Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
31 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

Dale-46
Howdy,

With the newer Firefox versions, I've noticed something weird about
downloading files.  Usually these are videos using a download helper for
videos and sometimes it is a normal file download, depends on the site. 
Either way, I get something odd at times.  So far, I've yet to see any
rhyme or reason to it.  I can't figure out what triggers it.  This is
what it does.  I start a download, either using a video helper add on or
downloading as a file.  I give it a name and location and it shows in
the download window that it is downloading.  However, if I go to the
directory where it should be, sometimes nothing shows up.  It will
complete the download and then show that it failed after finishing the
download.  However, if I notice that it is not in the directory where it
should be and I go back to the download window, hit pause and then
resume, it starts over from the beginning and then shows up in the
directory where it should be.  Most of the time, it shows up that it is
downloading and it is where it should be without be doing anything
further but sometimes, it doesn't. 

One other thing that it does on rare occasions.  It will show it is
downloading for a good while, sometimes more than half way, then
disappear in the directory as if it is deleted but still show that it is
downloading in the download window.  I've only seen it do that a few
times but it is annoying to look and make sure it is downloading a file
that takes a hour or more only to have it disappear part way through.

This started with the new multi-process versions or whatever it is
called of Firefox.  It acts like a permissions problem or something to
me.  It either thinks it doesn't have write permissions at the start or
thinks it loses them part way through or something.  If it only did this
when using the add on, I'd think it is that but it also does it when I'm
downloading as a file with no add on being used.  Either way, I'm not
sure what to look into really.  I'm not even sure what to google for to
see if anyone else is noticing this.  What does one call this problem??? 

Some info to follow.



[ebuild   R   ~] www-client/firefox-64.0::gentoo  USE="dbus
gmp-autoupdate screenshot startup-notification system-harfbuzz
system-jpeg system-libevent system-libvpx system-sqlite -bindist -clang
-custom-cflags -custom-optimization -debug -eme-free -geckodriver
-hardened -hwaccel -jack -lto (-neon) -pulseaudio (-selinux) -system-icu
-test -wifi" L10N="-ach -af -an -ar -as -ast -az -bg -bn-BD -bn-IN -br
-bs -ca -cak -cs -cy -da -de -dsb -el -en-GB -en-ZA -eo -es-AR -es-CL
-es-ES -es-MX -et -eu -fa -ff -fi -fr -fy -ga -gd -gl -gn -gu -he -hi
-hr -hsb -hu -hy -id -is -it -ja -ka -kab -kk -km -kn -ko -lij -lt -lv
-mai -mk -ml -mr -ms -nb -nl -nn -or -pa -pl -pt-BR -pt-PT -rm -ro -ru
-si -sk -sl -son -sq -sr -sv -ta -te -th -tr -uk -uz -vi -xh -zh-CN -zh-TW"

Filesystem                                Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/mapper/Home2-Home2    8.1T  3.9T  4.2T  49% /home


As one can see, not a space problem, thanks to all the help on this list
and LVM for that.  ;-) 

Anyone else seeing this?  Anyone have any idea what could cause this? 
Bug?  Some nifty new feature that breaks things??  Some USE flag that
needs to be changed?  Any other ideas?

Thanks.

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

Nikos Chantziaras-2
On 01/01/2019 06:45, Dale wrote:
> [...]
> [ebuild   R   ~] www-client/firefox-64.0::gentoo
For what it's worth, I never had that problem with the official Mozilla
build of Firefox (www-client/firefox-bin). Might be worth trying that
instead. Don't forget to "quickpkg firefox" and back up your ~/.mozilla
directory first.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

Davyd McColl
And fwiw, I haven't had this problem with building from source either. And
just recently switched to clang too, though Firefox was plenty speedy
before so I'm not really noticing the gains that were advertised.

-d


On January 1, 2019 9:32:38 AM Nikos Chantziaras <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 01/01/2019 06:45, Dale wrote:
>> [...]
>> [ebuild   R   ~] www-client/firefox-64.0::gentoo
> For what it's worth, I never had that problem with the official Mozilla
> build of Firefox (www-client/firefox-bin). Might be worth trying that
> instead. Don't forget to "quickpkg firefox" and back up your ~/.mozilla
> directory first.
>
>



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

Dale-46
Davyd McColl wrote:
> And fwiw, I haven't had this problem with building from source either.
> And just recently switched to clang too, though Firefox was plenty
> speedy before so I'm not really noticing the gains that were advertised.
>
> -d
>
>


I changed some USE flags.  I figure that is one thing that would make
Firefox different from say the average user who just downloads Firefox
from the website.  I'm not sure my googling skills are correct but I
don't see anyone else having this issue, if I'm looking for the right
things.  This is the current flag settings.


