β² 996 βΌ Can I get a filesystem cleanup on aisle 6? (lemmy.today) submitted 2 years ago by CmdrKeen@lemmy.today to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world 93 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[β] RustyNova@lemmy.world 54 points 2 years ago (3 children) Can a linux/systemd nerd explain what the error is? I know it's a shutdown sequence, but I'm curious on the fault permalink fedilink source hideshow 6 child comments replies: [β] CameronDev@programming.dev 113 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children) It is actually a boot failure. Normally the kernel reads some config from the initrd (the bootloader loads initrd and passes it to the kernel - thanks dan) and then does a bunch of setup stuff, and then it mounts the actual root filesystem, and then switches to using that. In this case, the root filesystem has failed to mount. Hardware failure is most likely the cause, but misconfiguration can also make this happen. Probably hardware though. If its misconfiguration, an admin can reattempt to mount the root drive on /new_root, and then ctrl-d to get the init system to try again ELI5: couldnt open C:/ drive Edit: clarified what loads the initrd - as per dans comment. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [β] dan@upvote.au 7 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Normally the kernel loads an initrd filesystem, The bootloader (GRUB) loads the initrd, not the kernel. The kernel accesses stuff from the initrd, but it's already loaded by that point. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] CameronDev@programming.dev 3 points 2 years ago You are correct. Ill add an edit. Thanks! permalink fedilink source parent [β] RustyNova@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago Thanks for that! Switching to Linux and actually being able to see real time logs made me actually curious how it works, so that's one gear out of the machine demistified permalink fedilink source parent [β] Synthead@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) The root filesystem mounted fine. That's why the init is starting with all the services on the root disk. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] neidu@feddit.nl 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) Not necessarily. I've seen failures like this if the boot partition works, but fails to mount the root partition. systemd then fails to proceed, and shuts down the running services. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] Synthead@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (2 children) systemd daemons are configured via /etc/systemd, and systemd itself lives in /usr/lib/systemd/systemd. How can systemd run or start the configured services without the root disk mounted? The initrd (from the boot partition) only contains enough of an environment to call the entrypoint for the init system, not contain the entirety of systemd (or the configured services). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [β] damium@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago Initrd contains the systemd binary and enough libraries, services, and kernel modules to get booted this far. The system failed at switch root which is where the real root disk is mounted. Initrd can contain as much or as little as needed to get a working system which can be a lot of you are using a network filesystem as a root for instance. permalink fedilink source parent [β] CameronDev@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Those are all hardware management services (as far as I can tell), and are configured before the root is mounted. I have hit this exact error before, that is what failing to mount the root disk looks like. A bunch of services will start, and then you get dropped into a shell (with a login). If you want to see it for yourself, change /etc/fstab such that /root is now pointing to the wrong device, and then rebuild your initrd. When you reboot you'll see exactly that output. To fix it, login to the shell and mount your root on /new_root, and ctrl-d to continue the boot (from memory it has a message telling you to do that anyway). When your system boots you can fix fstab and rebuild initrd. Its reversable, but maybe test on a machine you dont care about to be safe :) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] Synthead@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Oh interesting! I suppose I have just been very careful with /etc/fstab and I haven't seen systemd fail this way. TIL! Thanks for letting me know! permalink fedilink source parent [β] earthquake@lemm.ee 51 points 2 years ago (1 child) These kinds of public errors are almost always a hard drive failure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] CmdrKeen@lemmy.today [S] 12 points 2 years ago (6 children) Using an actual hard drive for an embedded system like this would be a failure in and of itself. Unless it literally has to store several hours' worth of HD video content, no reason the entire system couldn't fit on an SD card. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [β] constantokra@lemmy.one 31 points 2 years ago It's been my experience that SD cards are almost always what causes a failure on a SBC. Given the cost of the screens, i'd probably choose something that could boot off nvme storage. Or at least tape a new, configured SD card to the case of the SBC for when this inevitably happens. permalink fedilink source parent [β] VieuxQueb@lemmy.ca 21 points 2 years ago An SD card is MUCH less reliable than a good hdd unless it's read only. permalink fedilink source parent [β] dublet@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago As someone who works on embedded devices: HDDs are used for media storage and can be easily replaced. Any NAND as a limited life span and good embedded software will try very hard to minimise writes. Though in my particular area, there's additional security constraints on the OS, which preclude any removable flash storage from being used. permalink fedilink source parent [β] Cqrd@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 years ago They probably expect the signage to change a lot and don't want a hardware failure when they do it too much, or didn't use an external drive in this case and the SD card failed because they wrote to it too much (which would happen eventually anyway). permalink fedilink source parent [β] glibg10b@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Even better: Three SD cards with a ZFS mirror and failure notifications permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] CmdrKeen@lemmy.today [S] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Bah humbug, just hook it up to the cloud, WCGW? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] glibg10b@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago You don't need an internet connection for failure notifications permalink fedilink source parent [β] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 1 point 2 years ago Using an actual hard drive for an embedded system like this would be a failure in and of itself. You may be surprised to learn that these stores use machines that are occasionally more than a year old and also use inexpensive tech like enterprise spinny disk. A spinny disk will work in this space, and you know they'll be deciding based on cost. permalink fedilink source parent [β] aard@kyu.de 23 points 2 years ago (1 child) Systemd has a feature to shorten lines too long for the display, which is a pretty stupid idea, as you can see here. The service failing here would be initrd-switch-root.service. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] indepndnt@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) So the weird block character in the "see... for details" line is replacing "nitrd-switch-roo" just to shorten the line? That's what I was trying to figure out. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] aard@kyu.de 6 points 2 years ago Yeah, that'd be the Unicode ellipsis character (β¦) rendered on a system without a Unicode font on the terminal. permalink fedilink source parent
[β] CameronDev@programming.dev 113 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children) It is actually a boot failure. Normally the kernel reads some config from the initrd (the bootloader loads initrd and passes it to the kernel - thanks dan) and then does a bunch of setup stuff, and then it mounts the actual root filesystem, and then switches to using that. In this case, the root filesystem has failed to mount. Hardware failure is most likely the cause, but misconfiguration can also make this happen. Probably hardware though. If its misconfiguration, an admin can reattempt to mount the root drive on /new_root, and then ctrl-d to get the init system to try again ELI5: couldnt open C:/ drive Edit: clarified what loads the initrd - as per dans comment. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [β] dan@upvote.au 7 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Normally the kernel loads an initrd filesystem, The bootloader (GRUB) loads the initrd, not the kernel. The kernel accesses stuff from the initrd, but it's already loaded by that point. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] CameronDev@programming.dev 3 points 2 years ago You are correct. Ill add an edit. Thanks! permalink fedilink source parent [β] RustyNova@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago Thanks for that! Switching to Linux and actually being able to see real time logs made me actually curious how it works, so that's one gear out of the machine demistified permalink fedilink source parent [β] Synthead@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) The root filesystem mounted fine. That's why the init is starting with all the services on the root disk. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] neidu@feddit.nl 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) Not necessarily. I've seen failures like this if the boot partition works, but fails to mount the root partition. systemd then fails to proceed, and shuts down the running services. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] Synthead@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (2 children) systemd daemons are configured via /etc/systemd, and systemd itself lives in /usr/lib/systemd/systemd. How can systemd run or start the configured services without the root disk mounted? The initrd (from the boot partition) only contains enough of an environment to call the entrypoint for the init system, not contain the entirety of systemd (or the configured services). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [β] damium@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago Initrd contains the systemd binary and enough libraries, services, and kernel modules to get booted this far. The system failed at switch root which is where the real root disk is mounted. Initrd can contain as much or as little as needed to get a working system which can be a lot of you are using a network filesystem as a root for instance. permalink fedilink source parent [β] CameronDev@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Those are all hardware management services (as far as I can tell), and are configured before the root is mounted. I have hit this exact error before, that is what failing to mount the root disk looks like. A bunch of services will start, and then you get dropped into a shell (with a login). If you want to see it for yourself, change /etc/fstab such that /root is now pointing to the wrong device, and then rebuild your initrd. When you reboot you'll see exactly that output. To fix it, login to the shell and mount your root on /new_root, and ctrl-d to continue the boot (from memory it has a message telling you to do that anyway). When your system boots you can fix fstab and rebuild initrd. Its reversable, but maybe test on a machine you dont care about to be safe :) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] Synthead@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Oh interesting! I suppose I have just been very careful with /etc/fstab and I haven't seen systemd fail this way. TIL! Thanks for letting me know! permalink fedilink source parent
[β] dan@upvote.au 7 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Normally the kernel loads an initrd filesystem, The bootloader (GRUB) loads the initrd, not the kernel. The kernel accesses stuff from the initrd, but it's already loaded by that point. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] CameronDev@programming.dev 3 points 2 years ago You are correct. Ill add an edit. Thanks! permalink fedilink source parent
