Linux

48338 readers

845 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

283

What is the most duct-tape thing you've done to Linux? (lemm.ee)

submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

190 comments fedilink hide all child comments

tell me the most ass over backward shit you do to keep your system chugging?
here's mine:
sway struggles with my dual monitors, when my screen powers off and back on it causes sway to crash.
system service 'switch-to-tty1.service'

[Unit]
Description=Switch to tty1 on resume
After=suspend.target

[Service]
Type=simple
ExecStart=/usr/local/bin/switch-to-tty1.sh

[Install]
WantedBy=suspend.target

'switch-to-tty1.service' executes '/usr/local/bin/switch-to-tty1.sh' and send user to tty1

#!/bin/bash
# Switch to tty1
chvt 1

.bashrc login from tty1 then kicks user to tty2 and logs out tty1.

if [[ "$(tty)" == "/dev/tty1" ]]; then
    chvt 2
    logout
fi

also tty2 is blocked from keyboard inputs (Alt+Ctrl+F2) so its a somewhat secure lock-screen which on sway lock-screen aren't great.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Did it work? There's a huge chance of data corruption if you are copying the disk of a running system.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

It didn't, but due to unrelated reasons. The root FS was mounted r/w, so the regular IO eventually overwhelmed the network's ability to copy stuff.

But no worries, a reboot later, with unmounted FS, I finished the same thing.

Copying the disk of a running system appears to be fine in LVM. Copying is done block-by-block, and the only thing it has to do to make it atomic is: in case of a conflict (writing into a block that's being copied right now), postpone writing to a block until it's copied, then finish the write in the new location. Or else, abort the copy, finish the write, then copy again.