Category Archives: Software

btrfs on a Raspberry Pi

Linux,

I’m something of a filesystem geek, I guess. I first wrote about ZFS on Linux 14 years ago, and even before I used ZFS, I had used ext2/3/4, jfs, reiserfs, xfs, and no doubt some others.

I’ve also used btrfs. I last posted about it in 2014, when I noted it has some advantages over ZFS, but also some drawbacks, including a lot of kernel panics.

Since that comparison, ZFS has gained trim support and btrfs has stabilized. The btrfs status page gives you an accurate idea of what is good to use on btrfs.

Background: Moving towards ZFS and btrfs

I have been trying to move everything away from ext4 and onto either ZFS or btrfs. There are generally several reasons for that:

  1. The checksums for every block help detect potential silent data corruption
  2. Instant snapshots make consistent backups of live systems a lot easier, and without the hassle and wasted space of LVM snapshots
  3. Transparent compression and dedup can save a lot of space in storage-constrained environments

For any machine with at least 32GB of RAM (plus my backup server, which has only 8GB), I run ZFS. While it lacks some of the flexibility of btrfs, it has polish. zfs list -o space shows a useful space accounting. zvols can be behind VMs. With my project simplesnap, I can easily send hourly backups with ZFS, and I choose to send them over NNCP in most cases.

I have a few VMs in the cloud (running Debian, of course) that I use to host things like this blog, my website, my gopher site, the quux NNCP public relay, and various other things.

In these environments, storage space can be expensive. For that matter, so can RAM. ZFS is RAM-hungry, so that rules out ZFS. I’ve been running btrfs in those environments for a few years now, and it’s worked out well. I do async dedup, lzo or zstd compression depending on the needs, and the occasional balance and defrag.

Filesystems on the Raspberry Pi

I run Debian trixie on all my Raspberry Pis; not Raspbian or Raspberry Pi OS for a number of reasons. My 8-yr-old uses a Raspberry Pi 400 as her primary computer — and loves it! She doesn’t do web browsing, but plays Tuxpaint, some old DOS games like Math Blaster via dosbox, and uses Thunderbird for a locked-down email account.

But it was SLOW. Just really, glacially, slow, especially for Thunderbird.

My first step to address that was to get a faster MicroSD card to hold the OS. That was a dramatic improvement. It’s still slow, but a lot faster.

Then, I thought, maybe I could use btrfs with LZO compression to reduce the amount of I/O and speed things up further? Analysis showed things were mostly slow due to I/O, not CPU, constraints.

The conversion

Rather than use the btrfs in-place conversion from ext4, I opted to dar it up (like tar), run mkfs.btrfs on the SD card, then unpack the archive back onto it. Easy enough, right?

Well, not so fast. The MicroSD card is 128GB, and the entire filesystem is 6.2GB. But after unpacking 100MB onto it, I got an out of space error.

btrfs has this notion of block groups. By default, each block group is dedicated to either data or metadata. btrfs fi df and btrfs fi usage will show you details about the block groups.

btrfs allocates block groups greedily (the ssd_spread mount option I use may have exacerbated this). What happened was it allocated almost the entire drive to data block groups, trying to spread the data across it. It so happened that dar archived some larger files first (maybe /boot), so btrfs was allocating data and metadata blockgroups assuming few large files. But then it started unpacking one of the directories in /usr with lots of small files (maybe /usr/share/locale). It quickly filled up the metadata block group, and since the entire SD card had been allocated to different block groups, I got ENOSPC.

Deleting a few files and running btrfs balance resolved it; now it allocated 1GB to metadata, which was plenty. I re-ran the dar extract and now everything was fine. See more details on btrfs balance and block groups.

This was the only btrfs problem I encountered.

Benchmarks

I timed two things prior to switching to btrfs: how long it takes to boot (measured from the moment I turn on the power until the moment the XFCE login box is displayed), and how long it takes to start Thunderbird.

After switching to btrfs with LZO compression, somewhat to my surprise, both measures were exactly the same!

Why might this be?

It turns out that SD cards are understood to be pathologically bad with random read performance. Boot and Thunderbird both are likely doing a lot of small random reads, not large streaming reads. Therefore, it may be that even though I have reduced the total I/O needed, the impact is unsubstantial because the real bottleneck is the “seeks” across the disk.

Still, I gain the better backup support and silent data corruption prevention, so I kept btrfs.

SSD mount options and MicroSD endurance

btrfs has several mount options specifically relevant to SSDs. Aside from the obvious trim support, they are ssd and ssd_spread. The documentation on this is vague and my attempts to learn more about it found a lot of information that was outdated or unsubstantiated folklore.

Some reports suggest that “older” SSDs will benefit from ssd_spread, but that it may have no effect or even a harmful effect on newer ones, and can at times cause fragmentation or write amplification. I could find nothing to back this up, though. And it seems particularly difficult to figure out what kind of wear leveling SSD firmware does. MicroSD firmware is likely to be on the less-advanced side, but still, I have no idea what it might do. In any case, with btrfs not updating blocks in-place, it should be better than ext4 in the most naive case (no wear leveling at all) but may have somewhat more write traffic for the pathological worst case (frequent updates of small portions of large files).

One anecdotal report I read — and can’t find anymore, somehow — was from a person that had set up a sort of torture test for SD cards, with reports that ext4 lasted a few weeks or months before the MicroSDs failed, while btrfs lasted years.

If you are looking for a MicroSD card, by the way, The Great MicroSD Card Survey is a nice place to start.

For longevity: I mount all my filesystems with noatime already, so I continue to recommend that. You can also consider limiting the log size in /etc/systemd/journald.conf, running daily fstrim (which may be more successful than live trims in all filesystems).

Conclusion

I’ve been pretty pleased with btrfs. The concerns I have today relate to block groups and maintenance (periodic balance and maybe a periodic defrag). I’m not sure I’d be ready to say “put btrfs on the computer you send to someone that isn’t Linux-savvy” because the chances of running into issues are higher than with ext4. Still, for people that have some tech savvy, btrfs can improve reliability and performance in other ways.

I Learned We All Have Linux Seats, and I’m Not Entirely Pleased

Linux

I recently wrote about How to Use SSH with FIDO2/U2F Security Keys, which I now use on almost all of my machines.

The last one that needed this was my Raspberry Pi hooked up to my DEC vt510 terminal and IBM mechanical keyboard. Yes I do still use that setup!

To my surprise, generating a key on it failed. I very quickly saw that /dev/hidraw0 had incorrect permissions, accessible only to root.

On other machines, it looks like this:

crw-rw----+ 1 root root 243, 16 May 24 16:47 /dev/hidraw16

And, if I run getfacl on it, I see:

# file: dev/hidraw16
# owner: root
# group: root
user::rw-
user:jgoerzen:rw-
group::---
mask::rw-
other::---

Yes, something was setting an ACL on it. Thus began to saga to figure out what was doing that.

Firing up inotifywatch, I saw it was systemd-udevd or its udev-worker. But cranking up logging on that to maximum only showed me that uaccess was somehow doing this.

I started digging. uaccess turned out to be almost entirely undocumented. People say to use it, but there’s no description of what it does or how. Its purpose appears to be to grant access to devices to those logged in to a machine by dynamically adding them to ACLs for devices. OK, that’s a nice goal, but why was machine A doing this and not machine B?

I dug some more. I came across a hint that uaccess may only do that for a “seat”. A seat? I’ve not heard of that in Linux before.

Turns out there’s some information (older and newer) about this out there. Sure enough, on the machine with KDE, loginctl list-sessions shows me on seat0, but on the machine where I log in from ttyUSB0, it shows an empty seat.

But how to make myself part of the seat? I tried various udev rules to add the “seat” or “master-of-seat” tags, but nothing made any difference.

