From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>
Subject: Re: bug#33676: GuixSD on eoma68-a20?
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2018 16:08:11 +0100
Message-ID: <20181216150811.GA8664@jurong>
References: <68f9fc17-94f5-dcc2-f54d-61d6e2bf384d@riseup.net>
	<20181208181214.2308472a@scratchpost.org>
	<20181209215126.GA10968@jurong>
	<20181210113014.0e4e76eb@scratchpost.org>
	<20181210211224.GA7317@jurong>
	<20181214215026.66ac1df2@scratchpost.org>
	<20181215102906.GA4621@jurong> <87lg4qa9vu.fsf@netris.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45301)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1gYY1j-0002ef-2Y
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Dec 2018 10:08:19 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1gYY1h-0003ul-BR
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Dec 2018 10:08:18 -0500
Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([2a0c:e300::1]:47746)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1gYY1h-0003cD-3D
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Dec 2018 10:08:17 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87lg4qa9vu.fsf@netris.org>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, 33676@debbugs.gnu.org

On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 02:04:58PM -0500, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> >> See also https://blog.merovius.de/2013/10/20/ext4-mysterious-no-space-left-on.html
> > It was, and I disabled it. Hopefully this does not break anything...
> Why did you disable it?

Because we get exactly these spurious ENOSPC mentioned in the blog post
on bayfront when the disk is only one third full.

Now I am happy to try out any other combination of flags that solves the
problem.

So should I add dir_index again (is this possible live?), and then
add large_dir?

Andreas