"David O'Brien" writes:
> I am planning on adding the Wide-DHCP client to src/contrib/ and
> src/sbin/ in a few days.
>
> I have it bmaked and ready go to. I have choosen the WIDE client because
> it is much smaller space-wise than the ISC client and its configuration
> is simplier.
>
> The pla
I'm not convinced that DHCP CLIENT needs to have everything wide open.
It sends a broadcast, but the response is directed.
On Mon, 8 Feb 1999, Sean Eric Fagan wrote:
> In article
> <19990209082922.17759.qmail.kithrup.freebsd.curr...@rucus.ru.ac.za> you write:
> >- DHCP-WIDE requires you to have
> It may even be necessary to use bpf initially, but there must be a more
> elegant way - having a quick look around - it would be a good idea to
> look at the code which already exists in libstand
> (/usr/src/lib/libstand/bootp.c).
There is.
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 15:20:45 -0400 (EDT)
> David's original email said he was going to commit without giving
> a justification. I call it bloat, then the justifications pour in.
I may have been too close to the situation. JKH asked for a DHCP client
on -STABLE a few days ago to add to the boot floppy. He now has one.
I was taking th
On Mon, Feb 08, 1999 at 11:10:53PM -0800, Mike Smith wrote:
>
> There are any number of reasons for going with the ISC client,
> including an involved ISC developer that's keen to help it happen.
The WIDE project has been very responsive in the past in supporting their
products on FreeBSD. Unle
> > *DO* *NOT* *SUPPORT* *STATIC* *IP* *ASSIGNMENTS*. How can we make this any
> > clearer to you? Its fine to say `I don't want to see DHCP in the base
> > system'
> Then, *BUY* the cd-rom and support the FreeBSD project.
Maybe Gary isn't yelling loud enought, so let me try.
I AM part of the
> What impact will this have on the rc files? How will it affect
> rc.conf, seeing as it overrides several values therein?
Most basic, you would have ``network_interfaces="lo0 fxp0"'' as usual,
but no "ifconfig_fxp0="inet " line.
Rather you would have a ``/etc/start_if.fxp0'' file with:
> Would you please settle on a set of misinformation and stick with it?
>
> isc-dhcp's client *does* have a very extensive configuration file. Same
> parser as the server.
Ok! So I'll stop passing on this information, I'll try it again. Last
time I used ISC-dhclient, it did infact REQUIRE a co
I took a 3.0 kernel #3 floppy and tried to install 3.0 on two systems
and both failed:
1. System:
PCB Motherboard , Amd 386/40, Cyrix FasMath (w/ or w/o)
8 MB, IDE IBM DHEA 38451 (16384/16/63)
The most I could achieve was booting up into blue install screen
mode but got hung
On Mon, Feb 08, 1999 at 04:32:39PM -0800, Steve Kargl
wrote:
> > If we want FreeBSD to have any credibility as a workstation OS, we
> > need DHCP. It should be possible for a user or admin to smack in the
> > boot floppy, have it autoconfigure the selected network interface, and
> > perform an F
This sometimes can happen :( However, to avoid hungs - boot with -c option
and in visual configure mode disable all devices which you doesn't have.
Maxim
Christoph Kukulies wrote:
> I took a 3.0 kernel #3 floppy and tried to install 3.0 on two systems
> and both failed:
>
> 1. System:
>
> P
Can we go onto a more interesting discussion? I'm a bit tired of
debating the merits of DHCP or rc.conf.site.foo.bar and this
discussion thread (and that one) have now moved to the "delete at
first sight" stage.
- Jordan
> David O'Brien wrote:
> > > These should be left has ports.
> >
> > Expla
In article
you write:
>What impact will this have on the rc files? How will it affect
>rc.conf, seeing as it overrides several values therein?
PAO already has some support for this; it works, and is what I've been using.
