Re: FreeBSD-9.1 freezes on sun ultra-30
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 09:20:05AM -0500, Richard Thornton wrote: > On 2/20/2013 6:30 AM, Marius Strobl wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 12:36:36PM +0100, Magnus Lindholm wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> I've installed FreeBSD-8.3 on my sun ultra-30, the 9.1 boot-only install > >> CD failed to boot, so did the 9.0 install CD. 8.3 worked fine and from > >> that I upgraded to 9.1 from source. The system has been up and running for > >> a day or two when I get the message: > >> > >> pcib0: correctable DMA error AFAR 0x3aecc400 AFSR 0x40f49f80 > >> > >> > >> I't repeats a few times on the console and then the system freezes. The > >> system was doing some work building stuff from the port-collections, so > >> the load was quite heavy. Is this hardware related (failing hardware) or > >> is something in the 9.1 kernel thats doesn't work well with my hardware? > >> > > Most likely RAM issues; re-seating the modules might help. > > > > Marius > > > > ___ > > freebsd-spar...@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-sparc64 > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-sparc64-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > Go with openbsd 5.2; that's a real system. I doubt that OpenBSD will magically fix hardware problems. However, given that the performance of OpenBSD typically plain sucks, i.e. it doesn't make much out of the hardware (f.e., according to my testing of hme(4) with netperf on an u60, it is nowhere near being able to saturate Fast Ethernet, while FreeBSD on the same hardware certainly does), it's quite likely that with OpenBSD one just doesn't hit such hardware issues. Marius
Re: httpd and php-mapi
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 06:28:05PM -0500, gregoi...@hotmail.com wrote: > For those interested. Zarafa needs to be recompiled and 1 WANTLIB > line of its Makefile must be amended to remove 'z gmp gnutls hogweed > nettle p11-kit tasn1'. > > 1) pkg_delete libvmime zarafa zarafa-webaccess zarafa-webapp > 2) cd /usr/ports/devel/libvmime > 3) patch Makefile > 4) make install > 5) cd ../../mail/zarafa > 6) patch Makefile > 7) make install > > I guess this is what I was suppose to understand by 'make > port-lib-depends check'. > > > @ajacoutot You should definitely review your approach to user > support. You obviously run -current but not everyone do and not You should better review the way you are asking help and not being so virulent to somebody so helpfull and talented than Antoine!
Re: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.
On 2013-02-20, Keith wrote: >> > Hi, thanks for the info. Yesterday I did a backup, format, restore of > the /var/www partition although to be honest I wasn't really sure what i > was doing with regards to the newfs command. I tried running "newfs > -i"with different values and settled on "newfs -i 1 /var/www" as it > seemed at the time to makes the make the most inodes and that was just > based on how much output was generated while newfs was running. Those aren't inodes, they're superblock backups, clue is in the text printed by newfs. > # df -hi > Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity iused ifree %iused Mounted on > /dev/sd0l 4.7G1.2G3.3G26% 449170 220631617% /var/www > > The above "df -hi" output was done today after the wiped the app and > started it again from scratch. It had been running for about 12 hours > and there was about 450,000 files. How many files do you think I'll be > able to store with this number of inodes ? I would think you'd be able to store 2206316 files purely based on the number of inodes, but this would be limited by the minimum file size. $ df -hi /tmp; touch /tmp/bleh; df -hi /tmp | tail -1 Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity iused ifree %iused Mounted on mfs:21643 991M110M831M12% 16175 253967 6% /tmp mfs:21643 991M110M831M12% 16176 253966 6% /tmp >: do you want 20GB of files in your db? >: i know i dont .. >: Then you will get "why is my nzbfiles table corrupt"? There is absolutely no reason for a database to corrupt itself just by having 20GB of data in it. It's at least as likely that a filesystem would corrupt itself, and databases often have better recovery mechanisms than many types of filesystem. Please at least tell me that these files are split across a number of directories and not all lumped together in one
Re: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.
On 2013-02-20, Matthias Appel wrote: > *ZFS was open source (FSF would say free) until Oracle acquired Sun The source was available, but it relies on Sun/Oracle patents. The CDDL license it was provided under allows use of those patents, but only subject to certain conditions, and there are indemnification clauses that some projects cannot agree to. > *IMHO ZFS hast to be reversed, just like NTFS. There has to be > compatibility between Oracles ZFS and the free versions of it. Then you don't have a license to use the patents.
Re: EIGRP implementation?