[ebuild   R   ~] www-client/firefox-64.0::gentoo  USE="dbus
gmp-autoupdate screenshot startup-notification system-harfbuzz
system-jpeg system-sqlite -bindist -clang -custom-cflags
-custom-optimization -debug -eme-free -geckodriver -hardened -hwaccel
-jack -lto (-neon) -pulseaudio (-selinux) -system-icu -system-libevent
-system-libvpx -test -wifi" L10N="-ach -af -an -ar -as -ast -az -bg
-bn-BD -bn-IN -br -bs -ca -cak -cs -cy -da -de -dsb -el -en-GB -en-ZA
-eo -es-AR -es-CL -es-ES -es-MX -et -eu -fa -ff -fi -fr -fy -ga -gd -gl
-gn -gu -he -hi -hr -hsb -hu -hy -id -is -it -ja -ka -kab -kk -km -kn
-ko -lij -lt -lv -mai -mk -ml -mr -ms -nb -nl -nn -or -pa -pl -pt-BR
-pt-PT -rm -ro -ru -si -sk -sl -son -sq -sr -sv -ta -te -th -tr -uk -uz
-vi -xh -zh-CN -zh-TW"


I disabled system-icu, system-libevent, system-libvpx and may change
some others before it is over.  I used the info from euse -i to try to
pick ones that might affect this.  Thing is, it just did it again a
minute ago with two files.  That is another thing that is odd, when it
does it, it does it a good bit until it stops.  It may affect several
downloads before I can get it working again.  Then it works again for a
good while.  I might add, pausing and resuming made it work, this time. 
Thing is, the next download may or may not work right.  I won't know
until I start another set. 

This is a interesting issue.  I'm not sure what to do to narrow it down
really.  Trying these USE flags is all I can come up with.  It seems
like others are stumped as well.  :/

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

Nikos Chantziaras-2
On 02/01/2019 22:45, Dale wrote:
> I changed some USE flags.  I figure that is one thing that would make
> Firefox different from say the average user who just downloads Firefox
> from the website.
Is there a reason you don't want to try the firefox-bin package I
meantion in my previous post?


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

Dale-46
Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 02/01/2019 22:45, Dale wrote:
>> I changed some USE flags.  I figure that is one thing that would make
>> Firefox different from say the average user who just downloads Firefox
>> from the website.
> Is there a reason you don't want to try the firefox-bin package I
> meantion in my previous post?
>
>
>


That will be if I can't get a source build to work.  Thing is, I won't
be surprised if it does the same thing.  I suspect this is a bug related
to some permission issue or something related to it within Firefox
itself.  I've wondered if I should allow Firefox to store the files in
its own download directory and then move them after it is completed.  I
may try that as well. 

Long term tho, I do prefer building from source.  It's sort of why I
like Gentoo.  ;-)  It's on the list of options tho.  It would eliminate
any local build configs too.  It is a good idea to at least test it.  I
may try that next.  If it still does it, it isn't me for sure.  It's
Firefox itself. 

Dale

:-)  :-)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

Davyd McColl


On January 3, 2019 12:29:34 AM Dale <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>> On 02/01/2019 22:45, Dale wrote:
>>> I changed some USE flags.  I figure that is one thing that would make
>>> Firefox different from say the average user who just downloads Firefox
>>> from the website.
>> Is there a reason you don't want to try the firefox-bin package I
>> meantion in my previous post?
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> That will be if I can't get a source build to work.  Thing is, I won't
> be surprised if it does the same thing.  I suspect this is a bug related
> to some permission issue or something related to it within Firefox
> itself.  I've wondered if I should allow Firefox to store the files in
> its own download directory and then move them after it is completed.  I
> may try that as well. 
>
> Long term tho, I do prefer building from source.  It's sort of why I
> like Gentoo.  ;-)  It's on the list of options tho.  It would eliminate
> any local build configs too.  It is a good idea to at least test it.  I
> may try that next.  If it still does it, it isn't me for sure.  It's
> Firefox itself. 
I agree it's a good idea to try the bin. Also perhaps to try to to back to
as vanilla USE flags as possible. IIRC, my only deviances from the default
USE flags are to disable pulseaudio and enable clang (though that was only
recently after the announcement about how it was supposed to improve
performance so much, and was to become the mozilla-preferred method).

