Nginx 1.0.8 on dotdeb

drmike

Just a quick mention that Nginx 1.0.8 got released on dotdeb if that's one of your sources:

http://www.dotdeb.org/2011/10/20/packages-of-nginx-1-0-8-are-available/

Just came down for me.

giang

Nginx got official repo for Debian 6 Why would you use DotDeb instead?

http://wiki.nginx.org/Install

NickM

The packages in Debian 6 are way out of date. See?

eva2000

Ancient, using nginx 1.1.6 myself

yomero

Compiling ftw

giang

NickM said: The packages in Debian 6 are way out of date. See?

You may misunderstand my post. I meant NGINX's repo for Debian 6, not Debian's repo.

deb http://nginx.org/packages/debian/ squeeze nginx

deb-src http://nginx.org/packages/debian/ squeeze nginx

It will always up to date by Nginx team

Kairus

Changes with nginx 1.0.8                                         01 Oct 2011

    *) Bugfix: nginx could not be built --with-http_mp4_module and without
       --with-debug option.

Not an important release .

I always run the dev versions!

NickM

giang said: You may misunderstand my post. I meant NGINX's repo for Debian 6, not Debian's repo.

I totally missed that, actually. Still prefer dotdeb since it has a php5-fpm package though.

hien

I built nginx & php5-fpm from source..no deb only build module that my apps required

marrco

you can have this (and other updated packages like tmux or nsd) directly from debian backports:

add this to your /etc/apt/sources.list

deb http://backports.debian.org/debian-backports squeeze-backports main contrib non-free

and then
apt-get -t squeeze-backports install nginx

it will then automatically update via standard apt-get update && apt-get upgrade

drmike

cough

"Why thank you, drmike, for letting us know about an important update. Thanks for making sure we were aware of it. All hail the wise and wonderful drmike."

edit: Actually I'm using dotdeb because I was using Debian 5 previously and never changed over when I upgrade to 6. Oops.

What should my sources.list file look like?

TigersWay

A nice start with http://debgen.simplylinux.ch/index.php

drmike

What the heck is "non-free software" anyway? I gather some one didn't have proofs in high school and/or college. "Non-free is non-free software" My math teacher must be rolling over in his grave....

I got half way down and went "Huh?" All those explanations run off the right side and are unreadable in FF. I took some guesses and got back what I already had for a sources.list file.

thanks though.

sleddog

I love dotdeb Use it on all my Deb web boxes, no problem, works great, latest versions of nginx, php-fpm & mysql.

drmike

@sleddog Um, I think the whole point of this is that dotdeb doesn't have the latest version of nginx.

Or am I missing something here?

sleddog

dotdeb has the latest stable version of nginx. if you want the development version for some reason you'll have to look elsewhere.

I have no desire to explore the development version, especially for production servers, so dotdeb works fine for me.

See http://nginx.org/

tux

drmike said: What the heck is "non-free software" anyway? I gather some one didn't have proofs in high school and/or college. "Non-free is non-free software" My math teacher must be rolling over in his grave....

http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html

TigersWay

drmike said: What the heck is "non-free software" anyway?

Don't ask me why, but you need "non-free" if you want to install libapache2-mod-fastcgi!

yomero

TigersWay said: A nice start with http://debgen.simplylinux.ch/index.php

You are the man, I love that site

drmike

I'm curious and I've always wondered about this. I know in many GPL and other open source licenses, there's a clause prohibiting any restriction of use of the software. But yet I see some GPL'ed software go ahead and do this, even though their license states that it's a nono.

Is there anything that can be done about this? I know that when I asked the EFF about this, I got back a very unclear answer stating that the developer can do whatever they please as long as those under him or her followed the rules in the GPL.

edit: Thanks for the policy link by the way.

drmike

Just to mention, looks like mysql5.5 got released on dotdeb to a few issues. There's a thread here:

http://www.dotdeb.org/2011/11/01/mysql-5-5-is-finally-here/

I screwed something up on my box. Have to look at it tomorrow.