Interesting. Cisco discontinued IGRP starting with IOS 12.2(13)T and 12.2(R1s4)S. And many years ago it was recommended to me my the Cisco SmartNet people to switch form EIGRP to may be ISIS or OSPF back then as it was possible that Cisco discontinue EIGRP as well. May be they are desperate to loose control over EIGRP now and various router protocol seeing that lots more competition is coming to them now. (:> I guess after you know OSPF and in some cases if you want to use ISIS, I see no reason to have EIGRP anyway. I don't think Cisco is pushing their own EIGRP and not that I miss it anyway, but may be ISIS would be nicer then EIGRP inside an OpenBSD router, even if I do not miss it. The only advantage is that ISIS is much simpler to use and learn then properly done OSPF for a smaller and simpler network that OpenBSD may fit better with it. Some not to familiar IT guys may prefer ISIS to OSPF, but really I see no needs for EIGRP. Anyway, just my $0.02 worth for what it is. Daniel On 2/20/13 7:24 PM, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2013-02-20, Claudio Jeker wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 03:35:59PM +0300, Aaron Glenn wrote: >>> I'm wondering if any one is thinking/contemplating/attempting >>> implementing the newly release EIGRP draft from Cisco. >>> No, I don't have patches to contribute...this is just a simple "anyone >>> else thinking about this?" message. feel free to contact me privately >>> if this is too noisy a message (hah...misc...noisy...heaven forbid) > > interesting commentary at packetpushers if you missed it.. > > http://packetpushers.net/why-is-cisco-bothering-with-open-eigrp/ > >> Last time I looked EIGRP was a Cisco propretary protocol from the times >> when RIP was modern. I see no need to support it, I would first consider >> ISIS and adding stuff to ospfd / ospf6d. > > +1 [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]
Downlink speed limit
Hi all: I'm running current amd64. I've detected a problem with the network speed. My internet connection is cable, with 20Mbps. In Linux, with several speed meters (my provider's and, for example, speedof.me) I always get around 20Mpbs in donwlink, and about 2-2.5 Mbps in uplink. But with OpenBSD current there is a limit around 4Mbps in downlink (uplink is ok). It doesn't matter if the PF is enabled or disable, the speed is always ~4Mbps. Ethernet card is in 100Mbps full-duplex. I've google a lot and tried several sysctl tweaks but without success. Right now I've finished to upgrade to the last snapshot and the problem remains. Any idea? Thanks in advance, Jes
Re: Downlink speed limit
Hi Sven: My laptop is a Thinkpad T410, with two disks. Fedora 18 installed in the first, and OpenBSD in the second. The ethernet card is: em0 at pci0 dev 25 function 0 "Intel 82577LM" rev 0x06: msi, address f0:de:f1:11:5e:42 # netstat -i NameMtu Network Address Ipkts Ierrs Opkts Oerrs Colls lo0 33152 12 0 12 0 0 lo0 33152 localhost/1 localhost 12 0 12 0 0 lo0 33152 fe80::%lo0/ fe80::1%lo0 12 0 12 0 0 lo0 33152 localhost localhost 12 0 12 0 0 em0 1500f0:de:f1:11:5e:4247578 0 8230 0 0 em0 1500 fe80::%em0/ fe80::f2de:f1ff:f47578 0 8230 0 0 em0 1500 185.14.165. 185.14.165.83.dyn47578 0 8230 0 0 iwn0* 150000:27:10:81:bf:1c0 00 0 0 enc0* 00 00 0 0 pflog0 331520 00 0 0 # vmstat -i interrupt total rate irq0/clock 589062 399 irq0/ipi 1377979 933 irq144/acpi0 2950 irq100/inteldrm0 85435 irq112/em0 50136 33 irq96/ehci0 28840 19 irq176/azalia0 64064 irq101/ehci1 260 irq102/ahci046781 31 irq145/pckbc043872 irq146/pckbc0 287700 194 Total 2400155 1626 # uname -a OpenBSD openfourten.my.domain 5.3 GENERIC.MP#36 amd64 # ping www.yahoo.com PING ds-eu-fp3.wa1.b.yahoo.com (87.248.122.122): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 87.248.122.122: icmp_seq=0 ttl=51 time=102.293 ms 64 bytes from 87.248.122.122: icmp_seq=1 ttl=51 time=103.218 ms 64 bytes from 87.248.122.122: icmp_seq=2 ttl=51 time=108.620 ms 64 bytes from 87.248.122.122: icmp_seq=3 ttl=51 time=100.815 ms 64 bytes from 87.248.122.122: icmp_seq=4 ttl=51 time=109.586 ms 64 bytes from 87.248.122.122: icmp_seq=5 ttl=51 time=107.245 ms 64 bytes from 87.248.122.122: icmp_seq=6 ttl=51 time=108.278 ms 64 bytes from 87.248.122.122: icmp_seq=7 ttl=51 time=103.384 ms # cat /etc/hostname.em0 dhcp # ifconfig em0 em0: flags=8843 mtu 1500 lladdr f0:de:f1:11:5e:42 priority: 0 groups: egress media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex,rxpause,txpause) status: active inet6 fe80::f2de:f1ff:fe11:5e42%em0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 inet 83.165.14.185 netmask 0xf800 broadcast 83.165.15.255 # netstat -s ip: 9994 total packets received 0 bad header checksums 0 with size smaller than minimum 0 with data size < data length 0 with header length < data size 0 with data length < header length 0 with bad options 0 with incorrect version number 0 fragments received 0 fragments dropped (duplicates or out of space) 0 malformed fragments dropped 0 fragments dropped after timeout 0 packets reassembled ok 9982 packets for this host 0 packets for unknown/unsupported protocol 0 packets forwarded 0 packets not forwardable 0 redirects sent 8033 packets sent from this host 0 packets sent with fabricated ip header 0 output packets dropped due to no bufs, etc. 0 output packets discarded due to no route 0 output datagrams fragmented 0 fragments created 0 datagrams that can't be fragmented 0 fragment floods 0 packets with ip length > max ip packet size 0 tunneling packets that can't find gif 0 datagrams with bad address in header 9931 input datagrams checksum-processed by hardware 0 output datagrams checksum-processed by hardware 0 multicast packets which we don't join tcp: 7559 packets sent 2215 data packets (2502569 bytes) 96 data packets (132860 bytes) retransmitted 0 fast retransmitted packets 2933 ack-only packets (4742 delayed) 0 URG only packets 0 window probe packets 1993 window update packets 322 control packets 0 packets hardware-checksummed 9535 packets received 1955 acks (for 2329925 bytes) 345 duplicate acks 0 acks for unsent data 0 acks for old data 7193 packets (9431283 bytes) received in-sequence 10 completely duplicate packets (547 bytes) 0 old duplicate packets 0 packets with some duplicate data (0 bytes duplicated)
Re: EIGRP implementation?