I finally gave up and did the old-fashioned rule to just make it work already:

TAG=="security-device",SUBSYSTEM=="hidraw",GROUP="mygroup"

I still don’t know how to teach logind to add a seat for ttyUSB0, but oh well. At least I learned something. An annoying something, but hey.

This all had a laudable goal, but when there are so many layers of indirection, poorly documented, with poor logging, it gets pretty annoying.

Memoirs of the Early Internet

Online Life, Software, ,

The Internet is an amazing place, and occasionally you can find things on the web that have somehow lingered online for decades longer than you might expect.

Today I’ll take you on a tour of some parts of the early Internet.

The Internet, of course, is a “network of networks” and part of its early (and continuing) promise was to provide a common protocol that all sorts of networks can use to interoperate with each other. In the early days, UUCP was one of the main ways universities linked with each other, and eventually UUCP and the Internet sort of merged (but that’s a long story).

Let’s start with some Usenet maps, which were an early way to document the UUCP modem links between universities. Start with this PDF. The first page is a Usenet map (which at the time mostly flowed over UUCP) from April of 1981. Notice that ucbvax, a VAX system at Berkeley, was central to the map.

ucbvax continued to be a central node for UUCP for more than a decade; on page 5 of that PDF, you’ll see that it asks for a “Path from a major node (eg, ucbvax, devcax, harpo, duke)”. Pre-Internet email addresses used a path; eg, mark@ucbvax was duke!decvax!ucbvax!mark to someone. You had to specify the route from your system to the recipient on your email To line. If you gave out your email address on a business card, you would start it from a major node like ucbvax, and the assumption was that everyone would know how to get from their system to the major node.

On August 19, 1994, ucbvax was finally turned off. TCP/IP had driven UUCP into more obscurity; by then, it was mostly used by people without a dedicated Internet connection to get on the Internet, rather than an entire communication network of its own. A few days later, Cliff Frost posted a memoir of ucbvax; an obscurbe bit of Internet lore that is fun to read.

UUCP was ad-hoc, and by 1984 there was an effort to make a machine-parsable map to help automate routing on UUCP. This was called the pathalias project, and there was a paper about it. The Linux network administration guide even includes a section on pathalias.

Because UUCP mainly flowed over phone lines, long distance fees made it quite expensive. In 1985, the Stargate Project was formed, with the idea of distributing Usenet by satellite. The satellite link was short-lived, but the effort eventually morphed into UUNET. It was initially a non-profit, but eventually became a commercial backbone provider, and later ISP. Over a long series of acquisitions, UUNET is now part of Verizon. An article in ;login: is another description of this history.

IAPS has an Internet in 1990 article, which includes both pathalias data and an interesting map of domain names to UUCP paths.

As I was pondering what interesting things a person could do with NNCPNET Internet email, I stumbled across a page on getting FTP files via e-mail. Yes, that used to be a thing! I remember ftpmail@decwrl.dec.com.

It turns out that page is from a copy of EFF’s (Extended) Guide to the Internet from 1994. Wow, what a treasure! It has entries such as A Slice of Life in my Virtual Community, libraries with telnet access, Gopher, A Statement of Principle by Bruce Sterling, and I could go on. You can also get it as a PDF from Internet Archive.

UUCP is still included with modern Linux and BSD distributions. It was part of how I experienced the PC and Internet revolution in rural America. It lacks modern security, but NNCP is to UUCP what ssh is to telnet.

Announcing the NNCPNET Email Network

Linux, Online Life, ,

From 1995 to 2019, I ran my own mail server. It began with a UUCP link, an expensive long-distance call for me then. Later, I ran a mail server in my apartment, then ran it as a VPS at various places.

But running an email server got difficult. You can’t just run it on a residential IP. Now there’s SPF, DKIM, DMARC, and TLS to worry about. I recently reviewed mail hosting services, and don’t get me wrong: I still use one, and probably will, because things like email from my bank are critical.

But we’ve lost the ability to tinker, to experiment, to have fun with email.

Not anymore. NNCPNET is an email system that runs atop NNCP. I’ve written a lot about NNCP, including a less-ambitious article about point-to-point email over NNCP 5 years ago. NNCP is to UUCP what ssh is to telnet: a modernization, with modern security and features. NNCP is an asynchronous, onion-routed, store-and-forward network. It can use as a transport anything from the Internet to a USB stick.

NNCPNET is a set of standards, scripts, and tools to facilitate a broader email network using NNCP as the transport. You can read more about NNCPNET on its wiki!

The “easy mode” is to use the Docker container (multi-arch, so you can use it on your Raspberry Pi) I provide, which bundles:

  • Exim mail server
  • NNCP
  • Verification and routing tools I wrote. Because NNCP packets are encrypted and signed, we get sender verification “for free”; my tools ensure the From: header corresponds with the sending node.
  • Automated nodelist tools; it will request daily nodelist updates and update its configurations accordingly, so new members can be communicated with
  • Integration with the optional, opt-in Internet email bridge

It is open to all. The homepage has a more extensive list of features.

I even have mailing lists running on NNCPNET; see the interesting addresses page for more details.

There is extensive documentation, and of course the source to the whole thing is available.

The gateway to Internet SMTP mail is off by default, but can easily be enabled for any node. It is a full participant, in both directions, with SPF, DKIM, DMARC, and TLS.

You don’t need any inbound ports for any of this. You don’t need an always-on Internet connection. You don’t even need an Internet connection at all. You can run it from your laptop and still use Thunderbird to talk to it via its optional built-in IMAP server.

The xz Issue Isn’t About Open Source

Society, Software

You’ve probably heard of the recent backdoor in xz. There have been a lot of takes on this, most of them boiling down to some version of:

The problem here is with Open Source Software.

I want to say not only is that view so myopic that it pushes towards the incorrect, but also it blinds us to more serious problems.

Now, I don’t pretend that there are no problems in the FLOSS community. There have been various pieces written about what this issue says about the FLOSS community (usually without actionable solutions). I’m not here to say those pieces are wrong. Just that there’s a bigger picture.

So with this xz issue, it may well be a state actor (aka “spy”) that added this malicious code to xz. We also know that proprietary software and systems can be vulnerable. For instance, a Twitter whistleblower revealed that Twitter employed Indian and Chinese spies, some knowingly. A recent report pointed to security lapses at Microsoft, including “preventable” lapses in security. According to the Wikipedia article on the SolarWinds attack, it was facilitated by various kinds of carelessness, including passwords being posted to Github and weak default passwords. They directly distributed malware-infested updates, encouraged customers to disable anti-malware tools when installing SolarWinds products, and so forth.

It would be naive indeed to assume that there aren’t black hat actors among the legions of programmers employed by companies that outsource work to low-cost countries — some of which have challenges with bribery.

So, given all this, we can’t really say the problem is Open Source. Maybe it’s more broad:

The problem here is with software.

Maybe that inches us closer, but is it really accurate? We have all heard of Boeing’s recent issues, which seem to have some element of root causes in corporate carelessness, cost-cutting, and outsourcing. That sounds rather similar to the SolarWinds issue, doesn’t it?

Well then, the problem is capitalism.

Maybe it has a role to play, but isn’t it a little too easy to just say “capitalism” and throw up our hands helplessly, just as some do with FLOSS as at the start of this article? After all, capitalism also brought us plenty of products of very high quality over the years. When we can point to successful, non-careless products — and I own some of them (for instance, my Framework laptop). We clearly haven’t reached the root cause yet.

And besides, what would you replace it with? All the major alternatives that have been tried have even stronger downsides. Maybe you replace it with “better regulated capitalism”, but that’s still capitalism.

Then the problem must be with consumers.

As this argument would go, it’s consumers’ buying patterns that drive problems. Buyers — individual and corporate — seek flashy features and low cost, prizing those over quality and security.

