Re: OpenBSD 5.3 npppd pppoe segmantation fault
Hi,
On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 01:00:14 +0900
trick star wrote:
> hi, I have problem in the OpenBSD -snapshots 5.3 npppd pppoe setting!
> server's npppd was down for segmantation fault. when client to attache
> the server.
> before -current version was fine. but new -snapshots is suck.
> if anyone could help my problem. please suggest for me.
npppd pppoe server has been broken since September. I fixed the
problem on cvs and I attached the diff below. I'd like you to apply
the diff and let me know if the diff doesn't fix your problem.
Thank you your report.
Index: pppoe/pppoed.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/npppd/pppoe/pppoed.c,v
retrieving revision 1.11
diff -u -p -r1.11 pppoed.c
--- pppoe/pppoed.c 18 Sep 2012 13:14:08 - 1.11
+++ pppoe/pppoed.c 6 Apr 2013 01:56:29 -
@@ -470,8 +470,9 @@ pppoed_reload(pppoed *_this, struct pppo
struct ifaddrs*ifa0;
slist rmlist, newlist;
struct {
- char ifname[IF_NAMESIZE];
- char name[PPPOED_PHY_LABEL_SIZE];
+ char ifname[IF_NAMESIZE];
+ char name[PPPOED_PHY_LABEL_SIZE];
+ struct pppoe_conf *conf;
} listeners[PPPOE_NLISTENER];
pppoed_listener *l;
pppoe_session *session;
@@ -493,6 +494,7 @@ pppoed_reload(pppoed *_this, struct pppo
sizeof(listeners[count].ifname));
strlcpy(listeners[count].name, conf->name,
sizeof(listeners[count].name));
+ listeners[count].conf = conf;
count++;
}
@@ -520,6 +522,7 @@ pppoed_reload(pppoed *_this, struct pppo
strlcpy(l->tun_name, listeners[i].name, sizeof(l->tun_name));
strlcpy(l->listen_ifname, listeners[i].ifname,
sizeof(l->listen_ifname));
+ l->conf = listeners[i].conf;
if (slist_add(&newlist, l) == NULL) {
pppoed_log(_this, LOG_ERR,
"slist_add() failed in %s(): %m", __func__);
Index: l2tp/l2tpd.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/npppd/l2tp/l2tpd.c,v
retrieving revision 1.11
diff -u -p -r1.11 l2tpd.c
--- l2tp/l2tpd.c18 Sep 2012 13:14:08 - 1.11
+++ l2tp/l2tpd.c19 Apr 2013 03:19:17 -
@@ -573,8 +573,6 @@ l2tpd_reload(l2tpd *_this, struct l2tp_c
return 0;
}
- if (l2tpd_init(_this) != 0)
- return -1;
i = 0;
TAILQ_FOREACH(conf, l2tp_conf, entry)
l2tpd_add_listener(_this, i++, conf);
Index: npppd/npppd.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/npppd/npppd/npppd.c,v
retrieving revision 1.28
diff -u -p -r1.28 npppd.c
--- npppd/npppd.c 16 Apr 2013 07:42:27 - 1.28
+++ npppd/npppd.c 19 Apr 2013 03:19:20 -
@@ -286,6 +286,18 @@ npppd_init(npppd *_this, const char *con
_this->boot_id = (uint32_t)random();
+#ifdef USE_NPPPD_L2TP
+ if (l2tpd_init(&_this->l2tpd) != 0)
+ return (-1);
+#endif
+#ifdef USE_NPPPD_PPTP
+ if (pptpd_init(&_this->pptpd) != 0)
+ return (-1);
+#endif
+#ifdef USE_NPPPD_PPPOE
+ if (pppoed_init(&_this->pppoed) != 0)
+ return (-1);
+#endif
/* load configuration */
if ((status = npppd_reload_config(_this)) != 0)
return status;
Index: pptp/pptpd.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/npppd/pptp/pptpd.c,v
retrieving revision 1.16
diff -u -p -r1.16 pptpd.c
--- pptp/pptpd.c6 Apr 2013 17:03:51 - 1.16
+++ pptp/pptpd.c19 Apr 2013 03:19:22 -
@@ -589,8 +589,6 @@ pptpd_reload(pptpd *_this, struct pptp_c
return 0;
}
- if (pptpd_init(_this) != 0)
- return -1;
i = 0;
TAILQ_FOREACH(conf, pptp_conf, entry)
pptpd_add_listener(_this, i++, conf);
Why does OpenBSD use CVS?
Hi, first, I don't want to start a flame war about why is CVS better or not better than X - it's just a question. If you say, we use it because it just works - it's okay. :) So why does OpenBSD still uses CVS and don't migrate to SVN or something like git as other OSS projekts do? Regards, fritjof
Re: Why does OpenBSD use CVS?