IGRP is a 28 year old routing protocol from the stone ages, no wonder it was retired. EIGRP is a bit more modern ;-) Cisco won't be discontinuing EIGRP anytime soon; it's the preferred routing protocol for building DMVPNs and Cisco DMVPN is a very widely used technology. Cisco definitely pushes EIGRP for building DMVPNs as it works better than anything currently available. The best way for OpenBSD to take hold in this area would be to implement NHRP (RFC 2332) and allow users to build DMVPNs using "nhrpd" and bgpd. BGP is not quite as good as EIGRP for DMVPNs, but it's a lot more scalable than OSPF. On Feb 21, 2013, at 4:28 PM, Daniel Ouellet wrote: > Interesting. > > Cisco discontinued IGRP starting with IOS 12.2(13)T and 12.2(R1s4)S. > > And many years ago it was recommended to me my the Cisco SmartNet people > to switch form EIGRP to may be ISIS or OSPF back then as it was possible > that Cisco discontinue EIGRP as well. May be they are desperate to loose > control over EIGRP now and various router protocol seeing that lots more > competition is coming to them now. (:> > > I guess after you know OSPF and in some cases if you want to use ISIS, I > see no reason to have EIGRP anyway. > > I don't think Cisco is pushing their own EIGRP and not that I miss it > anyway, but may be ISIS would be nicer then EIGRP inside an OpenBSD > router, even if I do not miss it. The only advantage is that ISIS is > much simpler to use and learn then properly done OSPF for a smaller and > simpler network that OpenBSD may fit better with it. > > Some not to familiar IT guys may prefer ISIS to OSPF, but really I see > no needs for EIGRP. > > Anyway, just my $0.02 worth for what it is. > > Daniel > > On 2/20/13 7:24 PM, Stuart Henderson wrote: >> On 2013-02-20, Claudio Jeker wrote: >>> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 03:35:59PM +0300, Aaron Glenn wrote: I'm wondering if any one is thinking/contemplating/attempting implementing the newly release EIGRP draft from Cisco. No, I don't have patches to contribute...this is just a simple "anyone else thinking about this?" message. feel free to contact me privately if this is too noisy a message (hah...misc...noisy...heaven forbid) >> >> interesting commentary at packetpushers if you missed it.. >> >> http://packetpushers.net/why-is-cisco-bothering-with-open-eigrp/ >> >>> Last time I looked EIGRP was a Cisco propretary protocol from the times >>> when RIP was modern. I see no need to support it, I would first consider >>> ISIS and adding stuff to ospfd / ospf6d. >> >> +1 > > [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which > had a name of signature.asc]
Re: sasync phase 1 issues
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:08 PM, sangdrax8 wrote: > I am new to OpenBSD, but would like to take advantage of a redundant > setup with ipsec/carp/sasync. I have run into a situation which seems > to be a bug, but thought it best if I first bring my questions here to > see if there is something I am missing. > > I have tried the following with 5.1-stable, 5.2-stable, and my > 5.2-stable setup with a snapshot kernel from 2/17/2013. My main problem > exists across all three setups. My guess is that it seems the phase 1 > of an ipsec negotiation is not being synced with sasync, but I will > describe my setup and results below and see if anyone else can assist me > with this. > > > My setup: > fw1 and fw2 - carp/ipsec/sasync > lab1 - ipsec > > Part that works as I expected it to: > > My fw1 and fw2 boxes are successfully running carp, and my fw1 is the > master. Using a machine behind the firewalls, I can initiate the ipsec > tunnel by sending some icmp packets to a machine behind the lab1 box. > While tcpdumping on the fw1 and fw2 interfaces, I can see the phase1 and > phase2 of ipsec happen on fw1, and esp traffic passing. I then verify > sasync by running 'ipsecctl -s a' on both fw1 and fw2. They both match, > indicating that the SA created by the master did make it to the backup > machine. > > I then wish to test failover between the two redundant firewalls, so I > run 'ifconfig -g carp carpdemote 128' on the master machine. I quickly > see the backup take over, and the esp packets start showing up on my > tcpdump on the backup machine. I see the sequence numbers jump by > 16384, which I have read is expected. (side note, this increase causes > the tunnel to break in 5.2-stable, but was reported and seems fixed in > my snapshot kernel tests, as well as working in 5.1-stable) Initially > this looks good, and even the spi's in use are the same. So again > sasync seems to be working, and I have a successful tunnel transition. > > Where things seem to go wrong: > > At this point if I keep watching the tcpdump on my fw2 (now the master > passing traffic) I see that about one or two minutes after it takes > over, it initiates a phase 1 re-key of the ipsec tunnel (and therefore a > new phase 2 under this new phase1). This happens quickly, and I can see > the spi's change as the new association is now the one being used. This > re-key also resets the previously mentioned sequence numbers, making it > easy to see when it took place. I think things have gone wrong here, > but traffic passes and will continue to re-key new phase 2 just fine. > So it isn't obvious that anything is wrong. > > Evidence something is wrong: > > I now allow fw1 to take back over master with 'ifconfig -g carp > -carpdemote 128' which also works. I see the traffic now on my fw1 > tcpdump window, and the spi's are the ones that were re-negotiated by > the backup when it did the strane phase1 and phase 2 rekey. Once again > my sequence numbers jump by 16384, as expected. Now watching the > tcpdump on fw1, I see that about one or two minutes in it attempts a > re-key, but not exactly like the backup one did when it took over. It > only initiates a phase 2 re-key with the remote host. This re-key is > attempted a few times, but always seems rejected by the lab1 side. > After waiting the default of nearly 20 minutes for phase 2 to expire, > the fw1 begins trying to get a phase 2 re-key again only to be denied > again by the lab machine. Eventually the phase 2 expires, and all > traffic dies across the VPN. It will stay dead, trying to re-key phase > 2 and being rejected by the lab1 machine. > > My best guess as to what is going on: > > So from the above sequence I am guessing that the sasync isn't actually > syncing a phase 1 between the fw1 and fw2. Once the fw2 takes over, it > decides to re-key the phase 2 (perhaps due to high sequence numbers?) > but finds it has no valid phase 1 with which to talk to the lab machine. > It therefore initiates a new phase 1 negotiation with the lab machine, > which succeeds. It follows this up with a phase 2, and traffic > continues to pass between these two boxes. Now in this current state it > would (I am guessing here) imply that the fw1 has a non-expired phase 1 > association with the lab box, which the lab box has replaced with a > newly negotiated phase 1 from fw2. If fw2 tries to re-key phase 2, > everything works since fw2 and the lab box now agree on the phase 1 > between them. When I then allow fw1 to take back over as master, it > attempts to re-key phase 2(again maybe due to sequence numbers?) but is > apparently rejected by lab1. Since this phase 2 synced, traffic > continues but eventually the writing is on the wall. Once this phase 2 > that was synced from fw2 expires, all traffic dies. Fw1 will not be > able to get a new phase 2 until the phase 1 expires and it re-keys phase > 1 with the lab box. The nail in the coffin for me was that once nothing > will pass, If i
Re: sasync phase 1 issues