Fortunately, at least Firefox builds relatively quickly, unlike chromium
(~40 min vs ~2.5h on my machine).
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-)
>



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

Dale-46
Davyd McColl wrote:

>
>
> On January 3, 2019 12:29:34 AM Dale <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>> On 02/01/2019 22:45, Dale wrote:
>>>> I changed some USE flags.  I figure that is one thing that would make
>>>> Firefox different from say the average user who just downloads Firefox
>>>> from the website.
>>> Is there a reason you don't want to try the firefox-bin package I
>>> meantion in my previous post?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> That will be if I can't get a source build to work.  Thing is, I won't
>> be surprised if it does the same thing.  I suspect this is a bug related
>> to some permission issue or something related to it within Firefox
>> itself.  I've wondered if I should allow Firefox to store the files in
>> its own download directory and then move them after it is completed.  I
>> may try that as well. 
>>
>> Long term tho, I do prefer building from source.  It's sort of why I
>> like Gentoo.  ;-)  It's on the list of options tho.  It would eliminate
>> any local build configs too.  It is a good idea to at least test it.  I
>> may try that next.  If it still does it, it isn't me for sure.  It's
>> Firefox itself. 
> I agree it's a good idea to try the bin. Also perhaps to try to to
> back to as vanilla USE flags as possible. IIRC, my only deviances from
> the default USE flags are to disable pulseaudio and enable clang
> (though that was only recently after the announcement about how it was
> supposed to improve performance so much, and was to become the
> mozilla-preferred method).
>
> Fortunately, at least Firefox builds relatively quickly, unlike
> chromium (~40 min vs ~2.5h on my machine).

Yea, it is a good idea.  Thing is, my network is busy right now.  I'm on
a video download binge again.  -_O

Question.  Just what is clang?  I did a eix for it but its description
is minimal and not to informative, if one doesn't already know what it
is.  If you know, what does it add to Firefox and briefly how does it do
it?  The reason I ask, could that help with my current issue?  I'm all
for Firefox being faster, even on this pretty fast rig, but I'd also
give it a try as well if it would fix this issue and as a bonus make
Firefox work better/faster/whatever as well. 

Thanks.

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

Davyd McColl


On January 3, 2019 8:59:09 AM Dale <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Davyd McColl wrote:
>>
>>
>> On January 3, 2019 12:29:34 AM Dale <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>>> On 02/01/2019 22:45, Dale wrote:
>>>>> I changed some USE flags.  I figure that is one thing that would make
>>>>> Firefox different from say the average user who just downloads Firefox
>>>>> from the website.
>>>> Is there a reason you don't want to try the firefox-bin package I
>>>> meantion in my previous post?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> That will be if I can't get a source build to work.  Thing is, I won't
>>> be surprised if it does the same thing.  I suspect this is a bug related
>>> to some permission issue or something related to it within Firefox
>>> itself.  I've wondered if I should allow Firefox to store the files in
>>> its own download directory and then move them after it is completed.  I
>>> may try that as well. 
>>>
>>> Long term tho, I do prefer building from source.  It's sort of why I
>>> like Gentoo.  ;-)  It's on the list of options tho.  It would eliminate
>>> any local build configs too.  It is a good idea to at least test it.  I
>>> may try that next.  If it still does it, it isn't me for sure.  It's
>>> Firefox itself. 
>> I agree it's a good idea to try the bin. Also perhaps to try to to
>> back to as vanilla USE flags as possible. IIRC, my only deviances from
>> the default USE flags are to disable pulseaudio and enable clang
>> (though that was only recently after the announcement about how it was
>> supposed to improve performance so much, and was to become the
>> mozilla-preferred method).
>>
>> Fortunately, at least Firefox builds relatively quickly, unlike
>> chromium (~40 min vs ~2.5h on my machine).
>
> Yea, it is a good idea.  Thing is, my network is busy right now.  I'm on
> a video download binge again.  -_O
>
> Question.  Just what is clang?  I did a eix for it but its description
> is minimal and not to informative, if one doesn't already know what it
> is.  If you know, what does it add to Firefox and briefly how does it do
> it?  The reason I ask, could that help with my current issue?  I'm all
> for Firefox being faster, even on this pretty fast rig, but I'd also
> give it a try as well if it would fix this issue and as a bonus make
> Firefox work better/faster/whatever as well. 
It's a front-end for llvm (a kind of generic compiler)  - bascially a
compiler replacement for gcc which has shown good compile times and the
Mozilla team is claiming fairly reasonable performance gains when compiled
with clang. It's been around a while, so it's not like you're taking a huge
chance or anything. It's just not quite as venerable as gcc.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-) 
>



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

Dale-46
Davyd McColl wrote:

