want
10Gbe connectivity to your NAS, so you might need a new NIC for your
computer, too.

$ df -tnfs4 -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
[...]
192.168.23.12:/volume1/ds 39T 27T 12T 69% /nfs/ds

(I have a new Synology sitting in the box, along with two sets
of disks for two new volumes. Haven't got a round tuit to get
it online yet.)

--
-v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090 Ti
OS: Linux 6.12.0 Release: Mint 21.3 Mem: 258G
"p.s. Will someone tell Crazed Laughing Boy to use smartctl, please?"

On Fri, 22 Nov 2024 17:36:35 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

>
> How the hell does one back up all that?
>

I only back up my OS files, which total about 100G.

All of my data, i.e. books, documents, music, videos,
programs, etc., I have already backed up onto USB HDD
and BDR and other optical media.

In case of a disk failure, which I have NEVER experienced
before, I am only 100G away from salvation and this is
barely a hiccough.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

On 23 Nov 2024 05:10:17 GMT, vallor wrote:

>
> So I thought I'd answer you:
>
> https://www.amazon.com/Synology-8-Bay-DiskStation-DS1823xs-Diskless/dp/B0BSTNV5TG/
>
> And you'll need 8 of something like this:
>
> https://www.amazon.com/Seagate-IronWolf-Enterprise-Internal-Drive/dp/B0B94NBBJH/
>

You must be joking.

You are recommending a 4,500 USD expenditure for a simple
workstation backup? This is nothing more than bling.

Yes, bling. Do you also have your front teeth drilled out
to install a couple of diamonds and a 24K gold grill?

Just get one or two of these and rest content:

https://www.westerndigital.com/products/external-drives/wd-elements-desktop-usb-3-0-hdd?sku=WDBWLG0040HBK-NESN

Every couple of years just buy another and copy everything
from old to new.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

Le 22-11-2024, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> a écrit :
> Last week I observed something in the GNU/Linux kernel
> logs that I have never ever seen before.

Another great one. Thanks.

> My main drive, which contains my OS and other important
> stuff,

OK, let's be clear about that. The OS is not important stuff. The OS is
the easiest thing to get if you lose a hard disk. Some config files are
important, but neither the OS nor the software. Except if you write the
software yourself, but you doesn't. So, some config files are important
to manage carefully, not the OS. You find the latest version of your OS
if you need.

> was reporting a reduction in speed from the usual
> SATA 6 mbs/sec to 3 mbs/sec and then to 1.5 mbs/sec.

I don't know if anyone here believes that: I don't. There is nothing like
that in the logs of a desktop computer. I never heard of something like
that on servers and it would be useless and too difficult to put in
place for its benefit. And, by the way, when you are talking about the
speed of a hard drive, you have to say if it's write speed or read sped.

So, I'm pretty sure you read something you didn't understood and you try
to impress some political readers lost here with no technical knowledge.
So, take that sentence, give it a good form, and put it in your body
where it will grant you the most pleasure you can get with it. But here,
it's just a good joke.

> I first noticed this when some MP3 files I was playing
> suddenly stalled and then restarted.

OK, you repeatedly say you are involved in everything, including music,
and you can't get with inferior things on your computer. So get your mp3
garbage out of your messages. It shows you know nothing about good
quality sound.

> I have NEVER experienced such behavior. NEVER.

That I can believe. You just invented everything, so you couldn't saw it
before.

> But then I recalled the phenomenon of the hard drive
> crash.

That is something that happens. A hard drive has a short expected life.
Let say between five and ten years as you refuse SSD. So I can believe
you have already seen crashed hard drives.

> Immediately, I shut down my system and then replaced
> the main drive with a backup drive and then rebooted.
> All was fine.

That's something you never said here (at least I never saw it). It
means, you are copying all of your hard drive each time you are updating
your OS/softwares, installing something, are downloading something. You
can note I don't speak about creating a new file or updating it because
it's well beyond your abilities. It looks you take more time to save
your system than to use it. With the time it takes you to update it
compiling everything, you have even less time, than I was expecting, to
use your computer.

> What I want to know is what are the symptoms of an HDD
> failure?

That means nothing. A hard drive can fail in a lot of ways. And when you
have some issues, depending on the place it's happening, the symptom
will be different. For example, if you have a default sector which make
your file useless, the symptom is not the same if your file is a mp3
garbage or a file used during boot time. So the only way to know about
it is not to look for a hypothetical nonsense speed on your logs, but to
look at the number of default sectors.