No, all tests were with exactly the same builds. I then tested 3 times to see if any 5.1, 5.2, or current would work. All three times I found the same results. "Faithless is he, who says 'farewell', when the path darkens." "you just keep on trying till you run out of cake" On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:41 PM, sven falempin wrote: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:08 PM, sangdrax8 wrote: > > > I am new to OpenBSD, but would like to take advantage of a redundant > > setup with ipsec/carp/sasync. I have run into a situation which seems > > to be a bug, but thought it best if I first bring my questions here to > > see if there is something I am missing. > > > > I have tried the following with 5.1-stable, 5.2-stable, and my > > 5.2-stable setup with a snapshot kernel from 2/17/2013. My main problem > > exists across all three setups. My guess is that it seems the phase 1 > > of an ipsec negotiation is not being synced with sasync, but I will > > describe my setup and results below and see if anyone else can assist me > > with this. > > > > > > My setup: > > fw1 and fw2 - carp/ipsec/sasync > > lab1 - ipsec > > > > Part that works as I expected it to: > > > > My fw1 and fw2 boxes are successfully running carp, and my fw1 is the > > master. Using a machine behind the firewalls, I can initiate the ipsec > > tunnel by sending some icmp packets to a machine behind the lab1 box. > > While tcpdumping on the fw1 and fw2 interfaces, I can see the phase1 and > > phase2 of ipsec happen on fw1, and esp traffic passing. I then verify > > sasync by running 'ipsecctl -s a' on both fw1 and fw2. They both match, > > indicating that the SA created by the master did make it to the backup > > machine. > > > > I then wish to test failover between the two redundant firewalls, so I > > run 'ifconfig -g carp carpdemote 128' on the master machine. I quickly > > see the backup take over, and the esp packets start showing up on my > > tcpdump on the backup machine. I see the sequence numbers jump by > > 16384, which I have read is expected. (side note, this increase causes > > the tunnel to break in 5.2-stable, but was reported and seems fixed in > > my snapshot kernel tests, as well as working in 5.1-stable) Initially > > this looks good, and even the spi's in use are the same. So again > > sasync seems to be working, and I have a successful tunnel transition. > > > > Where things seem to go wrong: > > > > At this point if I keep watching the tcpdump on my fw2 (now the master > > passing traffic) I see that about one or two minutes after it takes > > over, it initiates a phase 1 re-key of the ipsec tunnel (and therefore a > > new phase 2 under this new phase1). This happens quickly, and I can see > > the spi's change as the new association is now the one being used. This > > re-key also resets the previously mentioned sequence numbers, making it > > easy to see when it took place. I think things have gone wrong here, > > but traffic passes and will continue to re-key new phase 2 just fine. > > So it isn't obvious that anything is wrong. > > > > Evidence something is wrong: > > > > I now allow fw1 to take back over master with 'ifconfig -g carp > > -carpdemote 128' which also works. I see the traffic now on my fw1 > > tcpdump window, and the spi's are the ones that were re-negotiated by > > the backup when it did the strane phase1 and phase 2 rekey. Once again > > my sequence numbers jump by 16384, as expected. Now watching the > > tcpdump on fw1, I see that about one or two minutes in it attempts a > > re-key, but not exactly like the backup one did when it took over. It > > only initiates a phase 2 re-key with the remote host. This re-key is > > attempted a few times, but always seems rejected by the lab1 side. > > After waiting the default of nearly 20 minutes for phase 2 to expire, > > the fw1 begins trying to get a phase 2 re-key again only to be denied > > again by the lab machine. Eventually the phase 2 expires, and all > > traffic dies across the VPN. It will stay dead, trying to re-key phase > > 2 and being rejected by the lab1 machine. > > > > My best guess as to what is going on: > > > > So from the above sequence I am guessing that the sasync isn't actually > > syncing a phase 1 between the fw1 and fw2. Once the fw2 takes over, it > > decides to re-key the phase 2 (perhaps due to high sequence numbers?) > > but finds it has no valid phase 1 with which to talk to the lab machine. > > It therefore initiates a new phase 1 negotiation with the lab machine, > > which succeeds. It follows this up with a phase 2, and traffic > > continues to pass between these two boxes. Now in this current state it > > would (I am guessing here) imply that the fw1 has a non-expired phase 1 > > association with the lab box, which the lab box has replaced with a > > newly negotiated phase 1 from fw2. If fw2 tries to re-key phase 2, > > everything works since fw2 and the lab box now agree on the phase 1 > > between them. When I th
Re: Precisions on ZFS (was: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.)
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:32:02AM +0100, Matthias Appel wrote: > > Yupp, I think, that's (beside the CDDL part of ZFS) it the major > turn-off in any kind of productive enviroment. > > At the moment I don't know how FreeBSD handles the ZFS development, but > maintaining a not-really-fully-ZFS besides Oracle is a no-go, IMHO. > Maybe forking it and calling it whatever-name-you-want-FS, would be > better (but would violate CDDL, as far as I can see).. > > If you want to have ZFS, you will have to bite the bullet and throw some > $$$ on Oracles hive and get a fully licensed ZFS alongside with Solaris. > > If thats not an option, move along and choose someting different. > > So, long story short, I do not see any option to use ZFS on a free system. There are two versions of ZFS: Oracle's ZFS in Solaris 11 and the other ZFS, which is the open-source evolution of the latest ZFS from OpenSolaris. This open-source version is mainly developped within IllumOS, which can be considered as the OpenSolaris heir and is backed by the Nexenta company. Two others companies, Joyent and Delphix, also hired former Sun Solaris developers and are putting some efforts in it. FreeBSD basically pulls the changes from IllumOS regurlarly. A handful of bugfixes did go in the other direction though, but not that much. IIRC, I've also seen one or two bugfixes committed into FreeBSD that came from ZFS On Linux. -- Jeremie Le Hen Scientists say the world is made up of Protons, Neutrons and Electrons. They forgot to mention Morons.
Re: Precisions on ZFS (was: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.)
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 05:15:35PM -0500, Bryan Horstmann-Allen wrote: > I apologize this is off-topic, but I'm somewhat close to the illumos project > and would like to correct a few things. > > [...things corrected...] Well, thank you very much for correcting me and providing us high quality informations! Regards, -- Jeremie Le Hen Scientists say the world is made up of Protons, Neutrons and Electrons. They forgot to mention Morons.
Re: Constant attacks and ISP's are ignoring them
On 2/19/2013 18:35, Matthias Appel wrote: > Am 19.02.2013 18:34, schrieb Chris Cappuccio: >> Richard Thornton [rich...@thornton.net] wrote: >>> Linksys routers are defaulted to port forwarding NOT enabled, so >>> check facts before ranting. >>> >> Your routers are impervious to penetration. >> > I would not call those Linksys boxes _routers_ in the first place! > Not very good ones perhaps, but they are routers nonetheless. They are also switches and wireless APs. All these coupled with underpowered hardware and crippled software, not a recipe for success. -- staticsafe O< ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org Please don't top post - http://goo.gl/YrmAb Don't CC me! I'm subscribed to whatever list I just posted on.
Re: Constant attacks and ISP's are ignoring them [OT]
Am 21.02.2013 00:41, schrieb patrick keshishian: You of course need a license / permit to operate that car legally. That process also teaches you how to use it safely. Nobody is required to have a license to use the internet. Privilege vs right discussions are way too off topic here. That said, you are falsely assuming people with government endorsed licenses "do the right thing". Get serious. --patrick I was tempted to roughly reply the same thing...thanks a lot for doing it for me!
Re: Constant attacks and ISP's are ignoring them [OT]
Am 21.02.2013 00:53, schrieb Mark Felder: On Wed, 20 Feb 2013 17:41:20 -0600, patrick keshishian wrote: Privilege vs right discussions are way too off topic here. That said, you are falsely assuming people with government endorsed licenses "do the right thing". Get serious. Licensed drivers aren't perfect but they do have to master some important basic skills before getting out on the road which is designed to protect other drivers and themselves. And you're right, this is getting wa off topic. Really, they do so? If It does not work for cars, why should It work for the internet?