>What happens
>if your lease expires and doesn't get renewed, or gets ren
On Mon, 8 Feb 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> This does not make any operational change except to get rid
> of the $conf_dir junk from rc.conf, which I originally put
> in to try to bootstrap rc.diskless.
>
> A much better way to do rc.diskless was suggested to me,
> which I'm
> -Original Message-
> From: David O'Brien [mailto:obr...@nuxi.com]
> Sent: 09 February 1999 10:54
> To: Geoff Rehmet
> Cc: curr...@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: adding DHCP client to src/contrib/
>
>
> > It may even be necessary to use bpf initially, but there
> must be a more
> > elegan
On Tue, Feb 09, 1999 at 01:37:16PM +0200, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
> This sometimes can happen :( However, to avoid hungs - boot with -c option
> and in visual configure mode disable all devices which you doesn't have.
I should have mentioned that I did that already. The installation disk
lets you en
> I've seen identical panics when using nmh's spost command to send
> mail. Instant panic saying "negative ref cnt". This is using an NFS
> mounted home directory (containing the draft mail to be sent).
> Unfortunately, I didn't have time to investigate further, so I just
> switched over to using
Jordan,
I object to the idea that the selection of which dhcp client
is being made on the basis that David has commit privledges
and I do not. Further, it is clear that David has not used a
recent release of the isc client and is biasing his opinion
with false assertions.
It is my opinion that we
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard"
Subject: Re: adding DHCP client to src/contrib/
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 21:05:59 -0800
> > Make sysinstall be able to pkg_add? We do something similar to
>
> It can already pkg_add. However, I need dhcp in the crunched image
> since I can't very well GET a package if
Steve Kargl wrote:
>
> Drop FreeBSD cd-rom into tray (or caddy).
> mount_cd9660 /dev/cd0a /mnt
> pkg_add dhcp
> umount /mnt
What about us without FreeBSD cd-roms?
--
Daniel C. Sobral(8-DCS)
d...@newsguy.com
d...@freebsd.org
Well, as a computer geek, I have to be
Karl Pielorz wrote:
>
> Whilst the argument about removing the source tree / kernel source etc. has
> always been pretty mute (what hackers not worth their salt don't come
> prepared? :) - I don't like the idea of every root exploiter just being able
> to 'instantly' sit there and run BPF! (Withou
Steve Kargl wrote:
>
> > > The plan is to make a boot floppy / boot CDROM with a DHCP client on it.
>
> Content-Type: text/BLOAT
>
> These should be left has ports.
I disagree. It is very common nowadays to need to extract your IP
address through DHCP. Not having a DHCP boot floppy/cd is a seri
From: John Birrell
> Or convince FreeBSD developers to simply add a DHCP client to the base
> sources and build a boot/install floppy with that functionality.
> No user cost. No user hassle. Why not?! Sigh.
Agree that this should be done for now. Absolutely.
In the long run, an extensible sysin
On Mon, Feb 08, 1999 at 08:14:55PM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> This does not make any operational change except to get rid
> of the $conf_dir junk from rc.conf, which I originally put
> in to try to bootstrap rc.diskless.
>
> A much better way to do rc.diskless was suggested to
> I object to the idea that the selection of which dhcp client
> is being made on the basis that David has commit privledges
> and I do not. Further, it is clear that David has not used a
> recent release of the isc client and is biasing his opinion
> with false assertions.
H. From where I'm
<
said:
> The issue, as I understand it, is to get a reply from an unknown server
> (who has an IP address), while you have no IP address.
You also have to send a packet *from* 0.0.0.0 (since you have no IP
address). I'm almost irritated enough to consider fixing this this
week.
-GAWollman
On Mon, Jan 18, 1999 at 07:39:06PM +0200, Robert Nordier wrote:
> Josef Karthauser wrote:
>
> As the one who did the actual coding, I can confirm that the approach
> adopted in both the new bootblocks and the boot loader is virtually
> identical to that used in the older (biosboot) bootblocks. In
I do not dispute that he "likes" the WIDE client. However, his
choice seems to be based on familarity rather than CURRENT technical
evaluation.