I'll tel you a secret to manage your HDD: "man smartctl" is your friend.
If you don't have it, install it.

> The problem drive, after a shutdown and subsequent power
> up and reboot, behaves normally -- for a while. After
> about 24 hours of operation it will once again begin
> to shift from 6 mbs/sec to 3 mbs/sec and then to 1.5 mbs/sec.

Once again, I don't believe your numbers. It's way more difficult than
that to know the speed of a hard drive. It depends if you have a lot of
little files or a big file. And the speed of read and write file are
different. And you have to take care of the cache, too.

> Is this this the behavior of a dying HDD?

In your head, maybe, I'm not in your head. In a real world, I don't
know, you didn't gave the behavior of a hard drive, you gave numbers
coming from your head.

> The drive is relatively new and I would never have
> expected a failure from this drive.

Once again, that means nothing. Nobody can investigate with that. Mind
you: I wouldn't investigate for you even with the real data. But I'm not
the only one here and you don't give enough information to know what's
happening.

> C'mon lackeys, cough up some advice.

Why? It's your computer. It's your hard drive. I don't care if you can't
use it anymore.

> Or does your distro do it all for you including wiping
> your shit besotted ass?

The facts are: I can investigate and fix my computer issues, I can't
investigate issues when you don't give enough information, I don't want
to help you when you'll pretend later my help never existed.

So, take care of your issues by yourself. I don't give a damn if you
succeed or not. Good luck with that.

> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

I'm laughing at your issue, but I don't understand why you are laughing
at your own issue. I have only two explanations, each one would be
adequate:
- you just invented everything and you believe you will impress anyone
here with your fake story and your fake numbers.
- you believe anyone here would be annoyed to be unable to help you. But
the fact is, except for your pet dog the terrorist, everyone here is
happy to see you having issues with your computer.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

Le 22-11-2024, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> a écrit :
> On Fri, 22 Nov 2024 17:04:39 -0500, -hh wrote:

I'm not reading answers given to the -hh shit (unlike chrisv, I know
what a killfile is and I know how to use it). Except for you because
you are the funniest guy here, so I wouldn't miss an opportunity to
laugh.

> Nope. Only losers use SSD.

As with everything, you are stuck in the past and you don't understand
technology. It's not the first time you said it, it's not the reason for
my answer.

> HDD is for winners.

Yes, I saw your previous message. You have an issue with it and you don't
understand what happens with it. Good job winner.

> But, regardless, backups are critical and it is backups
> which saved me much grief.

In the real life, I agree. But in your case, saying that the most
important stuff in your computer is your OS just shows:
- you don't master your OS,
- your computer is useless,
- your claims of being involved in subjects that matters are fantaisies.

Because, if I'm involved in something that is important to me, that
something is important to save at more than what one place. When I can
reinstall my OS easily, loosing my work would really piss me off.

> Yet my original question remains unanswered. What are
> the usual symptoms, if there are usual symptoms, of a
> failing HDD drive?

That answer is easy: a hard drive can fail in many ways, with many
symptoms. So, as you didn't gave any real information, nobody can help
you.

> What's matter,

Nothing. My hard drives are good. I have no issue with my computer. You
are the one havng issues and I don't care about them.

> lackeys?

Here, you are the one asking for help. You are the lackey of others'
willing to help you.

> Mamma Ubuntu/Mint has taped your fucking mouths shut?

Really, your issues won't stop me to sleep well.

> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

Yes, your issues are fun. It's good to see you are able to laugh at your
misfortune. It's easy for others, including me, to laugh at your issues,
it's more difficult for you to laugh at them. Well, except if they are
all invented. Which I'm ready to believe.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

On 11/23/2024 12:10 AM, vallor wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Nov 2024 17:36:35 -0600, Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com>
> wrote in <vhr4i3$15lr9$1@solani.org>:
>
>> How the hell does one back up all that?
>
> Thanks to Dufus falling out of my killfile, I saw his reply to
> your post.
>
> So I thought I'd answer you:
>
> https://www.amazon.com/Synology-8-Bay-DiskStation-DS1823xs-Diskless/dp/B0BSTNV5TG/
>
> And you'll need 8 of something like this:
>
> https://www.amazon.com/Seagate-IronWolf-Enterprise-Internal-Drive/dp/B0B94NBBJH/
>
> And...size components to fit budget. Consider that you probably want
> 10Gbe connectivity to your NAS, so you might need a new NIC for your
> computer, too.
>
> $ df -tnfs4 -h
> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> [...]
> 192.168.23.12:/volume1/ds 39T 27T 12T 69% /nfs/ds
>
> (I have a new Synology sitting in the box, along with two sets
> of disks for two new volumes. Haven't got a round tuit to get
> it online yet.)