Re: Precisions on ZFS
Am 21.02.2013 22:12, schrieb Jeremie Le Hen: On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:32:02AM +0100, Matthias Appel wrote: Yupp, I think, that's (beside the CDDL part of ZFS) it the major turn-off in any kind of productive enviroment. At the moment I don't know how FreeBSD handles the ZFS development, but maintaining a not-really-fully-ZFS besides Oracle is a no-go, IMHO. Maybe forking it and calling it whatever-name-you-want-FS, would be better (but would violate CDDL, as far as I can see).. If you want to have ZFS, you will have to bite the bullet and throw some $$$ on Oracles hive and get a fully licensed ZFS alongside with Solaris. If thats not an option, move along and choose someting different. So, long story short, I do not see any option to use ZFS on a free system. There are two versions of ZFS: Oracle's ZFS in Solaris 11 and the other ZFS, which is the open-source evolution of the latest ZFS from OpenSolaris. This open-source version is mainly developped within IllumOS, which can be considered as the OpenSolaris heir and is backed by the Nexenta company. Two others companies, Joyent and Delphix, also hired former Sun Solaris developers and are putting some efforts in it. Yes, there are two (ore more) versions of ZFS, as you mentioned before. If this is the right thing, that's another story!
Re: Constant attacks and ISP's are ignoring them
Am 22.02.2013 00:26, schrieb staticsafe: On 2/19/2013 18:35, Matthias Appel wrote: Am 19.02.2013 18:34, schrieb Chris Cappuccio: Richard Thornton [rich...@thornton.net] wrote: Linksys routers are defaulted to port forwarding NOT enabled, so check facts before ranting. Your routers are impervious to penetration. I would not call those Linksys boxes _routers_ in the first place! Not very good ones perhaps, but they are routers nonetheless. I would not call NAT boxes routers, but thats just me...per definition they are so, yes! They are also switches and wireless APs. All these coupled with underpowered hardware and crippled software, not a recipe for success. Coupled with other Layer >4 crap, so...no these things are NOT routers!
Re: Precisions on ZFS
Am 22.02.2013 00:40, schrieb Matthias Appel: Am 21.02.2013 22:12, schrieb Jeremie Le Hen: On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:32:02AM +0100, Matthias Appel wrote: Yupp, I think, that's (beside the CDDL part of ZFS) it the major turn-off in any kind of productive enviroment. At the moment I don't know how FreeBSD handles the ZFS development, but maintaining a not-really-fully-ZFS besides Oracle is a no-go, IMHO. Maybe forking it and calling it whatever-name-you-want-FS, would be better (but would violate CDDL, as far as I can see).. If you want to have ZFS, you will have to bite the bullet and throw some $$$ on Oracles hive and get a fully licensed ZFS alongside with Solaris. If thats not an option, move along and choose someting different. So, long story short, I do not see any option to use ZFS on a free system. There are two versions of ZFS: Oracle's ZFS in Solaris 11 and the other ZFS, which is the open-source evolution of the latest ZFS from OpenSolaris. This open-source version is mainly developped within IllumOS, which can be considered as the OpenSolaris heir and is backed by the Nexenta company. Two others companies, Joyent and Delphix, also hired former Sun Solaris developers and are putting some efforts in it. Yes, there are two (ore more) versions of ZFS, as you mentioned before. That is what I wanted to sayso if there Is ZFS-a and ZFS-b, why call both of them ZFS? If this is the right thing, that's another story! Either do it right, or don't do it.but it's not my effort that goes into ZFS (and this is good so, I am a user, not a coder!)..so they have to decide. I only have to deice, if I use itand I don't do it!
Licensing OpenBSD artwork as CC-BY-SA?
Hi, I'm thinking about creating a community ad for http://meta.unix.stackexchange.com/q/1105/9454 for OpenBSD with an image from http://www.openbsd.org/art2.html One of the conditions is that the images must be uploaded to their network (via imgur), which requires a licensing as CC-BY-SA. This doesn't seem to be compatible with http://www.openbsd.org/art2.html "Most images provided here are copyright by OpenBSD, by Theo de Raadt, or by other members or developers of the OpenBSD group. However, it is our intent that anyone be able to use these images to represent OpenBSD in a positive light" Am I right or is that allowed? Theo? Best Martin
Re: Licensing OpenBSD artwork as CC-BY-SA?
It is not allowed. I think the existing rules are fair, and I don't understand why there is often an attempt to subvert this. Realistically --- most other projects have rules much tighter. Most of them are trademarks. > I'm thinking about creating a community ad for > http://meta.unix.stackexchange.com/q/1105/9454 for OpenBSD with an > image from http://www.openbsd.org/art2.html > > One of the conditions is that the images must be uploaded to their > network (via imgur), which requires a licensing as CC-BY-SA. > > This doesn't seem to be compatible with http://www.openbsd.org/art2.html > "Most images provided here are copyright by OpenBSD, by Theo de Raadt, > or by other members or developers of the OpenBSD group. However, it is > our intent that anyone be able to use these images to represent > OpenBSD in a positive light" > > Am I right or is that allowed? Theo? > > Best >Martin
pppoe repeated disconnects
Hoi, I have recently switched from a Zyxel modem terminated pppoe connection, to an OpenBSD based termination of the pppoe connection. I think I have a reasonable configuration, and both kernel as well as userland pppoe configs connect fine, but after a few minutes the ingress traffic halts and the connection drops. I am running 5.2, with the following /etc/ppp/ppp.conf ([1] for userland) and /etc/hostname.pppoe0 ([2] for kernel). Both exhibit the same issue. When the connection establishes, I have the following device: $ ifconfig pppoe0 pppoe0: flags=8851 mtu 1492 priority: 0 dev: vlan5 state: session sid: 0x1268 PADI retries: 8 PADR retries: 0 time: 00:04:02 sppp: phase network authproto chap authname "u280...@dsl.green.ch" groups: pppoe status: active inet6 fe80::260:e0ff:fe53:7978%pppoe0 -> prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1e inet 81.6.62.85 --> 80.254.161.242 netmask 0x The ISP routes me 81.6.62.84/30 and when the connection is up, this works (I can ping all 4 IP addresses). There's a netscreen at 81.6.62.86 behind this machine and it is responding to ping's from the internet just fine. A few minutes later, traffic stops flowing and about one minute later, pppoe0 disconnects and then reconnects a few minutes later, to rinse and repeat. So I tcpdump'ed the kernel pppoe, and noticed the following snippet (see [3] for details). I am MAC 00:60:e0:53:79:79 , the ISP is MAC 00:90:1a:a4:8d:20. At 00:27:30.706636 I see ingress to .86, which is replied at 00:27:30.708050 egress. Then, ingress halts. I send three echos at 00:27:52.564297, 00:28:02.563980 and 00:28:12.563665, and then give up at 00:28:22.563420 and send a Terminate-Request. I then send three Initiation requests, which are answered finally at 00:29:27.771647 by the ISP. The connection re-establishes and the cycle repeats. When I try the same thing using userland ppp (to benefit from debugging), things look pretty good to me, but also after a few minutes the physical link goes silent and I disconnect. The logs[4] show that the connection establishes (and on the ppp command line, 'show ipcp' and 'show lcp' look fine to me), but the problem persists. I've read up on ppp/pppd/pppoe for both userspace and kernel, but I'm stumped and at this point I believe the problem is with the ISP (I say this because traffic stops flowing while I'm sending LCP echos, and I always reply the ISPs echos, but after a few failed echos pppoe on my machine gives up). Can somebody please confirm this before I open a problem ticket with my ISP, or help me find a way to gather more information to diagnose this issue? Kind regards, Pim/ Zurich [1] cat /etc/ppp/ppp.conf default: set log Phase Chat LCP IPCP CCP tun command set speed sync disable acfcomp protocomp shortseq vjcomp deny acfcomp green: set device "!/usr/sbin/pppoe -i vlan5" set mtu max 1492 set mru max 1492 set authname "x...@dsl.green.ch" set authkey "Y" set ifaddr 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 disable echo lqr deny lqr [2] cat /etc/hostname.pppoe0 inet 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 NONE pppoedev vlan5 authproto chap authname 'x...@dsl.green.ch' authkey 'Y' up dest 0.0.0.1 [3] http://pastebin.com/ph6xrNaW [4] http://pastebin.com/grifHJ41 -- Pim van Pelt PBVP1-RIPE - http://www.ipng.nl/
Re: Licensing OpenBSD artwork as CC-BY-SA?