Sat 20.Apr'13 at 9:43:24 +0200, Alokat MacMoneysack > Hi, > > first, I don't want to start a flame war about why is CVS better or not > better than X - it's just a question. > > If you say, we use it because it just works - it's okay. :) > > So why does OpenBSD still uses CVS and don't migrate to SVN or something like > git as other OSS projekts do? > > Regards, > fritjof Does it really matter? -- James Griffin: jmz at kontrol.kode5.net jmzgriffin at gmail.com A4B9 E875 A18C 6E11 F46D B788 BEE6 1251 1D31 DC38
Re: Why does OpenBSD use CVS?
I find it a little bit difficult to see the commits from the developers. Because I have to check out the single files and not a single commit. James Griffin wrote: >Sat 20.Apr'13 at 9:43:24 +0200, Alokat >MacMoneysack >> Hi, >> >> first, I don't want to start a flame war about why is CVS better or >not better than X - it's just a question. >> >> If you say, we use it because it just works - it's okay. :) >> >> So why does OpenBSD still uses CVS and don't migrate to SVN or >something like git as other OSS projekts do? >> >> Regards, >> fritjof > >Does it really matter? > >-- >James Griffin: jmz at kontrol.kode5.net > jmzgriffin at gmail.com > >A4B9 E875 A18C 6E11 F46D B788 BEE6 1251 1D31 DC38 -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: Why does OpenBSD use CVS?
I work in a place where we used CVS. Recently due to various issues (commits
per file, pserver too slow, branching) we switched to Git. Now after some
months with Git there are some people, me as well but to lesser extent (I had
an early start), who are having issues due to branches they want to have how to
share work with each other. Staging, commits, gerrit, hudson etc. etc..
There is not one best tool that works for everyone forever thereafter ... :)
and usually the one you know is the one you feel most productive ('cause you
really are), but from personal experience as one of the early Git adopters I
have to tell you running Git locally on the CVS checkout was great I saw all
changes (directories multiple file etc.) someone put in when doing cvs update >
git status and for everyone else using only CVS it was easy to share cvs update
> commit ;). In fact since I am new to OpenBSD and want to learn stuff that's
exactly what I am doing with their CVS out local git in.
After years in dev/support/etc. I have to tell you complex tools rarely solve
complex problems... Unless you are the one creating them. You only need simple
building blocks with a small feature set so you can explain it and remember it.
That's actually what I very much like in OpenBSD I installed in 5 minutes and
after that I did ps/top only 11 processes ... Wow. Try that with something else
and you will see the entry barrier to understanding the system is higher.
Sorry I diverted :) the main point is if you want to see changes as groups use
git.
HTH
George
- Original message -
> I find it a little bit difficult to see the commits from the developers.
> Because I have to check out the single files and not a single commit.
>
> James Griffin wrote:
>
> > Sat 20.Apr'13 at 9:43:24 +0200, Alokat
> > MacMoneysack
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > first, I don't want to start a flame war about why is CVS better or
> > not better than X - it's just a question.
> > >
> > > If you say, we use it because it just works - it's okay. :)
> > >
> > > So why does OpenBSD still uses CVS and don't migrate to SVN or
> > something like git as other OSS projekts do?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > fritjof
> >
> > Does it really matter?
> >
> > --
> > James Griffin: jmz at kontrol.kode5.net
> > jmzgriffin at gmail.com
> >
> > A4B9 E875 A18C 6E11 F46D B788 BEE6 1251 1D31 DC38
>
> --
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: Why does OpenBSD use CVS?
Alokat MacMoneysack wrote: > I find it a little bit difficult to see the commits from the developers. > Because I have to check out the single files and not a single commit. You might find the cvsps package useful. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de
Re: Why does OpenBSD use CVS?
On Apr 20, 2013, at 1:02 PM, na...@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) wrote: > Alokat MacMoneysack wrote: > >> I find it a little bit difficult to see the commits from the developers. >> Because I have to check out the single files and not a single commit. > > You might find the cvsps package useful. Or use https://bitbucket.org/braindamaged/openbsd-src to catch up on commits or skim through the history of -current. Franco
Re: Disappointing ISC BIND performance on OpenBSD 5.3 snapshot
On 2013-04-19, Kostas Zorbadelos wrote: > root@dmeg-dns1 ~ # /usr/local/sbin/named -V > BIND 9.9.2-P2 built with > '--enable-shared' '--enable-threads' You could try rebuilding the port without --enable-threads and see if it's any different.
NAT with one interface
According to the pf FAQ page for network address translation: "An OpenBSD system doing NAT will have at least two network adapters, one to the Internet, the other to your internal network." I have a VPS with two IP addresses, one for the Internet and one for a VLAN. I have another VPS just on the VLAN. I am wondering if I can do a NAT on the first VPS for the second.
Re: Why does OpenBSD use CVS?
On 09:43 Sat 20 Apr , Alokat MacMoneysack wrote: > Hi, > > first, I don't want to start a flame war about why is CVS better or not > better than X - it's just a question. > > If you say, we use it because it just works - it's okay. :) > > So why does OpenBSD still uses CVS and don't migrate to SVN or something like > git as other OSS projekts do? > > Regards, > fritjof There were several threads similiar to this one. CVS has many advantages. CVS has many disadvantages. If you are uncomfortable with it for some reason you can use other tools you find more useful. There are several git mirrors of openbsd source repo, for example.