No doubt this is true in a lot of cases. Maybe greed or status-conscious societies foster it: Temu promises people to “shop like a billionaire”, and unloads on them cheap junk, which “all but guarantees that shipments from Temu containing products made with forced labor are entering the United States on a regular basis“.

But consumers are also people, and some fraction of them are quite capable of writing fantastic software, and in fact, do so.

So what we need is some way to seize control. Some way to do what is right, despite the pressures of consumers or corporations.

Ah yes, dear reader, you have been slogging through all these paragraphs and now realize I have been leading you to this:

Then the solution is Open Source.

Indeed. Faults and all, FLOSS is the most successful movement I know where people are bringing us back to the commons: working and volunteering for the common good, unleashing a thousand creative variants on a theme, iterating in every direction imaginable. We have FLOSS being vital parts of everything from $30 Raspberry Pis to space missions. It is bringing education and communication to impoverished parts of the world. It lets everyone write and release software. And, unlike the SolarWinds and Twitter issues, it exposes both clever solutions and security flaws to the world.

If an authentication process in Windows got slower, we would all shrug and mutter “Microsoft” under our breath. Because, really, what else can we do? We have no agency with Windows.

If an authentication process in Linux gets slower, anybody that’s interested — anybody at all — can dive in and ask “why” and trace it down to root causes.

Some look at this and say “FLOSS is responsible for this mess.” I look at it and say, “this would be so much worse if it wasn’t FLOSS” — and experience backs me up on this.

FLOSS doesn’t prevent security issues itself.

What it does do is give capabilities to us all. The ability to investigate. Ability to fix. Yes, even the ability to break — and its cousin, the power to learn.

And, most rewarding, the ability to contribute.

Live Migrating from Raspberry Pi OS bullseye to Debian bookworm

Linux

I’ve been getting annoyed with Raspberry Pi OS (Raspbian) for years now. It’s a fork of Debian, but manages to omit some of the most useful things. So I’ve decided to migrate all of my Pis to run pure Debian. These are my reasons:

  1. Raspberry Pi OS has, for years now, specified that there is no upgrade path. That is, to get to a newer major release, it’s a reinstall. While I have sometimes worked around this, for a device that is frequently installed in hard-to-reach locations, this is even more important than usual. It’s common for me to upgrade machines for a decade or more across Debian releases and there’s no reason that it should be so much more difficult with Raspbian.
  2. As I noted in Consider Security First, the security situation for Raspberry Pi OS isn’t as good as it is with Debian.
  3. Raspbian lags behind Debian – often times by 6 months or more for major releases, and days or weeks for bug fixes and security patches.
  4. Raspbian has no direct backports support, though Raspberry Pi 3 and above can use Debian’s backports (per my instructions as Installing Debian Backports on Raspberry Pi)
  5. Raspbian uses a custom kernel without initramfs support

It turns out it is actually possible to do an in-place migration from Raspberry Pi OS bullseye to Debian bookworm. Here I will describe how. Even if you don’t have a Raspberry Pi, this might still be instructive on how Raspbian and Debian packages work.

WARNINGS

Before continuing, back up your system. This process isn’t for the neophyte and it is entirely possible to mess up your boot device to the point that you have to do a fresh install to get your Pi to boot. This isn’t a supported process at all.

Architecture Confusion

Debian has three ARM-based architectures:

  • armel, for the lowest-end 32-bit ARM devices without hardware floating point support
  • armhf, for the higher-end 32-bit ARM devices with hardware float (hence “hf”)
  • arm64, for 64-bit ARM devices (which all have hardware float)

Although the Raspberry Pi 0 and 1 do support hardware float, they lack support for other CPU features that Debian’s armhf architecture assumes. Therefore, the Raspberry Pi 0 and 1 could only run Debian’s armel architecture.

Raspberry Pi 3 and above are capable of running 64-bit, and can run both armhf and arm64.

Prior to the release of the Raspberry Pi 5 / Raspbian bookworm, Raspbian only shipped the armhf architecture. Well, it was an architecture they called armhf, but it was different from Debian’s armhf in that everything was recompiled to work with the more limited set of features on the earlier Raspberry Pi boards. It was really somewhere between Debian’s armel and armhf archs. You could run Debian armel on those, but it would run more slowly, due to doing floating point calculations without hardware support. Debian’s raspi FAQ goes into this a bit.

What I am going to describe here is going from Raspbian armhf to Debian armhf with a 64-bit kernel. Therefore, it will only work with Raspberry Pi 3 and above. It may theoretically be possible to take a Raspberry Pi 2 to Debian armhf with a 32-bit kernel, but I haven’t tried this and it may be more difficult. I have seen conflicting information on whether armhf really works on a Pi 2. (If you do try it on a Pi 2, ignore everything about arm64 and 64-bit kernels below, and just go with the linux-image-armmp-lpae kernel per the ARMMP page)

There is another wrinkle: Debian doesn’t support running 32-bit ARM kernels on 64-bit ARM CPUs, though it does support running a 32-bit userland on them. So we will wind up with a system with kernel packages from arm64 and everything else from armhf. This is a perfectly valid configuration as the arm64 – like x86_64 – is multiarch (that is, the CPU can natively execute both the 32-bit and 64-bit instructions).

(It is theoretically possible to crossgrade a system from 32-bit to 64-bit userland, but that felt like a rather heavy lift for dubious benefit on a Pi; nevertheless, if you want to make this process even more complicated, refer to the CrossGrading page.)

Prerequisites and Limitations

In addition to the need for a Raspberry Pi 3 or above in order for this to work, there are a few other things to mention.

If you are using the GPIO features of the Pi, I don’t know if those work with Debian.

I think Raspberry Pi OS modified the desktop environment more than other components. All of my Pis are headless, so I don’t know if this process will work if you use a desktop environment.

I am assuming you are booting from a MicroSD card as is typical in the Raspberry Pi world. The Pi’s firmware looks for a FAT partition (MBR type 0x0c) and looks within it for boot information. Depending on how long ago you first installed an OS on your Pi, your /boot may be too small for Debian. Use df -h /boot to see how big it is. I recommend 200MB at minimum. If your /boot is smaller than that, stop now (or use some other system to shrink your root filesystem and rearrange your partitions; I’ve done this, but it’s outside the scope of this article.)

You need to have stable power. Once you begin this process, your pi will mostly be left in a non-bootable state until you finish. (You… did make a backup, right?)

Basic idea

The basic idea here is that since bookworm has almost entirely newer packages then bullseye, we can “just” switch over to it and let the Debian packages replace the Raspbian ones as they are upgraded. Well, it’s not quite that easy, but that’s the main idea.

Preparation

First, make a backup. Even an image of your MicroSD card might be nice. OK, I think I’ve said that enough now.

It would be a good idea to have a HDMI cable (with the appropriate size of connector for your particular Pi board) and a HDMI display handy so you can troubleshoot any bootup issues with a console.

Preparation: access

The Raspberry Pi OS by default sets up a user named pi that can use sudo to gain root without a password. I think this is an insecure practice, but assuming you haven’t changed it, you will need to ensure it still works once you move to Debian. Raspberry Pi OS had a patch in their sudo package to enable it, and that will be removed when Debian’s sudo package is installed. So, put this in /etc/sudoers.d/010_picompat:

pi ALL=(ALL) NOPASSWD: ALL

Also, there may be no password set for the root account. It would be a good idea to set one; it makes it easier to log in at the console. Use the passwd command as root to do so.

Preparation: bluetooth

Debian doesn’t correctly identify the Bluetooth hardware address. You can save it off to a file by running hcitool dev > /root/bluetooth-from-raspbian.txt. I don’t use Bluetooth, but this should let you develop a script to bring it up properly.