2013/2/22 Theo de Raadt : > It is not allowed. I thought the same. So https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Openbsd2.svg is really a violation? Best Martin
Re: Precisions on ZFS (was: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.)
I apologize this is off-topic, but I'm somewhat close to the illumos project and would like to correct a few things. +-- | On 2013-02-21 22:12:45, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: | | > So, long story short, I do not see any option to use ZFS on a free system. This is not correct, as Jeremie notes below. Here's some delicious pudding proof, though. https://github.com/illumos/illumos-gate/tree/master/usr/src/uts/common/fs/zfs There is zero reason not to have ZFS in a free system. Consider its inclusion in FreeBSD. (I can't really imagine its inclusion in OpenBSD, though. License arguments are incredibly boring, but it just doesn't seem at all likely.) | There are two versions of ZFS: Oracle's ZFS in Solaris 11 and the other | ZFS, which is the open-source evolution of the latest ZFS from | OpenSolaris. This open-source version is mainly developped within | IllumOS, which can be considered as the OpenSolaris heir and is backed | by the Nexenta company. Two others companies, Joyent and Delphix, also | hired former Sun Solaris developers and are putting some efforts in it. This is also slightly incorrect. illumos (not IllumOS) is not backed by Nexenta. illumos is an open source project that Joyent, Delphix and Nexenta all contribute to. To date: Joyent's major contributions to illumos include ZFS Write I/O Throttle and a port of the Linux KVM hypervisor. Delphix recently upstreams ZFS feature flags, making ZFS versions more portable. Nexenta's contributions tend to come in the form of HBA driver work, as that's their business model (storage). All companies provide bug fixes of various sorts as well. The number of non-employee contributors is small, but exists. There is a lot of legacy in the build system, so writing code and running builds is somewhat non-trivial. illumos is the core OS and utilities, similar to the OS/NET source distributions if you're familiar with Solaris development. Or like kernel.org, if you like. (The kernel plus other stuff (like ZFS).) illumos is what you use to build illumos-based distributions, like SmartOS, OmniOS, or OpenIndiana. | FreeBSD basically pulls the changes from IllumOS regurlarly. A handful | of bugfixes did go in the other direction though, but not that much. | IIRC, I've also seen one or two bugfixes committed into FreeBSD that | came from ZFS On Linux. illumos has seen some bug fixes from the FreeBSD folks, as you mention, but they are primarily a consumer still. (Love seeing ZFS and DTrace on FreeBSD!) zfsonlinux is developed by LLNL, and is core to their supercomputing infrastructure. My experience with it has been pretty solid over the last year. Cheers. -- bdha cyberpunk is dead. long live cyberpunk.
Re: Precisions on ZFS (was: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.)
> There is zero reason not to have ZFS in a free system. Consider its inclusion > in FreeBSD. Just because FreeBSD decided to compromise in regards to ZFS, does not mean everyone else has to as well. They could include all sorts of other code with similar licenses, yet there they often stand firm. None of that matters here. As to the rest of what you say about ZFS, I doubt anyone here really cares about ZFS as regards the subject of this list -- OpenBSD.
Re: Precisions on ZFS
On Feb 21, 2013, at 6:57 PM, Matthias Appel wrote: . > > That is what I wanted to sayso if there Is ZFS-a and ZFS-b, why call both > of them ZFS? ZFS has version numbers. They are backward but not forward compatible so newer code can mount older ZFS but not the other way round. As version increases, capabilities increases, from supporting compression, more compression options, dedup and finally, in the version in Solaris 11, encryption as well. All Illumos/opensolaris versions of ZFS do not support ZFS type encryption, sadly.
Re: Precisions on ZFS (was: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.)