[β] CameronDev@programming.dev 3 points 2 years ago You are correct. Ill add an edit. Thanks! permalink fedilink source parent
[β] RustyNova@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago Thanks for that! Switching to Linux and actually being able to see real time logs made me actually curious how it works, so that's one gear out of the machine demistified permalink fedilink source parent
[β] Synthead@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) The root filesystem mounted fine. That's why the init is starting with all the services on the root disk. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] neidu@feddit.nl 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) Not necessarily. I've seen failures like this if the boot partition works, but fails to mount the root partition. systemd then fails to proceed, and shuts down the running services. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] Synthead@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (2 children) systemd daemons are configured via /etc/systemd, and systemd itself lives in /usr/lib/systemd/systemd. How can systemd run or start the configured services without the root disk mounted? The initrd (from the boot partition) only contains enough of an environment to call the entrypoint for the init system, not contain the entirety of systemd (or the configured services). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [β] damium@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago Initrd contains the systemd binary and enough libraries, services, and kernel modules to get booted this far. The system failed at switch root which is where the real root disk is mounted. Initrd can contain as much or as little as needed to get a working system which can be a lot of you are using a network filesystem as a root for instance. permalink fedilink source parent [β] CameronDev@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Those are all hardware management services (as far as I can tell), and are configured before the root is mounted. I have hit this exact error before, that is what failing to mount the root disk looks like. A bunch of services will start, and then you get dropped into a shell (with a login). If you want to see it for yourself, change /etc/fstab such that /root is now pointing to the wrong device, and then rebuild your initrd. When you reboot you'll see exactly that output. To fix it, login to the shell and mount your root on /new_root, and ctrl-d to continue the boot (from memory it has a message telling you to do that anyway). When your system boots you can fix fstab and rebuild initrd. Its reversable, but maybe test on a machine you dont care about to be safe :) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] Synthead@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Oh interesting! I suppose I have just been very careful with /etc/fstab and I haven't seen systemd fail this way. TIL! Thanks for letting me know! permalink fedilink source parent
[β] neidu@feddit.nl 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) Not necessarily. I've seen failures like this if the boot partition works, but fails to mount the root partition. systemd then fails to proceed, and shuts down the running services. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] Synthead@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (2 children) systemd daemons are configured via /etc/systemd, and systemd itself lives in /usr/lib/systemd/systemd. How can systemd run or start the configured services without the root disk mounted? The initrd (from the boot partition) only contains enough of an environment to call the entrypoint for the init system, not contain the entirety of systemd (or the configured services). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [β] damium@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago Initrd contains the systemd binary and enough libraries, services, and kernel modules to get booted this far. The system failed at switch root which is where the real root disk is mounted. Initrd can contain as much or as little as needed to get a working system which can be a lot of you are using a network filesystem as a root for instance. permalink fedilink source parent [β] CameronDev@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Those are all hardware management services (as far as I can tell), and are configured before the root is mounted. I have hit this exact error before, that is what failing to mount the root disk looks like. A bunch of services will start, and then you get dropped into a shell (with a login). If you want to see it for yourself, change /etc/fstab such that /root is now pointing to the wrong device, and then rebuild your initrd. When you reboot you'll see exactly that output. To fix it, login to the shell and mount your root on /new_root, and ctrl-d to continue the boot (from memory it has a message telling you to do that anyway). When your system boots you can fix fstab and rebuild initrd. Its reversable, but maybe test on a machine you dont care about to be safe :) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] Synthead@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Oh interesting! I suppose I have just been very careful with /etc/fstab and I haven't seen systemd fail this way. TIL! Thanks for letting me know! permalink fedilink source parent