Preparation: Debian archive keyring

You will next need to install Debian’s archive keyring so that apt can authenticate packages from Debian. Go to the bookworm download page for debian-archive-keyring and copy the URL for one of the files, then download it on the pi. For instance:

wget http://http.us.debian.org/debian/pool/main/d/debian-archive-keyring/debian-archive-keyring_2023.3+deb12u1_all.deb

Use sha256sum to verify the checksum of the downloaded file, comparing it to the package page on the Debian site.

Now, you’ll install it with:

dpkg -i debian-archive-keyring_2023.3+deb12u1_all.deb

Package first steps

From here on, we are making modifications to the system that can leave it in a non-bootable state.

Examine /etc/apt/sources.list and all the files in /etc/apt/sources.list.d. Most likely you will want to delete or comment out all lines in all files there. Replace them with something like:

deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bookworm main non-free-firmware contrib non-free
deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security bookworm-security main non-free-firmware contrib non-free
deb https://deb.debian.org/debian bookworm-backports main non-free-firmware contrib non-free

(you might leave off contrib and non-free depending on your needs)

Now, we’re going to tell it that we’ll support arm64 packages:

dpkg --add-architecture arm64

And finally, download the bookworm package lists:

apt-get update

If there are any errors from that command, fix them and don’t proceed until you have a clean run of apt-get update.

Moving /boot to /boot/firmware

The boot FAT partition I mentioned above is mounted at /boot by Raspberry Pi OS, but Debian’s scripts assume it will be at /boot/firmware. We need to fix this. First:

umount /boot
mkdir /boot/firmware

Now, edit fstab and change the reference to /boot to be to /boot/firmware. Now:

mount -v /boot/firmware
cd /boot/firmware
mv -vi * ..

This mounts the filesystem at the new location, and moves all its contents back to where apt believes it should be. Debian’s packages will populate /boot/firmware later.

Installing the first packages

Now we start by installing the first of the needed packages. Eventually we will wind up with roughly the same set Debian uses.

apt-get install linux-image-arm64
apt-get install firmware-brcm80211=20230210-5
apt-get install raspi-firmware

If you get errors relating to firmware-brcm80211 from any commands, run that install firmware-brcm80211 command and then proceed. There are a few packages that Raspbian marked as newer than the version in bookworm (whether or not they really are), and that’s one of them.

Configuring the bootloader

We need to configure a few things in /etc/default/raspi-firmware before proceeding. Edit that file.

First, uncomment (or add) a line like this:

KERNEL_ARCH="arm64"

Next, in /boot/cmdline.txt you can find your old Raspbian boot command line. It will say something like:

root=PARTUUID=...

Save off the bit starting with PARTUUID. Back in /etc/default/raspi-firmware, set a line like this:

ROOTPART=PARTUUID=abcdef00

(substituting your real value for abcdef00).

This is necessary because the microSD card device name often changes from /dev/mmcblk0 to /dev/mmcblk1 when switching to Debian’s kernel. raspi-firmware will encode the current device name in /boot/firmware/cmdline.txt by default, which will be wrong once you boot into Debian’s kernel. The PARTUUID approach lets it work regardless of the device name.

Purging the Raspbian kernel

Run:

dpkg --purge raspberrypi-kernel

Upgrading the system

At this point, we are going to run the procedure beginning at section 4.4.3 of the Debian release notes. Generally, you will do:

apt-get -u upgrade
apt full-upgrade

Fix any errors at each step before proceeding to the next. Now, to remove some cruft, run:

apt-get --purge autoremove

Inspect the list to make sure nothing important isn’t going to be removed.

Removing Raspbian cruft

You can list some of the cruft with:

apt list '~o'

And remove it with:

apt purge '~o'

I also don’t run Bluetooth, and it seemed to sometimes hang on boot becuase I didn’t bother to fix it, so I did:

apt-get --purge remove bluez

Installing some packages

This makes sure some basic Debian infrastructure is available:

apt-get install wpasupplicant parted dosfstools wireless-tools iw alsa-tools
apt-get --purge autoremove

Installing firmware

Now run:

apt-get install firmware-linux

Resolving firmware package version issues

If it gives an error about the installed version of a package, you may need to force it to the bookworm version. For me, this often happened with firmware-atheros, firmware-libertas, and firmware-realtek.

Here’s how to resolve it, with firmware-realtek as an example:

  1. Go to https://packages.debian.org/PACKAGENAME – for instance, https://packages.debian.org/firmware-realtek. Note the version number in bookworm – in this case, 20230210-5.

  2. Now, you will force the installation of that package at that version:

    apt-get install firmware-realtek=20230210-5

  3. Repeat with every conflicting package until done.

  4. Rerun apt-get install firmware-linux and make sure it runs cleanly.

Also, in the end you should be able to:

apt-get install firmware-atheros firmware-libertas firmware-realtek firmware-linux

Dealing with other Raspbian packages

The Debian release notes discuss removing non-Debian packages. There will still be a few of those. Run:

apt list '?narrow(?installed, ?not(?origin(Debian)))'

Deal with them; mostly you will need to force the installation of a bookworm version using the procedure in the section Resolving firmware package version issues above (even if it’s not for a firmware package). For non-firmware packages, you might possibly want to add --mark-auto to your apt-get install command line to allow the package to be autoremoved later if the things depending on it go away.

If you aren’t going to use Bluetooth, I recommend apt-get --purge remove bluez as well. Sometimes it can hang at boot if you don’t fix it up as described above.

Set up networking

We’ll be switching to the Debian method of networking, so we’ll create some files in /etc/network/interfaces.d. First, eth0 should look like this:

allow-hotplug eth0
iface eth0 inet dhcp
iface eth0 inet6 auto

And wlan0 should look like this:

allow-hotplug wlan0
iface wlan0 inet dhcp
    wpa-conf /etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf

Raspbian is inconsistent about using eth0/wlan0 or renamed interface. Run ifconfig or ip addr. If you see a long-named interface such as enx<something> or wlp<something>, copy the eth0 file to the one named after the enx interface, or the wlan0 file to the one named after the wlp interface, and edit the internal references to eth0/wlan0 in this new file to name the long interface name.

If using wifi, verify that your SSIDs and passwords are in /etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf. It should have lines like:

network={
   ssid="NetworkName"
   psk="passwordHere"
}

(This is where Raspberry Pi OS put them).

Deal with DHCP

Raspberry Pi OS used dhcpcd, whereas bookworm normally uses isc-dhcp-client. Verify the system is in the correct state:

apt-get install isc-dhcp-client
apt-get --purge remove dhcpcd dhcpcd-base dhcpcd5 dhcpcd-dbus

Set up LEDs

To set up the LEDs to trigger on MicroSD activity as they did with Raspbian, follow the Debian instructions. Run apt-get install sysfsutils. Then put this in a file at /etc/sysfs.d/local-raspi-leds.conf:

class/leds/ACT/brightness = 1
class/leds/ACT/trigger = mmc1

Prepare for boot

To make sure all the /boot/firmware files are updated, run update-initramfs -u. Verify that root in /boot/firmware/cmdline.txt references the PARTUUID as appropriate. Verify that /boot/firmware/config.txt contains the lines arm_64bit=1 and upstream_kernel=1. If not, go back to the section on modifying /etc/default/raspi-firmware and fix it up.

The moment arrives

Cross your fingers and try rebooting into your Debian system:

reboot

For some reason, I found that the first boot into Debian seems to hang for 30-60 seconds during bootstrap. I’m not sure why; don’t panic if that happens. It may be necessary to power cycle the Pi for this boot.

Troubleshooting

If things don’t work out, hook up the Pi to a HDMI display and see what’s up. If I anticipated a particular problem, I would have documented it here (a lot of the things I documented here are because I ran into them!) So I can’t give specific advice other than to watch boot messages on the console. If you don’t even get kernel messages going, then there is some problem with your partition table or /boot/firmware FAT partition. Otherwise, you’ve at least got the kernel going and can troubleshoot like usual from there.