AuroraZ

@drmike said: Just to mention, looks like mysql5.5 got released on dotdeb to a few issues. There's a thread here:

http://www.dotdeb.org/2011/11/01/mysql-5-5-is-finally-here/

I screwed something up on my box. Have to look at it tomorrow.

That's no fun but no worries man. I set mine up last night was running great. Tried to ssh in today got nothing. Webmin everything was down. No choice but to reinstall good thing nothing was on it.

drmike

Yup, mysql 5.5 is failing for me on both vpses.

edit: Looks like this may be the issue:

Nov 11 16:11:33 vps mysqld_safe[9645]: ERROR: 1064 You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near 'ALTER TABLE user ADD column Show_view_priv enum('N','Y') CHARACTER SET utf8 NOT ' at line 1

yomero

And you don't have an error? :P

tux

@drmike said: Yup, mysql 5.5 is failing for me on both vpses.

You must run mysql_upgrade.

drmike

Sure., I get an error. FAILED. That's my error. For both starting as well as the upgrade @tux mentions. mysql logs are empty. Lots of fun.

danielfeng

Each time I saw other distro users struggling looking for latest packages or compiling everything from scratch by themselves, I felt so lucky that I am using Arch.

Arch official repos already beat EPEL, dotdeb, etc. AUR even kills them. Peace.

Come on people, try Arch. Seriously.

Keith

skip_innodb causes mysql 5.5 to fail. with Squeeze

I've replaced skip_innodb with

ignore_builtin_innodb

default_storage_engine=MyISAM

drmike

Gone to try. @Keith, where did you find that? Been looking most of the afternoon and blowing off my real work. And where specifically are you replacing that please?

edit: I found the lines. They're in /etc/mysql/conf.d/lowendbox.cnf

reedit: No dice. Still the red failed message and nothing in the logs.

drmike

I reinstalled the vps yet again, made the changes to lowendscript that @Keith mentioned up there right from the start and things seems to installed fine. At least mysql is up and running,

thanks again

edit: Of course it doesn't help that lowendscript is still broken and on a repository that doesn't allow folks to submit fixes.

giang

@Keith said: skip_innodb causes mysql 5.5 to fail. with Squeeze

I've replaced skip_innodb with

ignore_builtin_innodb
default_storage_engine=MyISAM

I've used this config with MariaDB 5.3 (MySQL 5.5?), it was eating about 300MB of my memory, LowEndScript only eats 25MB, lol

dmmcintyre3

I have been using MySQL 5.5 in my nginx+php-fpm+mysql autoinstaller scripts for months.

drmike

@dmmcintyre3 I'm going to be polite and just ask for the link to this script please. I'm not going to give you the answer I want to give right now.

How many months have i been cough expressing my annoyance with the current state of the lowendscript?

edit: Thanks though as I hope that's an offer.

dmmcintyre3

CentOS 5: http://freevps.us/thread-528.html
CentOS/Scientific Linux 6: http://freevps.us/thread-1434.html

cleonard

The lowendscript is a good starting point, but it's possible to do a lot better. Some seem to have an aversion to compiling from sources, but it is really the best way. Sure it takes more effort than apt-get or yum, but you can configure it your way. I was trying to get a 128MB setup and I really wanted to be able to run more than just a single php-fpm process. After compiling with only the things I needed I cut the php footprint by half.

The down side is that it becomes a bit more difficult to script as there are a lot of packages that need adding to be able to compile.

Now on a 256MB server it would not be so critical and on a 512 I might even run apache, but on the smaller boxes every MB counts.

dmmcintyre3

@cleonard said: I was trying to get a 128MB setup and I really wanted to be able to run more than just a single php-fpm process.