>
>
> On January 3, 2019 8:59:09 AM Dale <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Davyd McColl wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On January 3, 2019 12:29:34 AM Dale <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>>>> On 02/01/2019 22:45, Dale wrote:
>>>>>> I changed some USE flags.  I figure that is one thing that would
>>>>>> make
>>>>>> Firefox different from say the average user who just downloads
>>>>>> Firefox
>>>>>> from the website.
>>>>> Is there a reason you don't want to try the firefox-bin package I
>>>>> meantion in my previous post?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That will be if I can't get a source build to work.  Thing is, I won't
>>>> be surprised if it does the same thing.  I suspect this is a bug
>>>> related
>>>> to some permission issue or something related to it within Firefox
>>>> itself.  I've wondered if I should allow Firefox to store the files in
>>>> its own download directory and then move them after it is
>>>> completed.  I
>>>> may try that as well. 
>>>>
>>>> Long term tho, I do prefer building from source.  It's sort of why I
>>>> like Gentoo.  ;-)  It's on the list of options tho.  It would
>>>> eliminate
>>>> any local build configs too.  It is a good idea to at least test
>>>> it.  I
>>>> may try that next.  If it still does it, it isn't me for sure.  It's
>>>> Firefox itself. 
>>> I agree it's a good idea to try the bin. Also perhaps to try to to
>>> back to as vanilla USE flags as possible. IIRC, my only deviances from
>>> the default USE flags are to disable pulseaudio and enable clang
>>> (though that was only recently after the announcement about how it was
>>> supposed to improve performance so much, and was to become the
>>> mozilla-preferred method).
>>>
>>> Fortunately, at least Firefox builds relatively quickly, unlike
>>> chromium (~40 min vs ~2.5h on my machine).
>>
>> Yea, it is a good idea.  Thing is, my network is busy right now.  I'm on
>> a video download binge again.  -_O
>>
>> Question.  Just what is clang?  I did a eix for it but its description
>> is minimal and not to informative, if one doesn't already know what it
>> is.  If you know, what does it add to Firefox and briefly how does it do
>> it?  The reason I ask, could that help with my current issue?  I'm all
>> for Firefox being faster, even on this pretty fast rig, but I'd also
>> give it a try as well if it would fix this issue and as a bonus make
>> Firefox work better/faster/whatever as well. 
> It's a front-end for llvm (a kind of generic compiler)  - bascially a
> compiler replacement for gcc which has shown good compile times and
> the Mozilla team is claiming fairly reasonable performance gains when
> compiled with clang. It's been around a while, so it's not like you're
> taking a huge chance or anything. It's just not quite as venerable as
> gcc.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Dale
>>
>> :-)  :-) 


When I read the info from eix, I was thinking it might be something like
that.  Doubt it would fix my current issue so I'll save that for later,
when I get this issue sorted out. 

Thanks for the info. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

gevisz
In reply to this post by Dale-46
вт, 1 янв. 2019 г. в 06:45, Dale <[hidden email]>:

>
> With the newer Firefox versions, I've noticed something weird about
> downloading files.  Usually these are videos using a download helper for
> videos and sometimes it is a normal file download, depends on the site.
> Either way, I get something odd at times.  So far, I've yet to see any
> rhyme or reason to it.  I can't figure out what triggers it.  This is
> what it does.  I start a download, either using a video helper add on or
> downloading as a file.  I give it a name and location and it shows in
> the download window that it is downloading.  However, if I go to the
> directory where it should be, sometimes nothing shows up.  It will
> complete the download and then show that it failed after finishing the
> download.  However, if I notice that it is not in the directory where it
> should be and I go back to the download window, hit pause and then
> resume, it starts over from the beginning and then shows up in the
> directory where it should be.  Most of the time, it shows up that it is
> downloading and it is where it should be without be doing anything
> further but sometimes, it doesn't.
>
> One other thing that it does on rare occasions.  It will show it is
> downloading for a good while, sometimes more than half way, then
> disappear in the directory as if it is deleted but still show that it is
> downloading in the download window.  I've only seen it do that a few
> times but it is annoying to look and make sure it is downloading a file
> that takes a hour or more only to have it disappear part way through.
>
> This started with the new multi-process versions or whatever it is
> called of Firefox.  It acts like a permissions problem or something to
> me.  It either thinks it doesn't have write permissions at the start or
> thinks it loses them part way through or something.  If it only did this
> when using the add on, I'd think it is that but it also does it when I'm
> downloading as a file with no add on being used.  Either way, I'm not
> sure what to look into really.  I'm not even sure what to google for to
> see if anyone else is noticing this.  What does one call this problem???
>