Consider Security First

Software

I write this in the context of my decision to ditch Raspberry Pi OS and move everything I possibly can, including my Raspberry Pi devices, to Debian. I will write about that later.

But for now, I wanted to comment on something I think is often overlooked and misunderstood by people considering distributions or operating systems: the huge importance of getting security updates in an automated and easy way.

Background

Let’s assume that these statements are true, which I think are well-supported by available evidence:

  1. Every computer system (OS plus applications) that can do useful modern work has security vulnerabilities, some of which are unknown at any given point in time;

  2. During the lifetime of that computer system, some of these vulnerabilities will be discovered. For a (hopefully large) subset of those vulnerabilities, timely patches will become available.

Now then, it follows that applying those timely patches is a critical part of having a system that it as secure as possible. Of course, you have to do other things as well – good passwords, secure practices, etc – but, fundamentally, if your system lacks patches for known vulnerabilities, you’ve already lost at the security ballgame.

How to stay patched

There is something of a continuum of how you might patch your system. It runs roughly like this, from best to worst:

  1. All components are kept up-to-date automatically, with no intervention from the user/operator

  2. The operator is automatically alerted to necessary patches, and they can be easily installed with minimal intervention

  3. The operator is automatically alerted to necessary patches, but they require significant effort to apply

  4. The operator has no way to detect vulnerabilities or necessary patches

It should be obvious that the first situation is ideal. Every other situation relies on the timeliness of human action to keep up-to-date with security patches. This is a fallible situation; humans are busy, take trips, dismiss alerts, miss alerts, etc. That said, it is rare to find any system living truly all the way in that scenario, as you’ll see.

What is “your system”?

A critical point here is: what is “your system”? It includes:

  • Your kernel
  • Your base operating system
  • Your applications
  • All the libraries needed to run all of the above

Some OSs, such as Debian, make little or no distinction between the base OS and the applications. Others, such as many BSDs, have a distinction there. And in some cases, people will compile or install applications outside of any OS mechanism. (It must be stressed that by doing so, you are taking the responsibility of patching them on your own shoulders.)

How do common systems stack up?

  • Debian, with its support for unattended-upgrades, needrestart, debian-security-support, and such, is largely category 1. It can automatically apply security patches, in most cases can restart the necessary services for the patch to take effect, and will alert you when some processes or the system must be manually restarted for a patch to take effect (for instance, a kernel update). Those cases requiring manual intervention are category 2. The debian-security-support package will even warn you of gaps in the system. You can also use debsecan to scan for known vulnerabilities on a given installation.

  • FreeBSD has no way to automatically install security patches for things in the packages collection. As with many rolling-release systems, you can’t automate the installation of these security patches with FreeBSD because it is not safe to blindly update packages. It’s not safe to blindly update packages because they may bring along more than just security patches: they may represent major upgrades that introduce incompatibilities, etc. Unlike Debian’s practice of backporting fixes and thus producing narrowly-tailored patches, forcing upgrades to newer versions precludes a “minimal intervention” install. Therefore, rolling release systems are category 3.

  • Things such as Snap, Flatpak, AppImage, Docker containers, Electron apps, and third-party binaries often contain embedded libraries and such for which you have no easy visibility into their status. For instance, if there was a bug in libpng, would you know how many of your containers had a vulnerability? These systems are category 4 – you don’t even know if you’re vulnerable. It’s for this reason that my Debian-based Docker containers apply security patches before starting processes, and also run unattended-upgrades and friends.

The pernicious library problem

As mentioned in my last category above, hidden vulnerabilities can be a big problem. I’ve been writing about this for years. Back in 2017, I wrote an article focused on Docker containers, but which applies to the other systems like Snap and so forth. I cited a study back then that “Over 80% of the :latest versions of official images contained at least one high severity vulnerability.” The situation is no better now. In December 2023, it was reported that, two years after the critical Log4Shell vulnerability, 25% of apps were still vulnerable to it. Also, only 21% of developers ever update third-party libraries after introducing them into their projects.

Clearly, you can’t rely on these images with embedded libraries to be secure. And since they are black box, they are difficult to audit.

Debian’s policy of always splitting libraries out from packages is hugely beneficial; it allows finegrained analysis of not just vulnerabilities, but also the dependency graph. If there’s a vulnerability in libpng, you have one place to patch it and you also know exactly what components of your system use it.

If you use snaps, or AppImages, you can’t know if they contain a deeply embedded vulnerability, nor could you patch it yourself if you even knew. You are at the mercy of upstream detecting and remedying the problem – a dicey situation at best.

Who makes the patches?

Fundamentally, humans produce security patches. Often, but not always, patches originate with the authors of a program and then are integrated into distribution packages. It should be noted that every security team has finite resources; there will always be some CVEs that aren’t patched in a given system for various reasons; perhaps they are not exploitable, or are too low-impact, or have better mitigations than patches.

Debian has an excellent security team; they manage the process of integrating patches into Debian, produce Debian Security Advisories, maintain the Debian Security Tracker (which maintains cross-references with the CVE database), etc.

Some distributions don’t have this infrastructure. For instance, I was unable to find this kind of tracker for Devuan or Raspberry Pi OS. In contrast, Ubuntu and Arch Linux both seem to have active security teams with trackers and advisories.

Implications for Raspberry Pi OS and others

As I mentioned above, I’m transitioning my Pi devices off Raspberry Pi OS (Raspbian). Security is one reason. Although Raspbian is a fork of Debian, and you can install packages like unattended-upgrades on it, they don’t work right because they use the Debian infrastructure, and Raspbian hasn’t modified them to use their own infrastructure. I don’t see any Raspberry Pi OS security advisories, trackers, etc. In short, they lack the infrastructure to support those Debian tools anyhow.

Not only that, but Raspbian lags behind Debian in both new releases and new security patches, sometimes by days or weeks.

Live Migrating from Raspberry Pi OS bullseye to Debian bookworm contains instructions for migrating Raspberry Pis to Debian.

A Maze of Twisty Little Pixels, All Tiny

Desktop Linux

Two years ago, I wrote Managing an External Display on Linux Shouldn’t Be This Hard. Happily, since I wrote that post, most of those issues have been resolved.

But then you throw HiDPI into the mix and it all goes wonky.

If you’re running X11, basically the story is that you can change the scale factor, but it only takes effect on newly-launched applications (which means a logout/in because some of your applications you can’t really re-launch). That is a problem if, like me, you sometimes connect an external display that is HiDPI, sometimes not, or your internal display is HiDPI but others aren’t. Wayland is far better, supporting on-the-fly resizes quite nicely.

I’ve had two devices with HiDPI displays: a Surface Go 2, and a work-issued Thinkpad. The Surface Go 2 is my ultraportable Linux tablet. I use it sparingly at home, and rarely with an external display. I just put Gnome on it, in part because Gnome had better on-screen keyboard support at the time, and left it at that.

On the work-issued Thinkpad, I really wanted to run KDE thanks to its tiling support (I wound up using bismuth with it). KDE was buggy with Wayland at the time, so I just stuck with X11 and ran my HiDPI displays at lower resolutions and lived with the fuzziness.

But now that I have a Framework laptop with a HiDPI screen, I wanted to get this right.

I tried both Gnome and KDE. Here are my observations with both:

Gnome

I used PaperWM with Gnome. PaperWM is a tiling manager with a unique horizontal ribbon approach. It grew on me; I think I would be equally at home, or maybe even prefer it, to my usual xmonad-style approach. Editing the active window border color required editing ~/.local/share/gnome-shell/extensions/paperwm@hedning:matrix.org/stylesheet.css and inserting background-color and border-color items in the paperwm-selection section.