Re: USB Wireless Adapter with hostap
On 2013-04-18, Vijay Sankar wrote: > I am trying to replace an Apple Extreme base station with an OpenBSD > router and tried quite a few Linksys/Cisco, D-Link etc., wireless USB > adapters but none of them seem to support hostap mode. Everything I > tried uses run, urtw, or urtwn and the stores around here don't seem > to have any USB wireless NIC that uses ral or rum. > > What currently available wireless USB adapter would support hostap? USB isn't very good for hostap. If you particularly want something to use as OpenBSD hostap then an athn PCI/PCIe/minipci/minipcie card is probably the best bet, but it will be limited to 11g only unless someone ports the 11n code from FreeBSD's net80211 layer (or writes a separate implementation).
Re: Why does OpenBSD use CVS?
On 2013-04-20, Alokat MacMoneysack wrote: > Hi, > > first, I don't want to start a flame war about why is CVS better or not > better than X - it's just a question. > > If you say, we use it because it just works - it's okay. :) > > So why does OpenBSD still uses CVS and don't migrate to SVN or something like > git as other OSS projekts do? > > Regards, > fritjof > > my 2p: like all version control software CVS has bugs, but between us, developers have a reasonable idea of how to avoid them in CVS, there's less knowledge about other version control systems. Also having the repository stored in human-readable (ish) files is an advantage if there was ever any repo corruption. You might also ask why some other OS use source control software which they don't even include in the base OS ;-)
Re: Why does OpenBSD use CVS?
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 01:06:44PM +0200, Franco Fichtner wrote: > On Apr 20, 2013, at 1:02 PM, na...@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) wrote: > > > Alokat MacMoneysack wrote: > > > >> I find it a little bit difficult to see the commits from the developers. > >> Because I have to check out the single files and not a single commit. > > > > You might find the cvsps package useful. > > Or use https://bitbucket.org/braindamaged/openbsd-src to catch up on > commits or skim through the history of -current. > > > Franco > Or use cvsync to keep a repository local and then look at the Changelog files. Ken
Re: NAT with one interface
You can. Best regards, Nikola Gyurov On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 3:58 PM, wrote: > According to the pf FAQ page for network address translation: "An OpenBSD > system doing NAT will have at least two network adapters, one to the > Internet, the other to your internal network." > > I have a VPS with two IP addresses, one for the Internet and one for a > VLAN. I have another VPS just on the VLAN. I am wondering if I can do a > NAT on the first VPS for the second.
Re: NAT with one interface
On 2013-04-20, fek...@tormail.org wrote: > According to the pf FAQ page for network address translation: "An OpenBSD > system doing NAT will have at least two network adapters, one to the > Internet, the other to your internal network." > > I have a VPS with two IP addresses, one for the Internet and one for a > VLAN. I have another VPS just on the VLAN. I am wondering if I can do a > NAT on the first VPS for the second. Yes. I've changed the FAQ to say "interfaces" rather than "adapters" to make it more obvious that there's no problem doing this with vlans.
Re: NAT with one interface
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 00:47, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > I've changed the FAQ to say "interfaces" rather than "adapters" to > make it more obvious that there's no problem doing this with vlans. Strictly speaking, you don't even need vlans. You can NAT off a single interface with two IPs. /--- inside machine 1 uplink switch NAT router \-- inside machine 2 This will work, although your uplink may or may not enjoy your "inside" packets occasionally leaking into their network.
Re: Why does OpenBSD use CVS?
On 04/20/13 03:42, Alokat MacMoneysack wrote: > Hi, > > first, I don't want to start a flame war about why is CVS better or > not better than X - it's just a question. > > If you say, we use it because it just works - it's okay. :) Good, 'cause it does. :) > So why does OpenBSD still uses CVS and don't migrate to SVN or > something like git as other OSS projekts do? * "it works" * migrating - and not losing history is difficult. * migrating versioning systems is something you don't want to do every few weeks (or even every few years)...so you want to make sure it is really worth it if/when you do. SVN today? GIT next week? something else next year? Please, no. * Tolerable -- and in the case of opencvs, ideal -- license. * its glitches are hated, but known (the devil you know how to subdue, vs. the devil who beats the sh*t out of you) * relatively light weight -- runs fine on a 486, hp300, or on a modern, fast machine, fits nicely into existing distribution, easy to drop into a chroot. * Infrastructure exists. To change it all would require a really good reason. * it fits the OpenBSD development model. * Many of the "features" of alternatives are not desired in the OpenBSD development model. Obviously, it is possible to build a quality-focused product of Operating System magnitude using CVS. I don't think one can quite say CVS is the REASON for OpenBSD's quality, but it obviously hasn't hurt. Nick.