I had no issues with my CentOS 5 script on my 128mb KVM with 2-3 php processes, APC and decent MySQL caching limits and a lot of extra stuff like ZNC, UnrealIRCd, NSD, OpenVPN or pptpd and exim.

cleonard

Perhaps I just needed a bit more headroom. I was also using Debian 6 32 bit, but I don't how that compares exactly to CentOS. I do need a bit more extra space. Using the OS packages I was able to run 2 php-fpm children. After some load testing it was idling at about 110 to 120 MB allocated. I have some rather heavy duty process that I was planning on running which can max out at 50MB. I wanted to try and keep below the limit so I went and compiled my own. It hovers around 75MB with just nginx and php recomplied with just what I need.

dmmcintyre3

I would sit around 40-55mb ram used, but that is on a KVM VPS not OpenVZ with crappy allocation based memory limits.

cleonard

Yes, I did mine on an OpenVZ where the virtual allocation is counted. I didn't realize it at first and I had a hard time understanding it at first. I just got done putting the same stack on a 128MB KVM and the numbers are more like I was expecting from my experience on non virtualized systems. Guess I just learned one reason why OpenVZ is usually less expensive for what seems like the same specs.

Keith

@drmike Late reply due to time zone difference (I'm in the UK).

Found this with Google

I use my version of lowendscript for Squeeze only at https://github.com/Keith2/lowendscript

Now updated to work with MySql 5.5

drmike

sigh

@Keith It doesn't help having this hosting on a site that really doesn't allow contributions and fixes from members....

I'm cold, it's 28 degrees here and i'm late as usually. someone please find that thread nwhere we (i) was complaining about problems with the script and point @Keith to it. tyanks

Keith

@drmike said: @Keith It doesn't help having this hosting on a site that really doesn't allow contributions and fixes from members...

What's the best software package for Squeeze which will set up a site to do this on a leb?

drmike

@Keith, I'm talking about Gethub. I would love to contribute fixes to Xeoncross' script but their site doesn't allow it. Everything goes to the original and it appears that LEA is no longer working on it.

May want to review the thread as I mention it further up.

Keith

@drmike Creating a new empty repository on Github then adding the script file should enable contributions of fixes.

Trying it ouit with my version of lowendscript, now at https://github.com/Keith2/lowendscript-ng

drmike

Actually it doesn't. I've tried to contribute to Xenoscript's code but it all winds up on LEA's top version and Xeonscript never gets word of it.

I swear I'm going to throw it up on sourceforge after a bit.

TigersWay

@drmike There is plenty of different versions of LEA script: some better technically, some better organized, some worse :-) (https://github.com/TigersWay/VPS)

Take your pic and start yours!

drmike

sigh

Which is the problem. @TigersWay you just stated all of the issues with what's happening with this script.

I mean no disrespect but is anyone understanding what I'm saying here?

• We as end users can't do anything on github. We can't offer fixes or point out issues as it all goes to LEA and not to the folks actually working on the script. Or even log issues with the scripts that are having the issues.

• Forking is bad because it just spreads around the script and makes point one even worse. Spreading it around even more is bad because some of the versions have problems that others don't.

• There's no tracking at all.

drmike

@danielfeng Oh lookie. Another Daniel.

Have to admit that I looked at Arch this afternoon and I wasn't too impressed with their docs. I looked up a problem at random in their forums and the wiki's answer was "Fix it" with no explanation as to how to do it.

TigersWay

@drmike said: We as end users can't do anything on github. We can't offer fixes or point out issues as it all goes to LEA and not to the folks actually working on the script. Or even log issues with the scripts that are having the issues.

Well, maybe that's just because no "forker" decided to implement the available issue tracker.

@drmike said: Forking is bad because it just spreads around the script and makes point one even worse. Spreading it around even more is bad because some of the versions have problems that others don't.

Having kids make parents worse? :-)

The only question is to find an interesting AND active repo (forked or not) and participate with this one.

cleonard

How about using the low end wiki? Seems like the place for something like this.

manma

Any chance you'll release any of your modifications to the lowendscript soon @drmike?