Gnome continues to have an absolutely terrible picture for configuring things. It has no less than four places to make changes (Settings, Tweaks, Extensions, and dconf-editor). In many cases, configuration for a given thing is split between Settings and Tweaks, and sometimes even with Extensions, and then there are sometimes options that are only visible in dconf. That is, where the Gnome people have even allowed something to be configurable.

Gnome installs a power manager by default. It offers three options: performance, balanced, and saver. There is no explanation of the difference between them. None. What is it setting when I change the pref? A maximum frequency? A scaling governor? A balance between performance and efficiency cores? Not only that, but there’s no way to tell it to just use performance when plugged in and balanced or saver when on battery. In an issue about adding that, a Gnome dev wrote “We’re not going to add a preference just because you want one”. KDE, on the other hand, aside from not mucking with your system’s power settings in this way, has a nice panel with “on AC” and “on battery” and you can very easily tweak various settings accordingly. The hostile attitude from the Gnome developers in that thread was a real turnoff.

While Gnome has excellent support for Wayland, it doesn’t (directly) support fractional scaling. That is, you can set it to 100%, 200%, and so forth, but no 150%. Well, unless you manage to discover that you can run gsettings set org.gnome.mutter experimental-features "['scale-monitor-framebuffer']" first. (Oh wait, does that make a FIFTH settings tool? Why yes it does.) Despite its name, that allows you to select fractional scaling under Wayland. For X11 apps, they will be blurry, a problem that is optional under KDE (more on that below).

Gnome won’t show the battery life time remaining on the task bar. Yikes. An extension might work in some cases. Not only that, but the Gnome battery icon frequently failed to indicate AC charging when AC was connected, a problem that didn’t exist on KDE.

Both Gnome and KDE support “night light” (warmer color temperatures at night), but Gnome’s often didn’t change when it should have, or changed on one display but not the other.

The appindicator extension is pretty much required, as otherwise a number of applications (eg, Nextcloud) don’t have their icon display anywhere. It does, however, generate a significant amount of log spam. There may be a fix for this.

Unlike KDE, which has a nice inobtrusive popup asking what to do, Gnome silently automounts USB sticks when inserted. This is often wrong; for instance, if I’m about to dd a Debian installer to it, I definitely don’t want it mounted. I learned this the hard way. It is particularly annoying because in a GUI, there is no reason to mount a drive before the user tries to access it anyhow. It looks like there is a dconf setting, but then to actually mount a drive you have to open up Files (because OF COURSE Gnome doesn’t have a nice removable-drives icon like KDE does) and it’s a bunch of annoying clicks, and I didn’t want to use the GUI file manager anyway. Same for unmounting; two clicks in KDE thanks to the task bar icon, but in Gnome you have to open up the file manager, unmount the drive, close the file manager again, etc.

The ssh agent on Gnome doesn’t start up for a Wayland session, though this is easily enough worked around.

The reason I completely soured on Gnome is that after using it for awhile, I noticed my laptop fans spinning up. One core would be constantly busy. It was busy with a kworker events task, something to do with sound events. Logging out would resolve it. I believe it to be a Gnome shell issue. I could find no resolution to this, and am unwilling to tolerate the decreased battery life this implies.

The Gnome summary: it looks nice out of the box, but you quickly realize that this is something of a paper-thin illusion when you try to actually use it regularly.

KDE

The KDE experience on Wayland was a little bit opposite of Gnome. While with Gnome, things start out looking great but you realize there are some serious issues (especially battery-eating), with KDE things start out looking a tad rough but you realize you can trivially fix them and wind up with a very solid system.

Compared to Gnome, KDE never had a battery-draining problem. It will show me estimated battery time remaining if I want it to. It will do whatever I want it to when I insert a USB drive. It doesn’t muck with my CPU power settings, and lets me easily define “on AC” vs “on battery” settings for things like suspend when idle.

KDE supports fractional scaling, to any arbitrary setting (even with the gsettings thing above, Gnome still only supports it in 25% increments). Then the question is what to do with X11-only applications. KDE offers two choices. The first is “Scaled by the system”, which is also the only option for Gnome. With that setting, the X11 apps effectively run natively at 100% and then are scaled up within Wayland, giving them a blurry appearance on HiDPI displays. The advantage is that the scaling happens within Wayland, so the size of the app will always be correct even when the Wayland scaling factor changes. The other option is “Apply scaling themselves”, which uses native X11 scaling. This lets most X11 apps display crisp and sharp, but then if the system scaling changes, due to limitations of X11, you’ll have to restart the X apps to get them to be the correct size. I appreciate the choice, and use “Apply scaling by themselves” because only a few of my apps aren’t Wayland-aware.

I did encounter a few bugs in KDE under Wayland:

sddm, the display manager, would be slow to stop and cause a long delay on shutdown or reboot. This seems to be a known issue with sddm and Wayland, and is easily worked around by adding a systemd TimeoutStopSec.

Konsole, the KDE terminal emulator, has weird display artifacts when using fractional scaling under Wayland. I applied some patches and rebuilt Konsole and then all was fine.

The Bismuth tiling extension has some pretty weird behavior under Wayland, but a 1-character patch fixes it.

On Debian, KDE mysteriously installed Pulseaudio instead of Debian’s new default Pipewire, but that was easily fixed as well (and Pulseaudio also works fine).

Conclusions

I’m sticking with KDE. Given that I couldn’t figure out how to stop Gnome from deciding to eat enough battery to make my fan come on, the decision wasn’t hard. But even if it weren’t for that, I’d have gone with KDE. Once a couple of things were patched, the experience is solid, fast, and flawless. Emacs (my main X11-only application) looks great with the self-scaling in KDE. Gimp, which I use occasionally, was terrible with the blurry scaling in Gnome.

Update: Corrected the gsettings command

Try the Last Internet Kermit Server

Online Life, Software 
$ grep kermit /etc/services
kermit          1649/tcp

What is this mysterious protocol? Who uses it and what is its story?

This story is a winding one, beginning in 1981. Kermit is, to the best of my knowledge, the oldest actively-maintained software package with an original developer still participating. It is also a scripting language, an Internet server, a (scriptable!) SSH client, and a file transfer protocol.

And my first use of it was talking to my HP-48GX calculator over a 9600bps serial link. Yes, that calculator had a Kermit server built in.

But let’s back up and talk about serial ports and Modems.

Serial Ports and Modems

In my piece The PC & Internet Revolution in Rural America, I recently talked about getting a modem – what an excitement it was to get one! I realize that many people today have never used a serial line or a modem, so let’s briefly discuss.

Before Ethernet and Wifi took off in a big way, in the 1990s-2000s, two computers would talk to each other over a serial line and a modem. By modern standards, these were slow; 300bps was a common early speed. They also (at least in the beginning) had no kind of error checking. Characters could be dropped or changed. Sometimes even those speeds were faster than the receiving device could handle. Some serial links were 7-bit, and wouldn’t even pass all 7-bit characters; for instance, sending a Ctrl-S could lock up a remote until you sent Ctrl-Q.

And computers back in the 1970s and 1980s weren’t as uniform as they are now. They used different character sets, different line endings, and even had different notions of what a file is. Today’s notion of a file as whatever set of binary bytes an application wants it to be was by no means universal; some systems treated a file as a set of fixed-length records, for instance.

So there were a lot of challenges in reliably moving files between systems. Kermit was introduced to reliably move files between systems using serial lines, automatically working around the varieties of serial lines, detecting errors and retransmitting, managing transmit speeds, and adapting between architectures as appropriate. Quite a task! And perhaps this explains why it was supported on a calculator with a primitive CPU by today’s standards.

Serial communication, by the way, is still commonplace, though now it isn’t prominent in everyone’s home PC setup. It’s used a lot in industrial equipment, avionics, embedded systems, and so forth.