[β] Synthead@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (2 children) systemd daemons are configured via /etc/systemd, and systemd itself lives in /usr/lib/systemd/systemd. How can systemd run or start the configured services without the root disk mounted? The initrd (from the boot partition) only contains enough of an environment to call the entrypoint for the init system, not contain the entirety of systemd (or the configured services). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [β] damium@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago Initrd contains the systemd binary and enough libraries, services, and kernel modules to get booted this far. The system failed at switch root which is where the real root disk is mounted. Initrd can contain as much or as little as needed to get a working system which can be a lot of you are using a network filesystem as a root for instance. permalink fedilink source parent [β] CameronDev@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Those are all hardware management services (as far as I can tell), and are configured before the root is mounted. I have hit this exact error before, that is what failing to mount the root disk looks like. A bunch of services will start, and then you get dropped into a shell (with a login). If you want to see it for yourself, change /etc/fstab such that /root is now pointing to the wrong device, and then rebuild your initrd. When you reboot you'll see exactly that output. To fix it, login to the shell and mount your root on /new_root, and ctrl-d to continue the boot (from memory it has a message telling you to do that anyway). When your system boots you can fix fstab and rebuild initrd. Its reversable, but maybe test on a machine you dont care about to be safe :) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] Synthead@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Oh interesting! I suppose I have just been very careful with /etc/fstab and I haven't seen systemd fail this way. TIL! Thanks for letting me know! permalink fedilink source parent
[β] damium@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago Initrd contains the systemd binary and enough libraries, services, and kernel modules to get booted this far. The system failed at switch root which is where the real root disk is mounted. Initrd can contain as much or as little as needed to get a working system which can be a lot of you are using a network filesystem as a root for instance. permalink fedilink source parent
[β] CameronDev@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Those are all hardware management services (as far as I can tell), and are configured before the root is mounted. I have hit this exact error before, that is what failing to mount the root disk looks like. A bunch of services will start, and then you get dropped into a shell (with a login). If you want to see it for yourself, change /etc/fstab such that /root is now pointing to the wrong device, and then rebuild your initrd. When you reboot you'll see exactly that output. To fix it, login to the shell and mount your root on /new_root, and ctrl-d to continue the boot (from memory it has a message telling you to do that anyway). When your system boots you can fix fstab and rebuild initrd. Its reversable, but maybe test on a machine you dont care about to be safe :) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] Synthead@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Oh interesting! I suppose I have just been very careful with /etc/fstab and I haven't seen systemd fail this way. TIL! Thanks for letting me know! permalink fedilink source parent
[β] Synthead@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Oh interesting! I suppose I have just been very careful with /etc/fstab and I haven't seen systemd fail this way. TIL! Thanks for letting me know! permalink fedilink source parent
[β] earthquake@lemm.ee 51 points 2 years ago (1 child) These kinds of public errors are almost always a hard drive failure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] CmdrKeen@lemmy.today [S] 12 points 2 years ago (6 children) Using an actual hard drive for an embedded system like this would be a failure in and of itself. Unless it literally has to store several hours' worth of HD video content, no reason the entire system couldn't fit on an SD card. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [β] constantokra@lemmy.one 31 points 2 years ago It's been my experience that SD cards are almost always what causes a failure on a SBC. Given the cost of the screens, i'd probably choose something that could boot off nvme storage. Or at least tape a new, configured SD card to the case of the SBC for when this inevitably happens. permalink fedilink source parent [β] VieuxQueb@lemmy.ca 21 points 2 years ago An SD card is MUCH less reliable than a good hdd unless it's read only. permalink fedilink source parent [β] dublet@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago As someone who works on embedded devices: HDDs are used for media storage and can be easily replaced. Any NAND as a limited life span and good embedded software will try very hard to minimise writes. Though in my particular area, there's additional security constraints on the OS, which preclude any removable flash storage from being used. permalink fedilink source parent [β] Cqrd@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 years ago They probably expect the signage to change a lot and don't want a hardware failure when they do it too much, or didn't use an external drive in this case and the SD card failed because they wrote to it too much (which would happen eventually anyway). permalink fedilink source parent [β] glibg10b@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Even better: Three SD cards with a ZFS mirror and failure notifications permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] CmdrKeen@lemmy.today [S] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Bah humbug, just hook it up to the cloud, WCGW? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] glibg10b@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago You don't need an internet connection for failure notifications permalink fedilink source parent [β] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 1 point 2 years ago Using an actual hard drive for an embedded system like this would be a failure in and of itself. You may be surprised to learn that these stores use machines that are occasionally more than a year old and also use inexpensive tech like enterprise spinny disk. A spinny disk will work in this space, and you know they'll be deciding based on cost. permalink fedilink source parent