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 05:15:35PM -0500, Bryan Horstmann-Allen wrote: > I apologize this is off-topic, but I'm somewhat close to the illumos project > and would like to correct a few things. > > +-- > | On 2013-02-21 22:12:45, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: > | > | > So, long story short, I do not see any option to use ZFS on a free system. > > This is not correct, as Jeremie notes below. Here's some delicious pudding > proof, though. > > https://github.com/illumos/illumos-gate/tree/master/usr/src/uts/common/fs/zfs > > There is zero reason not to have ZFS in a free system. Consider its inclusion > in FreeBSD. > > (I can't really imagine its inclusion in OpenBSD, though. License arguments > are > incredibly boring, but it just doesn't seem at all likely.) The problem with licenses is different between FreeBSD/NetBSD/Linux and OpenBSD. FreeBSD uses a extra layer for compatibility with opensolaris and they have support for loadable kernel modules. NetBSD uses a similar approach. ZFS on Linux uses FUSE, I don't know if they also use a extra layer for compatibility with opensolaris. OpenBSD doesn't have support for loadable kernel modules or FUSE, so OpenBSD should include the code inside of the kernel. This is a big difference with FreeBSD/NetBSD/Linux. Also FreeBSD had adapted their kernel for the peculiarities of ZFS. Did you try the first version of FreeBSD with ZFS?. The performance was horrible. Here in the BSD world, we have HAMMER, a good alternative with a license compatible and a reasonable requirements. If ZFS had a license compatible, the problem would be the same of HAMMER, someone should do the job. I think the most of OpenBSD developers already have a to-do big enough > > | There are two versions of ZFS: Oracle's ZFS in Solaris 11 and the other > | ZFS, which is the open-source evolution of the latest ZFS from > | OpenSolaris. This open-source version is mainly developped within > | IllumOS, which can be considered as the OpenSolaris heir and is backed > | by the Nexenta company. Two others companies, Joyent and Delphix, also > | hired former Sun Solaris developers and are putting some efforts in it. > > This is also slightly incorrect. illumos (not IllumOS) is not backed by > Nexenta. illumos is an open source project that Joyent, Delphix and Nexenta > all > contribute to. To date: > > Joyent's major contributions to illumos include ZFS Write I/O Throttle and a > port of the Linux KVM hypervisor. > > Delphix recently upstreams ZFS feature flags, making ZFS versions more > portable. > > Nexenta's contributions tend to come in the form of HBA driver work, as that's > their business model (storage). > > All companies provide bug fixes of various sorts as well. > > The number of non-employee contributors is small, but exists. There is a lot > of > legacy in the build system, so writing code and running builds is somewhat > non-trivial. > > illumos is the core OS and utilities, similar to the OS/NET source > distributions if you're familiar with Solaris development. > > Or like kernel.org, if you like. (The kernel plus other stuff (like ZFS).) > > illumos is what you use to build illumos-based distributions, like SmartOS, > OmniOS, or OpenIndiana. > > | FreeBSD basically pulls the changes from IllumOS regurlarly. A handful > | of bugfixes did go in the other direction though, but not that much. > | IIRC, I've also seen one or two bugfixes committed into FreeBSD that > | came from ZFS On Linux. > > illumos has seen some bug fixes from the FreeBSD folks, as you mention, but > they are primarily a consumer still. (Love seeing ZFS and DTrace on FreeBSD!) > > zfsonlinux is developed by LLNL, and is core to their supercomputing > infrastructure. My experience with it has been pretty solid over the last > year. > > Cheers. > -- > bdha > cyberpunk is dead. long live cyberpunk. -- Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado http://juanfra.info
Re: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 07:41:11AM -0500, Nick Holland wrote: > On 02/19/13 05:47, MJ wrote: > > Which app are you running that is generating millions of tiny files > > in a single directory? Regardless, in this case OpenBSD is not the > > right tool for the job. You need either FreeBSD or a Solaris variant > > to handle this problem because you need ZFS. > > > > > > What limits does ZFS have? --- > > The limitations of ZFS are designed to be so large that they will > > never be encountered in any practical operation. ZFS can store 16 > > Exabytes in each storage pool, file system, file, or file attribute. > > ZFS can store billions of names: files or directories in a directory, > > file systems in a file system, or snapshots of a file system. ZFS can > > store trillions of items: files in a file system, file systems, > > volumes, or snapshots in a pool. > > > > > > I'm not sure why ZFS hasn't yet been ported to OpenBSD, but if it > > were then that would pretty much eliminate the need for my one and > > only FreeBSD box ;-) > > The usual stated reason is "license", it is completely unacceptable to > OpenBSD. > > The other reason usually not given which I suspect would become obvious > were the license not an instant non-starter is the nature of ZFS. As it > is a major memory hog, it works well only on loaded 64 bit platforms. > Since most of our 64 bit platforms are older, and Alpha and SGI machines > with many gigabytes of memory are rare, you are probably talking an > amd64 and maybe some sparc64 systems. > > Also...see the number of "ZFS Tuning Guides" out there. How...1980s. > The OP here has a "special case" use, but virtually all ZFS uses involve > knob twisting and experimentation, which is about as anti-OpenBSD as you > can get. Granted, there are a lot of people who love knob-twisting, but > that's not what OpenBSD is about. > > I use ZFS, and have a few ZFS systems in production, and what it does is > pretty amazing, but mostly in the sense of the gigabytes of RAM it > consumes for basic operation (and unexplained file system wedging). > I've usually seen it used as a way to avoid good system design. Yes, > huge file systems can be useful, but usually in papering over basic > design flaws. If you don't like the RAM consumption of ZFS for basic operations, enable the deduplication. You will cry like a baby :D -- Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado http://juanfra.info
Re: pppoe repeated disconnects
On 2013-02-21, Pim van Pelt wrote: > Hoi, > > I have recently switched from a Zyxel modem terminated pppoe > connection, to an OpenBSD based termination of the pppoe connection. I > think I have a reasonable configuration, and both kernel as well as > userland pppoe configs connect fine, but after a few minutes the > ingress traffic halts and the connection drops. I am running 5.2, with > the following /etc/ppp/ppp.conf ([1] for userland) and > /etc/hostname.pppoe0 ([2] for kernel). Both exhibit the same issue. > When the connection establishes, I have the following device: > $ ifconfig pppoe0 > pppoe0: flags=8851 mtu 1492 > priority: 0 > dev: vlan5 state: session > sid: 0x1268 PADI retries: 8 PADR retries: 0 time: 00:04:02 > sppp: phase network authproto chap authname "u280...