unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

DonVla · 2012-05-06 10:43:12

Hello graysky,

When I try downloading the latest linux-ck-kx package I get following error:

error: linux-ck-kx: signature from "graysky <graysky@archlinux.us>" is invalid
error: failed to commit transaction (invalid or corrupted package)

It used to work fine. Any hints?

Vlad

graysky · 2012-05-06 11:09:09

Ah, you need to either sign my key or drop the trust level to 'Optional TrustAll' for repo-ck.

Last edited by graysky (2012-05-06 11:29:22)

graysky · 2012-05-06 11:28:43

I updated the wiki page with instructions for signing my key: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Repo-ck#Setup

Last edited by graysky (2012-05-06 11:30:02)

DonVla · 2012-05-06 12:23:27

graysky wrote:

Ah, you need to either sign my key or drop the trust level to 'Optional TrustAll' for repo-ck.

Thanks for you reply, graysky.
I signed your key some time ago. Last update worked fine and I hadn't had this error.

[2012-04-30 13:12] upgraded linux-ck-kx (3.3.3-1 ->3.3.4-2)  
[2012-04-30 13:12] upgraded linux-ck-kx-headers (3.3.3-1 -> 3.3.4-2)

Is it possible that the package is indeed corrupted or faulty?

Vlad

BTW, I tried seeting the SigLevel to "Optional TrustAll", but same error.

graysky · 2012-05-06 14:47:56

The md5sums of the sig files and package files are identical on my local disk and the repo.

Can you post your /etc/pacman.conf

DonVla · 2012-05-06 15:29:18

Sorry for the noise and thanks for your help, graysky.

pacman -Sc 
pacman -Syyu

did the trick.

Vlad

Jodell · 2012-05-22 13:48:32

Did you change servers or something? I just did an update and got an average of 2.45M/s. I used to get an average of 50K/s.

Thank you!

graysky · 2012-05-22 15:15:27

@Jodell - No changes, glad it's faster for ya. Enjoy.

donniezazen · 2012-05-22 16:31:21

I get this error BFQ Scheduler not found. Is BFQ patch released a little late after release of kernel? Is it available in 3.3.7-1?

graysky · 2012-05-22 16:50:45

donniezazen wrote:

I get this error BFQ Scheduler not found. Is BFQ patch released a little late after release of kernel? Is it available in 3.3.7-1?

What error (nothing in your post)? BFQ is built into the packages, but not enabled by default. See, https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Li … _Scheduler

Last edited by graysky (2012-05-22 16:51:21)

donniezazen · 2012-05-22 17:38:52

That's the error.

[    1.269019] I/O scheduler bfq not found
[    1.600606] I/O scheduler bfq not found

My bad. I never enabled the kernel itself by adding ck to vmlinuz-linux and initramfs-linux. Thanks for replying.

crshbndct · 2012-06-02 02:57:32

Just thought I would let you know.. I am getting kicked off the repo-ck.com server every 400k or so. Currently on my 80th restart of the download. It has been going for around 8 hours now, still have 10mb to download. Download has been going between 1.5 and 3 KB/s, but when it drops below 1 it stops altogether.

graysky · 2012-06-02 12:33:06

Thanks for the report. Can anyone else confirm this behavior? It's working fine for me

Pip · 2012-06-02 20:30:34

Hello, graysky, today I have got updates of linux-ck packages: linux-ck-pentm-3.4-1 linux-ck-pentm-headers-3.4-1, but when installing with pacman, I got error:
Targets (2): linux-ck-pentm-3.4-1 linux-ck-pentm-headers-3.4-1

Total Installed Size: 89.79 MiB
Net Upgrade Size: 0.00 MiB

Proceed with installation? [Y/n] y
(2/2) checking package integrity [####################] 100%
error: linux-ck-pentm: missing required signature
error: linux-ck-pentm-headers: missing required signature
error: failed to commit transaction (invalid or corrupted package (PGP signature))
Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.