The key point about serial lines is that they aren’t inherently multiplexed or packetized. Whereas an Ethernet network is designed to let many dozens of applications use it at once, a serial line typically runs only one (unless it is something like PPP, which is designed to do multiplexing over the serial line).

So it become useful to be able to both log in to a machine and transfer files with it. That is, incidentally, still useful today.

Kermit and XModem/ZModem

I wondered: why did we end up with two diverging sets of protocols, created at about the same time? The Kermit website has the answer: essentially, BBSs could assume 8-bit clean connections, so XModem and ZModem had much less complexity to worry about. Kermit, on the other hand, was highly flexible. Although ZModem came out a few years before Kermit had its performance optimizations, by about 1993 Kermit was on par or faster than ZModem.

Beyond serial ports

As LANs and the Internet came to be popular, people started to use telnet (and later ssh) to connect to remote systems, rather than serial lines and modems. FTP was an early way to transfer files across the Internet, but it had its challenges. Kermit added telnet support, as well as later support for ssh (as a wrapper around the ssh command you already know). Now you could easily log in to a machine and exchange files with it without missing a beat.

And so it was that the Internet Kermit Service Daemon (IKSD) came into existence. It allows a person to set up a Kermit server, which can authenticate against local accounts or present anonymous access akin to FTP.

And so I established the quux.org Kermit Server, which runs the Unix IKSD (part of the Debian ckermit package).

Trying Out the quux.org Kermit Server

There are more instructions on the quux.org Kermit Server page! You can connect to it using either telnet or the kermit program. I won’t duplicate all of the information here, but here’s what it looks like to connect:

$ kermit
C-Kermit 10.0 Beta.08, 15 Dec 2022, for Linux+SSL (64-bit)
 Copyright (C) 1985, 2022,
  Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York.
  Open Source 3-clause BSD license since 2011.
Type ? or HELP for help.
(/tmp/t/) C-Kermit>iksd /user:anonymous kermit.quux.org
 DNS Lookup...  Trying 135.148.101.37...  Reverse DNS Lookup... (OK)
Connecting to host glockenspiel.complete.org:1649
 Escape character: Ctrl-\ (ASCII 28, FS): enabled
Type the escape character followed by C to get back,
or followed by ? to see other options.
----------------------------------------------------

 >>> Welcome to the Internet Kermit Service at kermit.quux.org <<<

To log in, use 'anonymous' as the username, and any non-empty password

Internet Kermit Service ready at Fri Aug  4 22:32:17 2023
C-Kermit 10.0 Beta.08, 15 Dec 2022
kermit

Enter e-mail address as Password: [redacted]

Anonymous login.

You are now connected to the quux kermit server.

Try commands like HELP, cd gopher, dir, and the like.  Use INTRO
for a nice introduction.

(~/) IKSD>

You can even recursively download the entire Kermit mirror: over 1GB of files!

Conclusions

So, have fun. Enjoy this experience from the 1980s.

And note that Kermit also makes a better ssh client than ssh in a lot of ways; see ideas on my Kermit page.

This page also has a permanent home on my website, where it may be periodically updated.

Backing Up and Archiving to Removable Media: dar vs. git-annex

Software, , , ,

This is the fourth in a series about archiving to removable media (optical discs such as BD-Rs and DVD+Rs or portable hard drives). Here are the first three parts:

  • In part 1, I laid out my goals for the project, and considered a number of tools before determining dar and git-annex were my leading options.
  • In part 2, I took a deep dive into git-annex and simulated using it for this project.
  • In part 3, I did the same with dar.
  • And in this part, I want to put it together to come up with an initial direction to pursue.

I want to state at the outset that this is not a general review of dar or git-annex. This is an analysis of how those tools stack up to a particular use case. Neither tool focuses on this use case, and I note it is particularly far from the more common uses of git-annex. For instance, both tools offer support for cloud storage providers and special support for ssh targets, but neither of those are in-scope for this post.

Comparison Matrix

As part of this project, I made a comparison matrix which includes not just dar and git-annex, but also backuppc, bacula/bareos, and borg. This may give you some good context, and also some reference for other projects in this general space.

Reviewing the Goals

I identified some goals in part 1. They are all valid. As I have thought through the project more, I feel like I should condense them into a simpler ordered list, with the first being the most important. I omit some things here that both dar and git-annex can do (updates/incrementals, for instance; see the expanded goals list in part 1). Here they are:

  1. The tool must not modify the source data in any way.
  2. It must be simple to create or update an archive. Processes that require a lot of manual work, are flaky, or are difficult to do correctly, are unlikely to be done correctly and often. If it’s easy to do right, I’m more likely to do it. Put another way: an archive never created can never be restored.
  3. The chances of a successful restore by someone that is not me, that doesn’t know Linux, and is at least 10 years in the future, should be maximized. This implies a simple toolset, solid support for dealing with media errors or missing media, etc.
  4. Both a partial point-in-time restore and a full restore should be possible. The full restore must, at minimum, provide a consistent directory tree; that is, deletions, additions, and moves over time must be accurately reflected. Preserving modification times is a near-requirement, and preserving hard links, symbolic links, and other POSIX metadata is a significant nice-to-have.
  5. There must be a strategy to provide redundancy; for instance, a way for one set of archive discs to be offsite, another onsite, and the two to be periodically swapped.
  6. Use storage space efficiently.

Let’s take a look at how the two stack up against these goals.

Goal 1: Not modifying source data

With dar, this is accomplished. dar --create does not modify source data (and even has a mode to avoid updating atime) so that’s done.

git-annex normally does modify source data, in that it typically replaces files with symlinks into its hash-indexed storage directory. It can instead use hardlinks. In either case, you will wind up with files that have identical content (but may have originally been separate, non-linked files) linked together with git-annex. This would cause me trouble, as well as run the risk of modifying timestamps. So instead of just storing my data under a git-annex repo as is its most common case, I use the directory special remote with importtree=yes to sort of “import” the data in. This, plus my desire to have the repos sensible and usable on non-POSIX operating systems, accounts for a chunk of the git-annex complexity you see here. You wouldn’t normally see as much complexity with git-annex (though, as you will see, even without the directory special remote, dar still has less complexity).

Winner: dar, though I demonstrated a working approach with git-annex as well.

Goal 2: Simplicity of creating or updating an archive

Let us simply start by recognizing this:

  • Number of commands to create a first dar archive, including all splits: 1
  • Number of commands to create a first git-annex archive, with just the first two splits: 58
  • Number of commands to create a dar incremental: 1
  • Number of commands to update the last git-annex drive: 10
  • Number of commands to do a full restore of all slices and both archives with dar: 2 (1 if dar_manager used)
  • Number of commands to do a full restore of just the first two drive with git-annex: 9 (but my process may not be correct)

Both tools have a lot of power, but I must say, it is easier to wrap my head around what dar is doing than what git-annex is doing. Everything dar does is with files: here are the files to archive, here is an archive file, here is a detached (isolated) catalog. It is very straightforward. It took me far less time to develop my dar page than my git-annex page, despite having existing familiarity with both tools. As I pointed out in part 2, I still don’t fully understand how git-annex syncs metadata. Unsolved mysteries from that post include why the two git-annex drives had no idea what was on the other drives, and why the export operation silenty did nothing. Additionally, for the optical disc case, I had to create a restricted-size filesystem/dataset for git-annex to write into in order to get the desired size limit.

Looking at the optical disc case, dar has a lot of nice infrastructure built in. With –pause and –execute, it can very easily be combined with disc burning operations. –slice will automatically limit the size of a given slice, regardless of how much disk space is free, meaning that the git-annex tricks of creating smaller filesystems/datasets are unnecessary with dar.

To create an initial full backup with dar, you just give it the size of the device, and it will automatically split up the archive, with hooks to integrate for burning or changing drives. About as easy as you could get.