Taking the piss? FizzClit doesn't need $5K of hardware and 176TB to
backup his pirated material.

On 11/23/24 12:10 AM, vallor wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Nov 2024 17:36:35 -0600, Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com>
> wrote in <vhr4i3$15lr9$1@solani.org>:
>
>> How the hell does one back up all that?
>
> Thanks to Dufus falling out of my killfile, I saw his reply to
> your post.
>
> So I thought I'd answer you:
>
> https://www.amazon.com/Synology-8-Bay-DiskStation-DS1823xs-Diskless/dp/B0BSTNV5TG/
>
> And you'll need 8 of something like this:
>
> https://www.amazon.com/Seagate-IronWolf-Enterprise-Internal-Drive/dp/B0B94NBBJH/
>
> And...size components to fit budget. Consider that you probably want
> 10Gbe connectivity to your NAS, so you might need a new NIC for your
> computer, too.

You're right about wanting a 10Gbe connection: a full backup that takes
~20hrs to a USB3 connection took me a couple of days on my most recent
NAS (DS923+); its at 19TB used out of 40TB at present in a 4-spindle.

In any event, the broader conversation here is that its foolish to try
to brag about the likes of a fast CPU when the rest of the system hasn't
been matched to minimize bottlenecks. This is why the hardware baseline
has moved up to have the OS's boot drive be on an SSD instead a HDD.

Similarly, one may employ SSD storage for frequently used Apps & data
for the lower latency & higher bandwidth to improve productivity. This
effectively relegates HDDs to use cases where their lower cost per TB is
valued over low latency & high bandwidth, such as for bulk/data backups.

-hh

On 23 Nov 2024 13:44:24 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

>
> OK, let's be clear about that. The OS is not important stuff. The OS is
> the easiest thing to get if you lose a hard disk. Some config files are
> important, but neither the OS nor the software.
>

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! Another idiotic statement from a total
idiot.

It may be true for YOUR generic and security-crippled OS, but
not mine.

My system is composed of close to 500 packages that are highly
customized. About 95% are automatically built be Gentoo Portage
and the remainder are automatically built by my own custom
scripts. But to download all the source files and then build
everything from scratch would require maybe 12-24 hours (that's
just my estimate since I never had to do it).

A restoration from backup would be the easiest and quickest
method.

>
> OK, you repeatedly say you are involved in everything, including music,
> and you can't get with inferior things on your computer. So get your mp3
> garbage out of your messages. It shows you know nothing about good
> quality sound.
>

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! The supreme idiocy continues unabated!

_I_ am the absolute expert in digital audio. YOU are the digital dunce
in everything.

I will offer no further comments because you could never comprehend.

[snip remaining idiotic drivel]

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

Le 23-11-2024, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> a écrit :
> On Fri, 22 Nov 2024 17:36:35 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

Wow. You made me read and answer to replies to the only two shitholes I'm
plonking (not in the chrisv sense, in the real sense) in a raw. It's
impressive.

> I only back up my OS files, which total about 100G.

Yes, that's the ultimate proof your computer is really useless. Thanks
for it. I can download and install any distro in a matter of hours. When
my work would be lost for ever if it wasn't saved. And the CD I bought
would took me days or months to find again if I didn't ripped them.

So, this only sentence is the ultimate proof you are lying when you
pretend you are involved in anything. Nothing more need to be said about
your crap. But I'm want to have fun, so, I won't stop there. Sorry, it's
not nice from my part, but it's funny.

You are explaining that when your system is working, it's by accident
and not on purpose. So you have to save it to be sure you are able to
have another working computer each time you break it. Because you aren't
sure you would be able to reinstall it from scratch. I won't tell you
that anyone could install Linux in a matter of minutes with a simple
distro because it would be too hard on you.