[β] CmdrKeen@lemmy.today [S] 12 points 2 years ago (6 children) Using an actual hard drive for an embedded system like this would be a failure in and of itself. Unless it literally has to store several hours' worth of HD video content, no reason the entire system couldn't fit on an SD card. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [β] constantokra@lemmy.one 31 points 2 years ago It's been my experience that SD cards are almost always what causes a failure on a SBC. Given the cost of the screens, i'd probably choose something that could boot off nvme storage. Or at least tape a new, configured SD card to the case of the SBC for when this inevitably happens. permalink fedilink source parent [β] VieuxQueb@lemmy.ca 21 points 2 years ago An SD card is MUCH less reliable than a good hdd unless it's read only. permalink fedilink source parent [β] dublet@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago As someone who works on embedded devices: HDDs are used for media storage and can be easily replaced. Any NAND as a limited life span and good embedded software will try very hard to minimise writes. Though in my particular area, there's additional security constraints on the OS, which preclude any removable flash storage from being used. permalink fedilink source parent [β] Cqrd@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 years ago They probably expect the signage to change a lot and don't want a hardware failure when they do it too much, or didn't use an external drive in this case and the SD card failed because they wrote to it too much (which would happen eventually anyway). permalink fedilink source parent [β] glibg10b@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Even better: Three SD cards with a ZFS mirror and failure notifications permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] CmdrKeen@lemmy.today [S] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Bah humbug, just hook it up to the cloud, WCGW? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] glibg10b@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago You don't need an internet connection for failure notifications permalink fedilink source parent [β] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 1 point 2 years ago Using an actual hard drive for an embedded system like this would be a failure in and of itself. You may be surprised to learn that these stores use machines that are occasionally more than a year old and also use inexpensive tech like enterprise spinny disk. A spinny disk will work in this space, and you know they'll be deciding based on cost. permalink fedilink source parent
[β] constantokra@lemmy.one 31 points 2 years ago It's been my experience that SD cards are almost always what causes a failure on a SBC. Given the cost of the screens, i'd probably choose something that could boot off nvme storage. Or at least tape a new, configured SD card to the case of the SBC for when this inevitably happens. permalink fedilink source parent
[β] VieuxQueb@lemmy.ca 21 points 2 years ago An SD card is MUCH less reliable than a good hdd unless it's read only. permalink fedilink source parent
[β] dublet@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago As someone who works on embedded devices: HDDs are used for media storage and can be easily replaced. Any NAND as a limited life span and good embedded software will try very hard to minimise writes. Though in my particular area, there's additional security constraints on the OS, which preclude any removable flash storage from being used. permalink fedilink source parent
[β] Cqrd@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 years ago They probably expect the signage to change a lot and don't want a hardware failure when they do it too much, or didn't use an external drive in this case and the SD card failed because they wrote to it too much (which would happen eventually anyway). permalink fedilink source parent
[β] glibg10b@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Even better: Three SD cards with a ZFS mirror and failure notifications permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] CmdrKeen@lemmy.today [S] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Bah humbug, just hook it up to the cloud, WCGW? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] glibg10b@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago You don't need an internet connection for failure notifications permalink fedilink source parent
[β] CmdrKeen@lemmy.today [S] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Bah humbug, just hook it up to the cloud, WCGW? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] glibg10b@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago You don't need an internet connection for failure notifications permalink fedilink source parent
[β] glibg10b@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago You don't need an internet connection for failure notifications permalink fedilink source parent
[β] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 1 point 2 years ago Using an actual hard drive for an embedded system like this would be a failure in and of itself. You may be surprised to learn that these stores use machines that are occasionally more than a year old and also use inexpensive tech like enterprise spinny disk. A spinny disk will work in this space, and you know they'll be deciding based on cost. permalink fedilink source parent
[β] aard@kyu.de 23 points 2 years ago (1 child) Systemd has a feature to shorten lines too long for the display, which is a pretty stupid idea, as you can see here. The service failing here would be initrd-switch-root.service. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] indepndnt@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) So the weird block character in the "see... for details" line is replacing "nitrd-switch-roo" just to shorten the line? That's what I was trying to figure out. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] aard@kyu.de 6 points 2 years ago Yeah, that'd be the Unicode ellipsis character (β¦) rendered on a system without a Unicode font on the terminal. permalink fedilink source parent
[β] indepndnt@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) So the weird block character in the "see... for details" line is replacing "nitrd-switch-roo" just to shorten the line? That's what I was trying to figure out. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [β] aard@kyu.de 6 points 2 years ago Yeah, that'd be the Unicode ellipsis character (β¦) rendered on a system without a Unicode font on the terminal. permalink fedilink source parent
[β] aard@kyu.de 6 points 2 years ago Yeah, that'd be the Unicode ellipsis character (β¦) rendered on a system without a Unicode font on the terminal. permalink fedilink source parent