I experience similar problems with downloading files in Firefox for quite
a long time. I cannot say for how long time exactly, but estimating it
from memory: for about a few years. Yes, t is quite annoying but
currently I have already got the habit to open download manager
every time I download a file, stop downloading it and then restart again.
(I even try to do the same automatically while using other web browsers
 like chromium or google-chrome. :)

However, I believe that it has nothing to do with "the newer Firefox versions"
as I still use Firefox version 52.9.0 (compiled without clang) and all these
troubles with downloading files started even on much more earlier versions.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

Dale-46
gevisz wrote:

> вт, 1 янв. 2019 г. в 06:45, Dale <[hidden email]>:
>> With the newer Firefox versions, I've noticed something weird about
>> downloading files.  Usually these are videos using a download helper for
>> videos and sometimes it is a normal file download, depends on the site.
>> Either way, I get something odd at times.  So far, I've yet to see any
>> rhyme or reason to it.  I can't figure out what triggers it.  This is
>> what it does.  I start a download, either using a video helper add on or
>> downloading as a file.  I give it a name and location and it shows in
>> the download window that it is downloading.  However, if I go to the
>> directory where it should be, sometimes nothing shows up.  It will
>> complete the download and then show that it failed after finishing the
>> download.  However, if I notice that it is not in the directory where it
>> should be and I go back to the download window, hit pause and then
>> resume, it starts over from the beginning and then shows up in the
>> directory where it should be.  Most of the time, it shows up that it is
>> downloading and it is where it should be without be doing anything
>> further but sometimes, it doesn't.
>>
>> One other thing that it does on rare occasions.  It will show it is
>> downloading for a good while, sometimes more than half way, then
>> disappear in the directory as if it is deleted but still show that it is
>> downloading in the download window.  I've only seen it do that a few
>> times but it is annoying to look and make sure it is downloading a file
>> that takes a hour or more only to have it disappear part way through.
>>
>> This started with the new multi-process versions or whatever it is
>> called of Firefox.  It acts like a permissions problem or something to
>> me.  It either thinks it doesn't have write permissions at the start or
>> thinks it loses them part way through or something.  If it only did this
>> when using the add on, I'd think it is that but it also does it when I'm
>> downloading as a file with no add on being used.  Either way, I'm not
>> sure what to look into really.  I'm not even sure what to google for to
>> see if anyone else is noticing this.  What does one call this problem???
>>
> I experience similar problems with downloading files in Firefox for quite
> a long time. I cannot say for how long time exactly, but estimating it
> from memory: for about a few years. Yes, t is quite annoying but
> currently I have already got the habit to open download manager
> every time I download a file, stop downloading it and then restart again.
> (I even try to do the same automatically while using other web browsers
>  like chromium or google-chrome. :)
>
> However, I believe that it has nothing to do with "the newer Firefox versions"
> as I still use Firefox version 52.9.0 (compiled without clang) and all these
> troubles with downloading files started even on much more earlier versions.
>
>


Interesting.  I don't recall it ever doing this with the older versions
but maybe whatever it is is just now hitting me for some reason.  That's
the thing about random problems, they are random.  Still, at least I
know it is not just me. 

Since you mention chromium etc, that makes me wonder if it is the
browser at all.  Could it be something else?  A permissions issue
maybe?  Some sort of file system problem?  Could it be a common package
that these browsers depend on?  Which leads to this question.  Do you
use LVM or ext4 or both?  I use LVM and ext4 here.  Odds are, we both
have the same dependencies installed so not sure how to figure out if it
is one of those. 

At least I'm not alone in this, although I hate that you are having this
issue too.  It is annoying. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

gevisz
вс, 6 янв. 2019 г. в 02:54, Dale <[hidden email]>:

>
> gevisz wrote:
> > вт, 1 янв. 2019 г. в 06:45, Dale <[hidden email]>:
> >> With the newer Firefox versions, I've noticed something weird about
> >> downloading files.  Usually these are videos using a download helper for
> >> videos and sometimes it is a normal file download, depends on the site.
> >> Either way, I get something odd at times.  So far, I've yet to see any
> >> rhyme or reason to it.  I can't figure out what triggers it.  This is
> >> what it does.  I start a download, either using a video helper add on or
> >> downloading as a file.  I give it a name and location and it shows in
> >> the download window that it is downloading.  However, if I go to the
> >> directory where it should be, sometimes nothing shows up.  It will
> >> complete the download and then show that it failed after finishing the
> >> download.  However, if I notice that it is not in the directory where it
> >> should be and I go back to the download window, hit pause and then
> >> resume, it starts over from the beginning and then shows up in the
> >> directory where it should be.  Most of the time, it shows up that it is
> >> downloading and it is where it should be without be doing anything
> >> further but sometimes, it doesn't.
> >>
> >> One other thing that it does on rare occasions.  It will show it is
> >> downloading for a good while, sometimes more than half way, then
> >> disappear in the directory as if it is deleted but still show that it is
> >> downloading in the download window.  I've only seen it do that a few
> >> times but it is annoying to look and make sure it is downloading a file
> >> that takes a hour or more only to have it disappear part way through.
> >>
> >> This started with the new multi-process versions or whatever it is
> >> called of Firefox.  It acts like a permissions problem or something to
> >> me.  It either thinks it doesn't have write permissions at the start or
> >> thinks it loses them part way through or something.  If it only did this
> >> when using the add on, I'd think it is that but it also does it when I'm
> >> downloading as a file with no add on being used.  Either way, I'm not
> >> sure what to look into really.  I'm not even sure what to google for to
> >> see if anyone else is noticing this.  What does one call this problem???
> >>
> > I experience similar problems with downloading files in Firefox for quite
> > a long time. I cannot say for how long time exactly, but estimating it
> > from memory: for about a few years. Yes, t is quite annoying but
> > currently I have already got the habit to open download manager
> > every time I download a file, stop downloading it and then restart again.
> > (I even try to do the same automatically while using other web browsers
> >  like chromium or google-chrome. :)
> >
> > However, I believe that it has nothing to do with "the newer Firefox versions"
> > as I still use Firefox version 52.9.0 (compiled without clang) and all these
> > troubles with downloading files started even on much more earlier versions.
> >
>
> Interesting.  I don't recall it ever doing this with the older versions
> but maybe whatever it is is just now hitting me for some reason.  That's
> the thing about random problems, they are random.  Still, at least I
> know it is not just me.
>
> Since you mention chromium etc, that makes me wonder if it is the
> browser at all.  Could it be something else?  A permissions issue
> maybe?  Some sort of file system problem?  Could it be a common package
> that these browsers depend on?  Which leads to this question.  Do you
> use LVM or ext4 or both?  I use LVM and ext4 here.  Odds are, we both
> have the same dependencies installed so not sure how to figure out if it
> is one of those.

I should clarify: I experience the said download problem only in Firefox,
never with Chromium or Google-chrome. I have mentioned Chromium
and Google-chrome only to indicate that my habit of opening download
manager became so unconscious that I try to open download manager
even in Chromium and Google-chrome, when it is not needed.

Luckily, the hot keys for opening download manager in Firefox and
Chromium/Google-chrome do not coincide, so I just end up opening
something else and then realize that download manager is not needed.

I never used LVM as I believe that it increases the chance of loosing
all the information on hard disks.

And yes, I do use ext4 as it is the default file system for Linux.

P.S. Most often, I download html pages and have noticed that the
said download problem does not arise when I download html pages
in the so called "read" view, that is after pressing that little book icon
in the Firefox URL address line, whereas downloading the same pages
from a usual default view, with a lot of additional files, almost sure
leads to the said download problem.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

Peter Humphrey-3
On Sunday, 6 January 2019 11:05:10 GMT gevisz wrote:

> I never used LVM as I believe that it increases the chance of [losing]
> all the information on hard disks.

Interesting. Would you like to explain why?

--
Regards,
Peter.




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

gevisz
вс, 6 янв. 2019 г. в 15:57, Peter Humphrey <[hidden email]>:
>
> On Sunday, 6 January 2019 11:05:10 GMT gevisz wrote:
>
> > I never used LVM as I believe that it increases the chance of [losing]
> > all the information on hard disks.
>
> Interesting. Would you like to explain why?

I had once a 40GB HDD failure and I have managed to restore
all the data on it by repeatedly putting it in a fridge what enabled
me to dd its partions for about 10 minutes or so. But in that case
the partitions were relatively small and the disk mounted quick
and easy. Now imagine that have failed a 4TB HDD disk that is
part of much bigger LVM volume. Moreover, suppose that it is
impossible to restore that part of the failed HDD disk that indexes
all that LVM volume...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

Mick-10
On Sunday, 6 January 2019 17:07:35 GMT gevisz wrote:

> вс, 6 янв. 2019 г. в 15:57, Peter Humphrey <[hidden email]>:
> > On Sunday, 6 January 2019 11:05:10 GMT gevisz wrote:
> > > I never used LVM as I believe that it increases the chance of [losing]
> > > all the information on hard disks.
> >
> > Interesting. Would you like to explain why?
>
> I had once a 40GB HDD failure and I have managed to restore
> all the data on it by repeatedly putting it in a fridge what enabled
> me to dd its partions for about 10 minutes or so. But in that case
> the partitions were relatively small and the disk mounted quick
> and easy. Now imagine that have failed a 4TB HDD disk that is
> part of much bigger LVM volume. Moreover, suppose that it is
> impossible to restore that part of the failed HDD disk that indexes
> all that LVM volume...
There's also the probability of corruption of the LVM table on the disk.  
Arguably a small probability, but nevertheless one additional reference table
for things to go wrong, should Murphy and his law have anything to do with it.  
I also prefer to keep disks with critical data as simple as possible, plan
ahead of applying partitioning schemes for particular use case requirements
and consequently I do not use LVM.  On the other hand, there are use cases
where LVM can be invaluable - ill defined or ever changing disk space
requirements where over-provisioning of spare space can be expensive.  So as
with most things in life it is a balancing act.  ;-)

--
Regards,
Mick

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

Dale-46
In reply to this post by gevisz
gevisz wrote:

> вс, 6 янв. 2019 г. в 15:57, Peter Humphrey <[hidden email]>:
>> On Sunday, 6 January 2019 11:05:10 GMT gevisz wrote:
>>
>>> I never used LVM as I believe that it increases the chance of [losing]
>>> all the information on hard disks.
>> Interesting. Would you like to explain why?
> I had once a 40GB HDD failure and I have managed to restore
> all the data on it by repeatedly putting it in a fridge what enabled
> me to dd its partions for about 10 minutes or so. But in that case
> the partitions were relatively small and the disk mounted quick
> and easy. Now imagine that have failed a 4TB HDD disk that is
> part of much bigger LVM volume. Moreover, suppose that it is
> impossible to restore that part of the failed HDD disk that indexes
> all that LVM volume...
>
>

The thing to remember tho, the drive failed.  That is why you had the
problem.  That isn't the fault of LVM.  That is a defective drive.  From
what I've read, you can have a drive fail, remove that drive and lose
the data from it but keep what is on other drives.  If you have all your
files on a single drive with no LVM and that drives fails suddenly, what
is different?  The important part, monitoring your drives and at the
first sign of problems, replace the drive.  That is true whether you use
LVM or not.  Right? 

I might add, long before I started using LVM, I've had drives to fail
and either had to backup real quick or lose data.  While LVM can cause a
problem, I suspect it is rare if managed properly.  For me, and many
others, it adds many benefits to managing data.  Just recently, my home
partition was starting to fill up.  It was made up of two 3TB drives.  I
replaced one of the 3TB drives with a 6TB drive.  Because I use LVM, it
was painless and easy.  If I hadn't been using LVM, like in the past, it
would have been much harder to do.  I might add, I would have had to
replace with larger drives, which also cost a good bit more. 

Even from my simple setup, LVM adds more benefits to managing data and
drives than it does risk.  The biggest thing, placing blame where it
lies.  Blaming LVM for a drive dying is placing the blame on something
that wasn't the root of the problem.  The dying drive was the problem,
using LVM or not. 

Back to Firefox, I recently did a emerge -e world with no change.  It
still does it on occasion.  So, it's not some weird quirk where
something needs to be rebuilt after a upgrade.  Still a annoying
problem.  Thinking on that firefox-bin package next.  :/

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

Peter Humphrey-3
On Sunday, 6 January 2019 22:13:31 GMT Dale wrote:

> Even from my simple setup, LVM adds more benefits to managing data and
> drives than it does risk.  The biggest thing, placing blame where it
> lies.  Blaming LVM for a drive dying is placing the blame on something
> that wasn't the root of the problem.  The dying drive was the problem,
> using LVM or not.

He isn't doing that, though. As I read it, he recounted the tale of recovering
data from a failed drive, then imagined how much worse it would be if it were
in an LVM setup. [Reported speech and mixed-up tenses causing me a problem
here...]

Thanks Gevisz, that was interesting. What we used to call a cautionary tale.

--
Regards,
Peter.