And, by the way, 100G is very much for a distro. Do you really know why
you need that much space? When someone is asking, I say 20G is enough
for the distro, 50 is large to be comfortable. But 100G for a useless
minimalistic distro is impressive. Did you put an average number or do
you have an explanation?

> All of my data, i.e. books, documents, music, videos,
> programs, etc., I have already backed up onto USB HDD
> and BDR and other optical media.

Yes, of course you saved everything important long ago and you never
managed to have new books (by the way, I know you don't know what a book
is used for), new video or new music (no, the programs don't count: you
didn't wrote them, so they belong to your distro). As your computer is
useless, you can use very old backups to recover your files.

> In case of a disk failure, which I have NEVER experienced
> before,

That's something I can't believe. You are too old for that. Except if you
change your disks every year, you should have experienced a failure
before. On the other way, I can believe you experienced a hard drive
failure before without understanding what it was.

> I am only 100G away from salvation and this is barely a hiccough.

Yes, another proof you don't understand what you are speaking about.
There are two main issues with Ubuntu. The first one is slap. But, it
can be avoided. The second issue is: it's for beginners, so it install a
lot of things you don't know why. The purpose is for the beginners to be
able to use it without knowledge. So everything a beginner could need is
installed by default. Which makes a pretty huge distro. But well under
the 50M on the disk space. When you start to master your computer, you
know what you want and why. So you don't install everything by default,
you only install what you'll need. Which is the purpose of a
minimalistic distro.

But 100G for a minimalistic distro is twice the size of the Ubuntu
distro with a lot of useless crap installed after the huge default. What
on earth are you doing with all that space? Did you said 100G because
you are unable to know the size of your distro? Are you saving your
logs and your temporary files? Can you stop in the ways you are making
me laugh?

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

On 23 Nov 2024 14:04:11 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

>
>> Nope. Only losers use SSD.
>
> As with everything, you are stuck in the past and you don't understand
> technology.
>

But the marketing people certainly understand your gullible ass.

Consumer-grade SSD's are a cheap money grab by the drive manufacturers.
They base their products on inferior, junk technology and then
market it to idiots like you.

High quality SSD drives do exist but they are way too expensive
for use with a personal workstation.

>
> Because, if I'm involved in something that is important to me, that
> something is important to save at more than what one place. When I can
> reinstall my OS easily, loosing my work would really piss me off.
>

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! Whatever you produce, i.e. your "work,"
must laughable junk.

That's why you are content with a generic, junk distro.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

Le 23-11-2024, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> a écrit :
> On 23 Nov 2024 05:10:17 GMT, vallor wrote:
>
> You must be joking.

With you, he's in good company.

> Every couple of years just buy another and copy everything
> from old to new.

Agreed, for most people a hard drive is well enough. Now, there is no
need to change the hard drive every couple of years. A hard drive can be
use longer than that. And, for a real user (ie: not like you who can
only try to compile your kernel), to just save his data/work every
couple of year, he'll lose a lot in case of issue with his hard drive.

The copy of the hard drive is not a good way to take care of what is
important on a computer because:
- the OS can be installed easily, so it's useless to save it,
- the documents which never change can be stored like that, so OK,
- the documents which change should be saved with their history.

So depending on what someone is doing with his computer different kinds
of backup must be done.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

On 23 Nov 2024 14:40:59 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

>
>> I only back up my OS files, which total about 100G.
>
> Yes, that's the ultimate proof your computer is really useless.
>
> And, by the way, 100G is very much for a distro. Do you really know why
> you need that much space? When someone is asking, I say 20G is enough
> for the distro, 50 is large to be comfortable. But 100G for a useless
> minimalistic distro is impressive. Did you put an average number or do
> you have an explanation?
>

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! You continually show that you are
an ignoramus asshole.

Now you listen. I want you to keep your fucking mouth shut.
You are a total idiot. Everything that you utter is gibberish.

You will recognize that _I_ am mater and that YOU are lackey.

[snip outrageous drivel]

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

On 11/23/2024 4:50 AM, Lameass Larry wrote:

> I only back up my OS files, which total about 100G.

heh! Nobody is impressed with your bullshit, Feeb.

Note: the Win11Pro .iso is 5.41GB. Get it and don't look back.

> I am only 100G away from salvation and this is
> barely a hiccough.
GuhNoo has been your doom, not your salvation.