@dsl.green.ch" > groups: pppoe > status: active > inet6 fe80::260:e0ff:fe53:7978%pppoe0 -> prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1e > inet 81.6.62.85 --> 80.254.161.242 netmask 0x > > The ISP routes me 81.6.62.84/30 and when the connection is up, this > works (I can ping all 4 IP addresses). There's a netscreen at > 81.6.62.86 behind this machine and it is responding to ping's from the > internet just fine. A few minutes later, traffic stops flowing and > about one minute later, pppoe0 disconnects and then reconnects a few > minutes later, to rinse and repeat. So I tcpdump'ed the kernel pppoe, > and noticed the following snippet (see [3] for details). I am MAC > 00:60:e0:53:79:79 , the ISP is MAC 00:90:1a:a4:8d:20. > > At 00:27:30.706636 I see ingress to .86, which is replied at > 00:27:30.708050 egress. Then, ingress halts. I send three echos at > 00:27:52.564297, 00:28:02.563980 and 00:28:12.563665, and then give up > at 00:28:22.563420 and send a Terminate-Request. I then send three > Initiation requests, which are answered finally at 00:29:27.771647 by > the ISP. The connection re-establishes and the cycle repeats. Your log only shows the last incoming packet and a few unanswered outgoing packets, so it's not enough to tell, does the ISP reply to any of your earlier LCP echo requests or does it ignore all of them? Normally if there is a period of 30 seconds with either no LCP keepalives or no user data, pppoe(4) will drop the session and log "LCP keepalive timeout", which it looks like should show up at the bottom of dmesg output. So, if they do normally respond to LCP, it looks like the link is dropping out somehow.. Or, if they don't normally respond to LCP, you may either need some other way to generate data to keep the session alive, disable the timeout (by hacking the driver), or ideally see if they can start responding (easier if it's an ISP compliant with xkcd 806 ;) > I've read up on ppp/pppd/pppoe for both userspace and kernel, but I'm > stumped and at this point I believe the problem is with the ISP (I say > this because traffic stops flowing while I'm sending LCP echos, and I > always reply the ISPs echos, but after a few failed echos pppoe on my > machine gives up). Can somebody please confirm this before I open a > problem ticket with my ISP, or help me find a way to gather more > information to diagnose this issue? > [1] cat /etc/ppp/ppp.conf > default: > set log Phase Chat LCP IPCP CCP tun command > set speed sync > disable acfcomp protocomp shortseq vjcomp > deny acfcomp > > green: > set device "!/usr/sbin/pppoe -i vlan5" > set mtu max 1492 > set mru max 1492 > set authname "x...@dsl.green.ch" > set authkey "Y" > set ifaddr 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 > disable echo lqr > deny lqr I haven't really used iij ppp since around 1998 so not too sure about syntax here (though it seems ok).. but > [2] cat /etc/hostname.pppoe0 > inet 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 NONE pppoedev vlan5 authproto chap > authname 'x...@dsl.green.ch' authkey 'Y' up > dest 0.0.0.1 this definitely looks right to me, and I have a bunch of pppoe(4) running over vlans, so there's no problem in that respect. > [3] http://pastebin.com/ph6xrNaW > > [4] http://pastebin.com/grifHJ41
Re: Precisions on ZFS (was: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.)
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado wrote: > OpenBSD doesn't have support for loadable kernel modules or FUSE, so > OpenBSD should include the code inside of the kernel. This is a big > difference with FreeBSD/NetBSD/Linux. lkm(4) is outdated with wrong information about a feature no longer present?
Re: Precisions on ZFS (was: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.)
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 10:54:58PM -0430, Andres Perera wrote: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado > wrote: > > > OpenBSD doesn't have support for loadable kernel modules or FUSE, so > > OpenBSD should include the code inside of the kernel. This is a big > > difference with FreeBSD/NetBSD/Linux. > > lkm(4) is outdated with wrong information about a feature no longer present? My fault :) -- Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado http://juanfra.info
Re: Precisions on ZFS (was: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.)
On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 22:54:58 -0430, Andres Perera wrote: >On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado > wrote: > >> OpenBSD doesn't have support for loadable kernel modules or FUSE, so >> OpenBSD should include the code inside of the kernel. This is a big >> difference with FreeBSD/NetBSD/Linux. > >lkm(4) is outdated with wrong information about a feature no longer present? > >From cvsweb:src/lkm/ap/Attic/README Revision 1.3 Mon Feb 24 22:30:12 2003 UTC (10 years ago) by matthieu Branches: MAIN CVS tags: HEAD FILE REMOVED Changes since revision 1.2: +1 -1 lines Bye, unused code. R/ *** NOTE *** Please DO NOT CC me. I subscribed to the list. Mail to the sender address that does not originate at the list server is tarpitted. The reply-to: address is provided for those who feel compelled to reply off list. Thankyou. Rod/ --- This life is not the real thing. It is not even in Beta. If it was, then OpenBSD would already have a man page for it.
Re: Precisions on ZFS (was: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.)
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Rod Whitworth wrote: > On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 22:54:58 -0430, Andres Perera wrote: ... >>lkm(4) is outdated with wrong information about a feature no longer present? > > From cvsweb:src/lkm/ap/Attic/README > > Revision 1.3 > Mon Feb 24 22:30:12 2003 UTC (10 years ago) by matthieu > Branches: MAIN > CVS tags: HEAD > FILE REMOVED > Changes since revision 1.2: +1 -1 lines > Bye, unused code. This is too subtle for me. How is that relevant to the question Andres asked? Philip Guenther
Re: Precisions on ZFS (was: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.)
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013, at 11:43 PM, Philip Guenther wrote: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Rod Whitworth > wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 22:54:58 -0430, Andres Perera wrote: > ... > >>lkm(4) is outdated with wrong information about a feature no longer present? > > > > From cvsweb:src/lkm/ap/Attic/README > > > > Revision 1.3 > > Mon Feb 24 22:30:12 2003 UTC (10 years ago) by matthieu > > Branches: MAIN > > CVS tags: HEAD > > FILE REMOVED > > Changes since revision 1.2: +1 -1 lines > > Bye, unused code. > > This is too subtle for me. How is that relevant to the question Andres > asked? Agreed. So why can I find lkm(4) in the man pages and it references OpenBSD 5.0?? This is the first time I was even aware OBSD had anything to do with lkm.
Re: Precisions on ZFS (was: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.)
On 2013-02-21, at 11:21 PM, Eric Furman wrote: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013, at 11:43 PM, Philip Guenther wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Rod Whitworth >> wrote: >>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 22:54:58 -0430, Andres Perera wrote: >> ... lkm(4) is outdated with wrong information about a feature no longer present? >>> >>> From cvsweb:src/lkm/ap/Attic/README >>> >>> Revision 1.3 >>> Mon Feb 24 22:30:12 2003 UTC (10 years ago) by matthieu >>> Branches: MAIN >>> CVS tags: HEAD >>> FILE REMOVED >>> Changes since revision 1.2: +1 -1 lines >>> Bye, unused code. >> >> This is too subtle for me. How is that relevant to the question Andres >> asked? > > Agreed. So why can I find lkm(4) in the man pages and it references > OpenBSD 5.0?? > This is the first time I was even aware OBSD had anything to do with > lkm. Because the lkm interface is used to load dynamic kernel modules in OpenBSD, like the man page says. I have been doing this for the OpenAFS client from OpenBSD 3.6 through to 5.2, inclusive, at least for i386. I have no idea what src/lkm used to do but modload work just fine using the lkm interface. Antoine Verheijen Email: antoine.verhei...@ualberta.ca AICT (formerly CNS) Phone: (780) 492-9312 University of Alberta Fax: (780) 492-1729
