that should be

sudo apt-get update --fix-missing

.

not -fix-missing.

when posting from my phone it likes to autocorrect that.

it ran fine on my system just now. no errors like that. but also should be run in conjunction with the other command. they fix different problems than the dpkg command.

more info: https://www.rosehosting.com/blog/how-to-fix-broken-packages-on-ubuntu-16-04-and-debian-9/

---

Seti@Home classic workunits: 29,492 CPU time: 134,419 hours

that should be

sudo apt-get update --fix-missing

.

it ran fine on my system just now. no errors like that. but also should be run in conjunction with the other command. they fix different problems than the dpkg command.

more info: https://www.rosehosting.com/blog/how-to-fix-broken-packages-on-ubuntu-16-04-and-debian-9/

. . OK, I ran that and the other commands, they all appeared to do something positive except that, each time, in the end the situation remains unresolved. In fact things seemed to go backwards as all access to the various drivers disappeared until I ran Mr Kevvys command to re-install the ppa.

. . In Synaptic it may fix broken package/s but you have to tell it what to fix. There are so many listings that I have never seen or heard of that I had no idea of where to start.

. . It seems that rig is down for the count ...

Stephen

:(

at this point, i would just stop trying to save it and just re-install the whole thing.

See if you can get things installed to the SSD. or at the very least get yourself a larger USB stick. 64GB models are cheap. but I strongly advise against using a USB stick. running SETI has a lot of random writes back and forth to the storage media as WUs are processed. the Flash memory isn't known for its longevity with a lot of use like this, they aren't nearly as robust as an SSD or HDD.

---

Seti@Home classic workunits: 29,492 CPU time: 134,419 hours

at this point, i would just stop trying to save it and just re-install the whole thing.

See if you can get things installed to the SSD. or at the very least get yourself a larger USB stick. 64GB models are cheap. but I strongly advise against using a USB stick. running SETI has a lot of random writes back and forth to the storage media as WUs are processed. the Flash memory isn't known for its longevity with a lot of use like this, they aren't nearly as robust as an SSD or HDD.

+ 1

---

Seti@Home classic workunits:20,676 CPU time:74,226 hours

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association)

For all 5 of my conversions I just got a 240GB SSD, well known brands like Kingston, Crucial, and PNY all selling for around £25 ($31)

Very quick and easy, and if something goes wrong, wipe and start again.

at this point, i would just stop trying to save it and just re-install the whole thing.

See if you can get things installed to the SSD. or at the very least get yourself a larger USB stick. 64GB models are cheap. but I strongly advise against using a USB stick. running SETI has a lot of random writes back and forth to the storage media as WUs are processed. the Flash memory isn't known for its longevity with a lot of use like this, they aren't nearly as robust as an SSD or HDD.

. . So far the oldest Linux rig has been running on the flashdrive for about 2.5 years :) But it was never meant to be permanent, simply a long term transition. I have SSDs in each of the 3 rigs but am still having all heck of problems persuading them to work.

. . And then there is the nerve wrecking process of migrating the SETI ID and details from the flashdrives with Ubuntu 14.04 to the SSDs with Lubuntu 18.04 and all the latest bits.

Stephen

:(

For all 5 of my conversions I just got a 240GB SSD, well known brands like Kingston, Crucial, and PNY all selling for around £25 ($31)

Very quick and easy, and if something goes wrong, wipe and start again.

. . So far only 3 Linux (or intended to be Linux) rigs but they all have SSDs I just have to manage the setup and then migration. Out here 120GB SSDs cost about $32 AUD.

Stephen

Still have to wonder if the performance boost really justifies the hassle of SSDs.
I can get new "white label" 500g HDDs all day for under $20US including shipping and a warranty.

---

Still have to wonder if the performance boost really justifies the hassle of SSDs.

What hassle?
A SATA SSD is the same as a SATA HDD as far as the BIOS is concerned (using the NVME option if available, otherwise AHCI will still work), it's only once the OS driver is installed that they are treated any differently, and the difference pretty much boils down to no defragging and enabling Trim support for a SSD.

The only grief likely is when using a PCIe based SSD that doesn't make use of the M.2 connector, with an older motherboard & OS that isn't PCIe SSD aware (think of the joys involved installing Windows on a SATA drive before the OS supported them natively...).

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Still have to wonder if the performance boost really justifies the hassle of SSDs.

Can't say I have ever had any hassle. These machines I converted are mostly old Windows machines, with existing HHD's which are still in place but disconnected.

I have never has much success with trying to dual boot with Windows, so a new clean SSD is easy and simple and doesn't require a 3.5 inch drive bay as they are so light they can be put anywhere.

If I want to boot to Win (unlikely on these machines) just swap the drive cables.

Speaking of performance...
I resurrected one of my old machines for the next month or so, and just happened upon a new to me 1070 today. I decided to test the 1070 in the old First generation Core2 Quad with First generation PCIe 1, just to make sure the 1070 was working well before adding it to the Mining machine. As expected, the 1070 runs just as well in the 10 year old Intel board as it does in a much newer board with a Sixth generation Intel CPU and PCIe 3. Of course the 1070 is running in a x16 PCIe slot at gen 1 and would do much worse in a x1 gen 1 slot, but with enough lanes it will run SETI just as well in the older first generation machines.