Haven't you figured out yet why you're a failure at life? Hint: your
deranged personality is only part of it.

On 11/23/2024 9:38 AM, Lying Larry Piet wrote:

> _I_ am the absolute expert in digital audio.

You also claimed to be a "C Programmer Extraordinaire" and an "Assembly
language genius", but in a fit of humility you admitted the truth:

"Anyone probably could beat me in a coding contest."

Le 23-11-2024, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> a écrit :
> On 23 Nov 2024 13:44:24 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>
>>
>> OK, let's be clear about that. The OS is not important stuff. The OS is
>> the easiest thing to get if you lose a hard disk. Some config files are
>> important, but neither the OS nor the software.
>>
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! Another idiotic statement

What? It's difficult to install Linux. For you, I believe it's true. But
for anyone else it's easy.

> from a total idiot.

Still the only one word you know. I'm willing to believe that I know
more insults in English than you. Can't you prove me wrong? When the
only thing you can do is insulting others, at least, you should be able
to show some greatness in it.

> It may be true for YOUR generic and security-crippled OS, but
> not mine.

Two things here. About security, you say in every message you don't take
care of it. And at the same time, you prove your system is as insecure
as only a poorly secured Windows computer could be. Which is not a
little claim. So it's literally impossible for my system to be less
secured than yours.

Second, the issue doesn't reside in the system to be installed but in
the guy doing it. And it looks like what would be difficult for you
would be easy for me.

> My system is composed of close to 500 packages that are highly
> customized.

Yes 100G of crap. I know. I saw your previous message about it. For the
customization, too, I know it means you apply the defaults, you proved
it sooner. So you only take more time to fail to compile than I take to
succeed to install. So, when you ever made it work, by chance, you have
to save it because you can never be sure your system will ever work
again. It's obvious: a miracle can only happen once. So when it happens
you have to save it. It's not something you should be proud of. It's
something you should hide but, it wouldn't be so funny to read and
answer you.

And, once again, the issue is not abot the system but in the way you
install it.

> About 95% are automatically built be Gentoo Portage

OK, so, it's exactly what I said: it's useless to save it because Gentoo
already did it. So. Exactly. Where Am I wrong stating the obvious even
you can agree?

> and the remainder are automatically built by my own custom
> scripts.

Let's imagine for a minute that you would be able to write some scripts to
automate things. So, that's exactly what I said: you would only have to
save your scripts, say a few mega, and the scripts would be able to
download the softwares saved by others. So, in your imaginary world, you
would have to just recover your scripts and use them. It would be easy
to recover your system and it wouldn't require 100G.

Now, back to the real world. As I said, the issue is not with the system
but with the one taking care of it. If you were able to script anything,
you wouldn't need to save your all system. So, the only reason why you
need to save your OS is because you are unable to say how you managed to
get something working.

> But to download all the source files and then build
> everything from scratch would require maybe 12-24 hours

Either your script are garbage or your Internet connexion is very
limited. Both explanation are valid and can be true at the same time.
For the connexion, it's not your own fault, depending on your location
well hidden in the country your choices can be very limited. But now,
anyone with the fiber can download a full distro in way less than ten
minutes. So a minimalistic distro like Gentoo is easily downloaded.
Well, I still don't understand how you managed to have 100G for your OS,
it's really impressive.

> (that's just my estimate since I never had to do it).

That, I can believe. You wouldn't be able to launch for real imaginary
scripts.

> A restoration from backup would be the easiest and quickest
> method.

Yes, a backup every couple of years like you said. And then, you'll have
to do all the upgrades and install what wasn't installed at the time of
the backup. So the few minutes of download you saved, thanks for your
backup, would be lost with the updates. So the end result, like I said
is: it's useless to save an OS.

>> OK, you repeatedly say you are involved in everything, including music,
>> and you can't get with inferior things on your computer. So get your mp3
>> garbage out of your messages. It shows you know nothing about good
>> quality sound.
>>
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! The supreme idiocy continues unabated!

The same word to insult. Again and again.

> _I_ am the absolute expert in digital audio. YOU are the digital dunce
> in everything.

Yes, so you know mp3 is garbage. I can understand someone listening mp3
in the street, there is so many noise outside that the quality loss is
less important than the outside noise. So having a lot of music on a
little device can be a good way to enjoy music. But at home, one a real
WI-FI system? No way. It can't be serious.