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

Dale-46
Peter Humphrey wrote:

> On Sunday, 6 January 2019 22:13:31 GMT Dale wrote:
>
>> Even from my simple setup, LVM adds more benefits to managing data and
>> drives than it does risk.  The biggest thing, placing blame where it
>> lies.  Blaming LVM for a drive dying is placing the blame on something
>> that wasn't the root of the problem.  The dying drive was the problem,
>> using LVM or not.
> He isn't doing that, though. As I read it, he recounted the tale of recovering
> data from a failed drive, then imagined how much worse it would be if it were
> in an LVM setup. [Reported speech and mixed-up tenses causing me a problem
> here...]
>
> Thanks Gevisz, that was interesting. What we used to call a cautionary tale.
>

From what I've read, that can be overcome.  If you get say a SMART
message that a drive is failing, just remove that drive or remove the
whole LVM setup and use something else until a working drive setup can
be made.  Once ready, then move the data, if the drive still works, to
the new drive.  That is basically what I did when I swapped a smaller
drive for a larger one.  I moved the data from one drive to another.  It
did it fairly quickly.  Someone posted that it may even be faster to do
it with LVM's pvmove than it is with cp or rsync.  I don't know how true
that is but from what I've read, it moves the data really efficiently. 
If the drive has a very limited time before failure, speed is
important.  If the drive is completely dead, replace the drive and hope
the backups are good.  Either way, LVM or not, a failing drive is a
failing drive.  The data has to be moved if the drive still works or the
data is gone if it just up and dies.  The biggest thing, watching the
SMART messages about the health of the drive.  In the past when I've had
a drive fail, I got error messages well ahead of time.  On one drive, I
removed the drive, set it aside, ordered a replacement drive, installed
both drives and copied the data over.  After I did all that, I played
with the drive until it failed a day or so later.  Lucky?  Most likely. 
Still, it gave me time to transfer things over. 

While I get that LVM adds a layer to things, it also adds some options
as well.  Those options can prove helpful if one uses them. 

Just my thinking.

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.

Jack
On 2019.01.07 05:46, Dale wrote:

> Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > On Sunday, 6 January 2019 22:13:31 GMT Dale wrote:
> >
> >> Even from my simple setup, LVM adds more benefits to managing data  
> and
> >> drives than it does risk.  The biggest thing, placing blame where  
> it
> >> lies.  Blaming LVM for a drive dying is placing the blame on  
> something
> >> that wasn't the root of the problem.  The dying drive was the  
> problem,
> >> using LVM or not.
> > He isn't doing that, though. As I read it, he recounted the tale of  
> recovering
> > data from a failed drive, then imagined how much worse it would be  
> if it were
> > in an LVM setup. [Reported speech and mixed-up tenses causing me a  
> problem
> > here...]
> >
> > Thanks Gevisz, that was interesting. What we used to call a  
> cautionary tale.
> >
>
> From what I've read, that can be overcome.  If you get say a SMART
> message that a drive is failing, just remove that drive or remove the
> whole LVM setup and use something else until a working drive setup can
> be made.  Once ready, then move the data, if the drive still works, to
> the new drive.  That is basically what I did when I swapped a smaller
> drive for a larger one.  I moved the data from one drive to another.   
> It
> did it fairly quickly.  Someone posted that it may even be faster to  
> do
> it with LVM's pvmove than it is with cp or rsync.  I don't know how  
> true
> that is but from what I've read, it moves the data really  
> efficiently. 
> If the drive has a very limited time before failure, speed is
> important.  If the drive is completely dead, replace the drive and  
> hope
> the backups are good.  Either way, LVM or not, a failing drive is a
> failing drive.  The data has to be moved if the drive still works or  
> the
> data is gone if it just up and dies.  The biggest thing, watching the
> SMART messages about the health of the drive.  In the past when I've  
> had
> a drive fail, I got error messages well ahead of time.  On one drive,  
> I
> removed the drive, set it aside, ordered a replacement drive,  
> installed
> both drives and copied the data over.  After I did all that, I played
> with the drive until it failed a day or so later.  Lucky?  Most  
> likely. 
> Still, it gave me time to transfer things over. 
>
> While I get that LVM adds a layer to things, it also adds some options
> as well.  Those options can prove helpful if one uses them. 
>
> Just my thinking.
>
> Dale
The only problem with all that is that SMART is far from completely  
reliable.  I recently had a drive fail, and the resulting fsck on the  
next reboot messed up many files.  (Not a Gentoo system, although I  
don't think that made any difference.)  After getting running again, I  
did several SMART tests, including the full self-test, and it reported  
ZERO errors.  A few weeks later, it did the same thing, and shortly  
after that, it failed totally.  I had done a few more full self-tests  
before final failure, and all came back clean.  I'd really love to find  
out there was something I did wrong in the testing, but I don't think  
so.  I have not yet completely given up on trying to recover stuff from  
that drive, but as time goes on, there is less and less that I haven't  
rebuilt or replaced by re-downloading or changing lost passwords, so  
it's less and less important.  (That was a different drive from the one  
I messed up myself, as discussed in another recent thread here.)

Jack
12