So, if you have one of these older machines stashed away, try converting it to run Linux and just the CUDA Special App. It will run the Special App just as well as a New machine without having to spend money on a new machine. Basically a Win, Win situation for You and SETI.

Another nod for Intel boards... it's a shame Intel stopped making them(?) as they were very durable. This computer has 3x970s which would otherwise be dust-collecting spares stuffed into a 12-year-old Intel board (that old and already had 3xPCIe slots... amazing) the first multicore setup I ever bought, and it's been used continuously ever since.

And another vote for me on not overspending on the CPU/board and reusing older ones... a mediocre GPU will outperform a top-of-the-line CPU so I don't overspend on them.

---

my oldest system that I had run SETI on recently was a Supermicro X7DA8+ board. socket 771 Xeons and DDR2 FBDIMMs lol.

one of the two x16 slots was PCIe 1.0 x4 electrically. still ran pretty much full speed. but 1.0x4 = 3.0x1 so it makes sense. I probably wouldn't use anything less than that though. the biggest problems with old systems like that is power consumption, so I've decommissioned mine in favor or more efficient hardware. it pays off in the power savings long term.

---

Seti@Home classic workunits: 29,492 CPU time: 134,419 hours

There's not much difference when just running GPU tasks.
An old Q6700 is rated at 95 watts
Most of the older Core2 Quads are around 95 watts.
A newer i7-6700K is rated at 91 watts
As long as you are just comparing GPU tasks, there isn't much difference as the times are the same as well as the wattage. Just don't run CPU tasks, heck, I don't even run CPU tasks on my i7s.

you're right that the GPUs themselves won't really pull much or any different power between the two. But something to consider is that the way Intel rates TDP (which isnt the same as power consumption, btw) on newer chips is different than the way it used to be done on old CPUs that do not have turbo. Intel rates TDP now at BASE clocks, not the turbo speeds. but that doesn't take into account the power consumption of the entire system, old inefficient CPUs usually use more power hungry base hardware such as the RAM and MB, it all adds up. hook up a watt-meter and you'll see a more substantial difference being pulled from the wall, which is what really matters at the end of the day.

additionally, your source for the TDP numbers is incorrect. you should check Intel's own documentation.

Q6700 is actually 105W TDP

I've also stopped running CPU WUs altogether for power consumption reasons. just doesn't make sense anymore when the GPUs as a whole are so much more power efficient while doing the job so much faster.

Using modern efficient PSUs will also go a long way. I wont run anything less than 80plus Gold rated, and Platinum when I can (of course titanium is even better, but cost is usually pretty high for those). I also moved a lot of my systems to 240V for the same efficiency reasons.

---

Seti@Home classic workunits: 29,492 CPU time: 134,419 hours

Actually, arguing about 4 to 14 watts of CPU compared to Hundreds of watts burned by the GPUs is senseless. All it takes is a slight clock change and the GPUs will burn that ~10 watts in a heartbeat. I am positive the newer CPUs use more power though, the same cooling that works on a 95 watt Core2 Quad isn't adequate for a 91 watt i7. I know because I've used the same cooler on both, which is a real world test. I had to buy new coolers to run the i7s at full power.

That reminds me, time to move the 1070 to the Mining machine. I suspect it will run up to around 600k... soon.

Actually, arguing about 4 to 14 watts of CPU compared to Hundreds of watts burned by the GPUs is senseless. All it takes is a slight clock change and the GPUs will burn that ~10 watts in a heartbeat. I am positive the newer CPUs use more power though, the same cooling that works on a 95 watt Core2 Quad isn't adequate for a 91 watt i7. I know because I've used the same cooler on both, which is a real world test. I had to buy new coolers to run the i7s at full power.

That reminds me, time to move the 1070 to the Mining machine. I suspect it will run up to around 600k... soon.

True, which is exactly why I moved to more efficient Turing GPUs, and use power limiting and tuning to keep things as efficient as I can without losing much or any speed. It's had the biggest impact.

---

Seti@Home classic workunits: 29,492 CPU time: 134,419 hours

So, if you have one of these older machines stashed away, try converting it to run Linux and just the CUDA Special App. It will run the Special App just as well as a New machine without having to spend money on a new machine. Basically a Win, Win situation for You and SETI.

Well this MB is from 2008.

https://setiathome.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=8762732

It is just sitting on a box in the corner of the room with a spare PSU, new SSD, special app and the old faithful 750ti, running tasks in 5-6 minutes.

Good stuff. The power efficiency of the 750ti is impressive for such an old GPU. rated for 75W, but when I had some of them, they were only really reporting about 30-35W or so.

it's only recently with the Turing cards that they have surpassed it in the (SETI)credit/watt metric

---

Seti@Home classic workunits: 29,492 CPU time: 134,419 hours

Good stuff. The power efficiency of the 750ti is impressive for such an old GPU. rated for 75W, but when I had some of them, they were only really reporting about 30-35W or so.

it's only recently with the Turing cards that they have surpassed it in the (SETI)credit/watt metric

It is still neat to see the 750Ti is in the Top 15 Credit/Watt-Hour chart. I have six of them and run them here and on PrimeGrid. Those were probably the best investments I made in 2015.