> I will offer no further comments because you could never comprehend.
Yes, you are right: RUN FORREST! RUN!

> [snip remaining idiotic drivel]

Still your limited insults. Is there any way in which you could be good?

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

Le 23-11-2024, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> a écrit :
> On 23 Nov 2024 14:04:11 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>
>>
>>> Nope. Only losers use SSD.
>>
>> As with everything, you are stuck in the past and you don't understand
>> technology.
>>
>
> But the marketing people certainly understand your gullible ass.

It's not only marketing. Anyone with an old computer can see the
improvement. To replace a HDD with a SSD gives a new life to one's
computer. It's a fact easy to see.

> Consumer-grade SSD's are a cheap money grab by the drive manufacturers.
> They base their products on inferior, junk technology and then
> market it to idiots like you.

Stop pretending you know things when you only follow marketing done by
others. Do it by yourself. And for once be honest, you'll see.

>> Because, if I'm involved in something that is important to me, that
>> something is important to save at more than what one place. When I can
>> reinstall my OS easily, loosing my work would really piss me off.
>>
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! Whatever you produce, i.e. your "work,"
> must laughable junk.

Don't care what you consider of what I do. The point is what _I_ do is
important to _ME_. So _I_ don't want to lose it. If _I_ lose what _I_
did, _I_'ll be the one at pain. So, _I_ have to save it. And _I_ do. And
it's the point for anyone. The OS is never the important thing to save.
Except for you because you didn't make it work on purpose. But anyone
but you can reinstall his OS when nobody can retrieve important lost
files/work.

> That's why you are content with a generic, junk distro.

It's not about the distro, it's about the way to use it. And what's
important. The distro is not. I could change my distro anytime. And do
the same things with another distro. Because my work, my config files
and my documents are well saved.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

Le 23-11-2024, DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> a écrit :
> On 11/23/2024 4:50 AM, Lameass Larry wrote:
>
>
> > I only back up my OS files, which total about 100G.
>
> heh! Nobody is impressed with your bullshit, Feeb.

In fact, I am. Really? 100G for an OS? It's huge! How can one have
something that huge for an OS? Does he install every package available
in his distro? Does he keep every log file for years? Does he keep ever
compiling files? Does someone else found a way to use his computer
without his knowledge?

It's really a mystery.

> Note: the Win11Pro .iso is 5.41GB. Get it and don't look back.

But, then you need to install Word and Excel. And probably other stuff.
But the step toward 100G is impressive.

$lc ISO
3.5 GB  manjaro-kde-21.2.4-220301-linux515.iso
1.9 GB  linuxmint-19.2-cinnamon-32bit.iso
3.1 GB  ubuntu-mate-22.04.2-desktop-amd64.iso
395 MB  clonezilla-live-3.1.0-22-amd64.iso
2.8 GB  Accessible-Coconut-22.04.2-amd64.iso
1.2 GB  tails-amd64-5.21.img
899 MB  AlmaLinux-9-latest-x86_64-boot.iso
4.2 GB  kubuntu-22.04.4-desktop-amd64.iso
3.7 GB  debian-12.5.0-i386-DVD-1.iso
3.7 GB  Mageia-9-i586.iso
3.7 GB  debian-12.5.0-amd64-DVD-1.iso
3.1 GB  lubuntu-24.04-desktop-amd64.iso
2.9 GB  linuxmint-21.3-cinnamon-64bit.iso
5.8 GB  ubuntu-24.04.1-desktop-amd64.iso
2.4 GB  debian-facile-12.7_amd64.iso

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote:
>On 11/23/2024 9:38 AM, Lying Larry Piet wrote:
>
>> _I_ am the absolute expert in digital audio.
>
>You also claimed to be a "C Programmer Extraordinaire" and an "Assembly
>language genius", but in a fit of humility you admitted the truth:
>
>"Anyone probably could beat me in a coding contest."

I'm skeptical of Larry's claim, because I have been a hardcore
audiophile all my life, and I know where people err, they put too much
money toward something of little to no benefit. My motherboards in
this and my previous machines had 24/192 audio, and my $30 Logitech
speakers power my non-Bluetooth headphones, which are terrific. Paying
for sound cards and overpriced gear is for morons, but I seem to
remember Larry talking about such.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.