With git-annex, you would run the commands to have it fill up the initial filesystem, then burn the disc (or remove the drive), then run the commands to create another repo on the second filesystem, and so forth.

With hard drives, with git-annex you would do something similar; let it fill up a repo on a drive, and if it exits with a space error, swap in the next. With dar, you would slice as with an optical disk. Dar’s slicing is less convenient in this case, though, as it assumes every drive is the same size — and yours may not be. You could work around that by using a slice size no bigger than the smallest drive, and putting multiple slices on larger drives if need be. If a single drive is large enough to hold your entire data set, though, you need not worry about this with either tool.

Here’s a warning about git-annex: it won’t store anything beneath directories named .git. My use case doesn’t have many of those. If your use case does, you’re going to have to figure out what to do about it. Maybe rename them to something else while the backup runs? In any case, it is simply a fact that git-annex cannot back up git repositories, and this cuts against being able to back up things correctly.

Another point is that git-annex has scalability concerns. If your archive set gets into the hundreds of thousands of files, you may need to split it into multiple distinct git-annex repositories. If this occurs — and it will in my case — it may serve to dull the shine of some of git-annex’s features such as location tracking.

A detour down the update strategies path

Update strategies get a little more complicated with both. First, let’s consider: what exactly should our update strategy be?

For optical discs, I might consider doing a monthly update. I could burn a disc (or more than one, if needed) regardless of how much data is going to go onto it, because I want no more than a month’s data lost in any case. An alternative might be to spool up data until I have a disc’s worth, and then write that, but that could possibly mean months between actually burning a disc. Probably not good.

For removable drives, we’re unlikely to use a new drive each month. So there it makes sense to continue writing to the drive until it’s full. Now we have a choice: do we write and preserve each month’s updates, or do we eliminate intermediate changes and just keep the most recent data?

With both tools, the monthly burn of an optical disc turns out to be very similar to the initial full backup to optical disc. The considerations for spanning multiple discs are the same. With both tools, we would presumably want to keep some metadata on the host so that we don’t have to refer to a previous disc to know what was burned. In the dar case, that would be an isolated catalog. For git-annex, it would be a metadata-only repo. I illustrated both of these in parts 2 and 3.

Now, for hard drives. Assuming we want to continue preserving each month’s updates, with dar, we could just write an incremental to the drive each month. Assuming that the size of the incremental is likely far smaller than the size of the drive, you could easily enough do this. More fancily, you could look at the free space on the drive and tell dar to use that as the size of the first slice. For git-annex, you simply avoid calling drop/dropunused. This will cause the old versions of files to accumulate in .git/annex. You can get at them with git annex commands. This may imply some degree of elevated risk, as you are modifying metadata in the repo each month, which with dar you could chmod a-w or even chattr +i the archive files once written. Hopefully this elevated risk is low.

If you don’t want to preserve each month’s updates, with dar, you could just write an incremental each month that is based on the previous drive’s last backup, overwriting the previous. That implies some risk of drive failure during the time the overwrite is happening. Alternatively, you could write an incremental and then use dar to merge it into the previous incremental, creating a new one. This implies some degree of extra space needed (maybe on a different filesystem) while doing this. With git-annex, you would use drop/dropunused as I demonstrated in part 2.

The winner for goal 2 is dar. The gap is biggest with optical discs and more narrow with hard drives, thanks to git-annex’s different options for updates. Still, I would be more confident I got it right with dar.

Goal 3: Greatest chance of successful restore in the distant future

If you use git-annex like I suggested in part 2, you will have a set of discs or drives that contain a folder structure with plain files in them. These files can be opened without any additional tools at all. For sheer ability to get at raw data, git-annex has the edge.

When you talk about getting a consistent full restore — without multiple copies of renamed files or deleted files coming back — then you are going to need to use git-annex to do that.

Both git-annex and dar provide binaries. Dar provides a win64 version on its Sourceforge page. On the author’s releases site, you can find the win64 version in addition to a statically-linked x86_64 version for Linux. The git-annex install page mostly directs you to package managers for your distribution, but the downloads page also lists builds for Linux, Windows, and Mac OS X. The Linux version is dynamic, but ships most of its .so files alongside. The Windows version requires cygwin.dll, and all versions require you to also install git itself. Both tools are in package managers for Mac OS X, Debian, FreeBSD, and so forth. Let’s just say that you are likely to be able to run either one on a future Windows or Linux system.

There are also GUI frontends for dar, such as DARGUI and gdar. This can increase the chances of a future person being able to use the software easily. git-annex has the assistant, which is based on a different use case and probably not directly helpful here.

When it comes to doing the actual restore process using software, dar provides the easier process here.

For dealing with media errors and the like, dar can integrate with par2. While technically you could use par2 against the files git-annex writes, that’s more cumbersome to manage to the point that it is likely not to be done. Both tools can deal reasonably with missing media entirely.

I’m going to give the edge on this one to git-annex; while dar does provide the easier restore and superior tools for recovering from media errors, the ability to access raw data as plain files without any tools at all is quite compelling. I believe it is the most critical advantage git-annex has, and it’s a big one.

Goal 4: Support high-fidelity partial and full restores

Both tools make it possible to do a full restore reflecting deletions, additions, and so forth. Dar, as noted, is easier for this, but it is possible with git-annex. So, both can achieve a consistent restore.

Part of this goal deals with fidelity of the restore: preserving timestamps, hard and symbolic links, ownership, permissions, etc. Of these, timestamps are the most important for me.

git-annex can’t do any of that. dar does all of it.

Some of this can be worked around using mtree as I documented in part 2. However, that implies a need to also provide mtree on the discs for future users, and I’m not sure mtree really exists for Windows. It also cuts against the argument that git-annex discs can be used without any tools. It is true, they can, but all you will get is filename and content; no accurate date. Timestamps are often highly relevant for everything from photos to finding an elusive document or record.

Winner: dar.

Goal 5: Supporting backup strategies with redundancy

My main goal here is to have two separate backup sets: one that is offsite, and one that is onsite. Depending on the strategy and media, they might just always stay that way, or periodically rotate. For instance, with optical discs, you might just burn two copies of every disc and store one at each place. For hard drives, since you will be updating the content of them, you might swap them periodically.

This is possible with both tools. With both tools, if using the optical disc scheme I laid out, you can just burn two identical copies of each disc.

With the hard drive case, with dar, you can keep two directories of isolated catalogs, one for each drive set. A little identifier file on each drive will let you know which set to use.

git-annex can track locations itself. As I demonstrated in part 2, you can make each drive its own repo, add all drives from a given drive set to a git-annex group. When initializing a drive, you tell git-annex what group it’s a prt of. From then on, git-annex knows what content is in each group and will add whatever a given drive’s group needs to that drive.

It’s possible to do this with both, but the winner here is git-annex.

Goal 6: Efficient use of storage

Here are situations in which one or the other will be more efficient:

  • Lots of small files: dar, due to reduced filesystem overhead
  • Compressible data: dar (git-annex doesn’t support compression)
  • Renamed files: git-annex (it will detect the sha256 match and avoid storing a duplicate copy)
  • Identical files: git-annex, unless they are hardlinked already (again, detects the sha256 match)
  • Small modifications to files (eg, ID3 tags on MP3s, EXIF data on photos, etc): dar (it supports rsync-style binary deltas)

The winner depends on your particular situation.

Other notes

While not part of the goals above, dar is capable of using tapes directly. While not as common, they are often used in communities of people that archive lots of data.

Conclusions

Overall, dar is the winner for me. It is simpler in most areas, easier to get correct, and scales very well.

git-annex does, however, have some quite compelling points. Being able to access files as plain files is huge, and its location tracking is nicer than dar’s, even when using dar_manager.

Both tools are excellent and I recommend them both – and for more than the particular scenario shown here. Both have fantastic and responsive authors.