To be mentioned, I have a global level of SigLevel set in pacman.conf:
SigLevel = PackageRequired TrustedOnly

What seems to be the reason that causesd this error? Thanks :-)

graysky · 2012-06-03 03:35:43

@pip - you need to sign my key:

# pacman-key -r 6176ED4B
# pacman-key --lsign-key 6176ED4B

See the wiki for more, https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pa … icial_keys

falconindy · 2012-06-03 04:31:10

graysky wrote:

@pip - you need to sign my key:

No, it looks like none of your i686 packages are signed.

graysky · 2012-06-03 11:25:01

falconindy wrote:

No, it looks like none of your i686 packages are signed.

!!!! you are right. Thanks for pointing out the obvious to me. Problem with my build script. I went through and manually signed:

for i in *.pkg.tar.xz; do gpg --detach-sign --local-user 9B453E32 $i; done

@Pip - can you please try again:

# pacman -Syy && pacman -Syu

Last edited by graysky (2012-06-03 11:49:51)

litemotiv · 2012-06-04 17:58:00

Sysload with 3.4.0-1-ck seems to always be zero, can anyone confirm that?

graysky · 2012-06-04 19:39:39

litemotiv wrote:

Sysload with 3.4.0-1-ck seems to always be zero, can anyone confirm that?

as measured by....?

litemotiv · 2012-06-04 19:44:22

graysky wrote:

as measured by....?

Sorry here's more data:

% uptime
 21:42:43 up  1:53,  1 user,  load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00

% cat /proc/loadavg 
0.00 0.00 0.00 1/210 5088

Last edited by litemotiv (2012-06-04 19:44:56)

graysky · 2012-06-04 19:53:05

The wife rebooted it this morning.

$ uptime
 15:52:23 up  7:46,  1 user,  load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00

$ cat /proc/loadavg 
0.00 0.00 0.00 1/309 18953

EDIT: odd... I started doing a kernel compilation to give the processor something to do and after about I min w/ 4 threads compiling:

$ uptime
 15:58:10 up  7:52,  2 users,  load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00

$ cat /proc/loadavg 
0.00 0.00 0.00 6/336 31689

@litem - was this the case with earlier version of bfs?

Last edited by graysky (2012-06-04 19:58:30)

litemotiv · 2012-06-04 21:43:57

graysky wrote:

@litem - was this the case with earlier version of bfs?

No as far as i can tell this is since 3.4, i use load all the time to check my system's performance.

graysky · 2012-06-04 22:54:22

@litemotiv - Emailed CK and posted to his blog. Please create a new thread if you wish to continue discussion since this really isn't repo-related.

http://ck-hack.blogspot.com/2012/06/bfs … 5953773979

doug piston · 2012-06-05 02:28:17

graysky wrote:

@pip - you need to sign my key:
# pacman-key -r 6176ED4B
# pacman-key --lsign-key 6176ED4B
See the wiki for more, https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pa … icial_keys

Thanks for this

And I'm sure you're past this but I can confirm the load average at 0.0. I've saw it that all day yesterday. Though it was my htop.

Edit:
Grammar > me

Last edited by doug piston (2012-06-05 02:29:29)

teateawhy · 2012-06-05 12:59:34

With linux-ck 3.4-1 i have problems with my firewall.
You can read it here: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=142727

Arch Linux

#826 2012-05-06 10:43:12

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#827 2012-05-06 11:09:09

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#828 2012-05-06 11:28:43

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#829 2012-05-06 12:23:27

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#830 2012-05-06 14:47:56

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#831 2012-05-06 15:29:18

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#832 2012-05-22 13:48:32

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#833 2012-05-22 15:15:27

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#834 2012-05-22 16:31:21

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#835 2012-05-22 16:50:45

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#836 2012-05-22 17:38:52

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#837 2012-06-02 02:57:32

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#838 2012-06-02 12:33:06

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#839 2012-06-02 20:30:34

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#840 2012-06-03 03:35:43

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#841 2012-06-03 04:31:10

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#842 2012-06-03 11:25:01

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#843 2012-06-04 17:58:00

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#844 2012-06-04 19:39:39

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#845 2012-06-04 19:44:22

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#846 2012-06-04 19:53:05

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#847 2012-06-04 21:43:57

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#848 2012-06-04 22:54:22

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#849 2012-06-05 02:28:17

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

#850 2012-06-05 12:59:34

Re: unofficial linux-ck repo with cpu optimized packages is ONLINE

Board footer