Linux Server (NAS)

[oimi]

I'm thinking about using Samba to manage file sharing: http://us1.samba.org/samba/
I'm looking at something similar to Fancontrol to manage the fans so that they speed up during the summer and slow/shut down during winter. I don't know, maybe acpid would do the trick?
I'll need to control the file server remotely, so Kvm over IP may well be the solution...

I'll be using this guide as reference: http://www.tech-faq.com/setup-linux-file-server.shtml

[Splash]

I used winMd5Sum to check the original ISO that I downloaded. The program claculated that the MD5 Sum was 78c786bb949a043c7ef1066dcc8622b3;compared to the MD5 Sum provided on the original site. This concludes that there is certainly a difference between the two. What's the next step then? Having checked the file again, I notice that the ISO is apparently reaches a file size of 383MB, but when opened using PowerISO, that size goes right up to 4463MB.

What do you think?

Redownload the file. If it doesn't match the published MD5 then it has either been tampered with or corrupted during the download. Did you use some form of download accelerator? I've know these to cause download corruption. Did you download over HTTP, FTP, Bittorrent or Jigdo? The last 2 should have an inbuilt file verification so that the file is checked against the hash at the end of the download.

As for the size difference when you open it in PowerISO this shoudl be expected - an ISO (on top of being a disc image) is an archive format, and when you open the file in PowerISO it unpacks the archive to it's original size. This is why when installed the OS can take up more disk space than the size of the image.

[oimi]

I've read a bit into MDADM and in the list of functions, one of them is Grow: Grow (or shrink) an array, or otherwise reshape it in some way. Currently supported growth options including changing the active size of componenet devices in RAID level 1/4/5/6 and changing the number of active devices in RAID1.

This seems to suggest that it is possible to enlarge an array without messing about with backups.

[peterb]

Splash has covered the download issues perfectly!

Samba is excellent (it is an open source implementation of the Microsoft SMB (Server Message Block) protocol and plays very nicely with MS shares. (NFS - network File sharing - works well between *nix machines, but not with Windows (AFAIK). Samba works with both)

I haven't used MDADM (apart from a little play around) but what you say sounds feasible - you may be able to upsize the disks one by one and then resize thearray to match the new disk sizes. That is possible with LVM.

Remote admin can be done over SSH - especially if you are using the Command line (which is ideal for admin because SSH gives encryption and (if you use a public/private key pair) strong authentication too. You can use x server over SSH (so you can use a gui from another Linux machine) but it isn't something I have explored - I haven't had the need to because I admin remotely using SSH and the command line. This is where "Linux in a Nutshell" (published by O'Reilly) or the pocket version - less detailed, but less expensive - is useful.

[aidanjt]

This seems to suggest that it is possible to enlarge an array without messing about with backups.

Even better, mdadm allows reshaping arrays (adding disks, or enlarging partitions an array is on) without unmounting them at all. And some filesystems like reiserfs, reiser4, xfs, etc allow growing md raid partitions without unmounting as well. As for shrinking arrays, that's a bit of a mixed bag with md raid, so read up on it if you ever want to avail of that feature. For example, md raid currently doesn't support shrinking volumes in RAID5 mode, it's planned, but has been planned for quite some time.

btrfs, when it matures, will also have the same capabilities rolled into one with it's own userspace tools without having to muck about with mdadm, or lvm, and other such volume management tools. Much like Sun's ZFS.

[aidanjt]

Samba is excellent (it is an open source implementation of the Microsoft SMB (Server Message Block) protocol and plays very nicely with MS shares. (NFS - network File sharing - works well between *nix machines, but not with Windows (AFAIK). Samba works with both)

The only problem with mounting samba partitions on *nix, is on-boot mounting is rather 'unpretty', *nix permissions and ACLs are a bit of a pain to get nice too. NFSv3 pulls this off a fair bit better, but there's no security. NFSv4 is attempting to fix the security issues but needs some more polish.

[oimi]

Redownload the file. If it doesn't match the published MD5 then it has either been tampered with or corrupted during the download. Did you use some form of download accelerator? I've know these to cause download corruption. Did you download over HTTP, FTP, Bittorrent or Jigdo? The last 2 should have an inbuilt file verification so that the file is checked against the hash at the end of the download.

As for the size difference when you open it in PowerISO this shoudl be expected - an ISO (on top of being a disc image) is an archive format, and when you open the file in PowerISO it unpacks the archive to it's original size. This is why when installed the OS can take up more disk space than the size of the image.

Hello there. Initially I downloaded the file using HTTP in Firefox using the built-in download manager (no download accelerator). Then I used Bittorrent to download it and the file size looked much more realistic. However, when I burned this copy to disc I still had the same problems! What a load of rubbish. If as you say, the MD5 doesn't match because it is an ISO file, how am I supposed to check?

[oimi]

This is rediculous, I really don't know what to do now. I've tried different download methods, each time I verify the burn after it has been completed. What is causing this problem?

[Splash]

Possibly worth checking your hard disk and memory for corruption?

[peterb]

You need to check the downloaded MD5 sum after you download - and only when they match should you do the burn. Bit-torrent is (as splash says) the most reliable method for large files where zero tolerance of corruption is required.

[oimi]

You need to check the downloaded MD5 sum after you download - and only when they match should you do the burn. Bit-torrent is (as splash says) the most reliable method for large files where zero tolerance of corruption is required.

Hello there. Initially I downloaded the file using HTTP in Firefox using the built-in download manager (no download accelerator). Then I used Bittorrent to download it and the file size looked much more realistic. However, when I burned this copy to disc I still had the same problems! What a load of rubbish. If as you say, the MD5 doesn't match because it is an ISO file, how am I supposed to check?

I've already downloaded it as a torrent for these reasons, this made no difference.

The HDDs and Memory are fine.

[peterb]

The iso is just a file - when you have downloaded the file to the hard drive, run the md5 application against that, and compare with the original MD5 hash from the website - the two MUST match. When you have got a match you can burn the DVD. You cannot check the DVD, however there may be a facility for checking that in the distro which will compare the MD5 sum of the DVD with a precalculated value for a correctly burned DVD.

Not sure which MD5 app you are using - here is a link to another one.

http://www.pc-tools.net/files/win32/...d5sums-1.2.zip

[oimi]

The iso is just a file - when you have downloaded the file to the hard drive, run the md5 application against that, and compare with the original MD5 hash from the website - the two MUST match. When you have got a match you can burn the DVD. You cannot check the DVD, however there may be a facility for checking that in the distro which will compare the MD5 sum of the DVD with a precalculated value for a correctly burned DVD.

Not sure which MD5 app you are using - here is a link to another one.

http://www.pc-tools.net/files/win32/...d5sums-1.2.zip

I've downloaded it twice now though, and surely the version downloaded with Bittorrent should be valid as you say it is failsafe. I was using Microsoft's MD5 checksum program.

That's 8GB of wasted bandwidth!

[mycarsavw]

I said I was done here, I lied.

What makes you want Debian over any other distro?

Personally, the first time I wasted 5 DVDs, I'd be done and looking for another distro.

Have you tried the CD version?
Have you tried the minimal/online version?

I've had the same error you highlighted above, and followed the same guide on you linked (Ubuntu forums) and nothing changed. It seems to be trial and error, luckily I had an assortment of optical drives to choose from, so I kept swapping them until one worked.

What does Debian do that makes you absolutely have to have it?

[oimi]

Advised to use, no bloat, customisation etc.

[mycarsavw]

Ubuntu Server - 1 CD, no bloat, fully customisable

Go on, live a little, try another distro, dares ya