I have (recently) tried both clients.
For the simple case, both work satisfactorily.
The ISC client/server (pl10) builds right out of the box.
I prefer
Sean Eric Fagan writes:
> >There is NO config file which means its damn annoying for you to tweak how
> >it works..
>
> Would you please settle on a set of misinformation and stick with it?
>
> isc-dhcp's client *does* have a very extensive configuration file. Same
> parser as the server.
>
>
How about putting bpf functionality into install-kernel, but not
into the GENERIC kernel?
If the install required the use of dhcp, sysinstall should yell
about having to rebuild the kernel with bpf-device in.
On the other hand, the security-concerned ISPs and others can
rebuild their kernels to r
> How about putting bpf functionality into install-kernel, but not
> into the GENERIC kernel?
That's already going to happen since the dhcp client isn't going to be
very useful otherwise. Since this affects only the installation
kernel, it's nothing that anyone should take issue with.
- Jordan
Hi folks,
It seems to me that most of all people in the developer list carried
away with DHCP issue and just ignore that buildworld fails continuously
for 2 days in /usr/src/sys/i386/ibcs2/ibcs2_ipc.c. Please get rid of
it!!!
Sincerely,
Maxim
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
< said:
>> A much better way to do rc.diskless was suggested to me,
>> which I'm going to implement. It involves retargeting
>> the /conf/ME softlink by mount_union'ing a small MFS
> Union mounts do not work, and I believe they are some distance from
> working (unless you have better patches th
On 8 Feb, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
>> These should be left has ports.
>
> Can't really get away with that anymore - too many people require
> DHCP for very basic bootstrapping.
To insert some reality into this discussion, a quick survey at the
office shows:
PlatformHas DHCP
"David O'Brien" wrote:
> I was taking the "contribute code, not ideas with no one to act on them"
> route.
Hear, Hear! Please import this, it will certainly make may (and many of
those I work with) lives a $#!tload easier.
M
--
Mark Murray
Join the anti-SPAM movement: http://www.cauce.org
To Uns
From: Charlie ROOT
> Although it is somewhat larger, the ISC dhcp2 client has significantly
> more flexability WRT options beyond the bare basics.
>
> I would recommend that the default client on HD based systems be the
> ISC client because of that flexability.
I have to agree here.
The problem
An alternative to dhclient and bpf would be to add an ioctl that would
force an interface to initiate a DHCP configuration. This would allow
for something like:
ifconfig ep0 dhcp
Of course, this means moving the entire DHCP state engine into the
kernel ...
--lyndon
To Unsubs
> To insert some reality into this discussion, a quick survey at the
> office shows:
>
> Platform Has DHCP
>
> Irix 6.5 Yes
> Solaris 2.5.1 No
... and Solaris 2.6 has DHCP.
> HP/UX 10.20 Yes
> Linux (RH 5.x)
Maxim Sobolev writes:
> It seems to me that most of all people in the developer list carried
> away with DHCP issue and just ignore that buildworld fails continuously
> for 2 days in /usr/src/sys/i386/ibcs2/ibcs2_ipc.c. Please get rid of
> it!!!
If you followed the appropriate lists, you'd know t
On Mon, 8 Feb 1999, Steve Kargl wrote:
> Daniel O'Connor wrote:
> >
> > On 09-Feb-99 Steve Kargl wrote:
> > > > And just WHERE is the package?? Often on an NFS or FTP server, no??
> > > > And just HOW am I to communicate with that NFS or FTP server??
> > > Drop FreeBSD cd-rom into tray (or cadd
:>> the /conf/ME softlink by mount_union'ing a small MFS
:
:> Union mounts do not work, and I believe they are some distance from
:> working (unless you have better patches than I do, of course).
:
:Last I checked, union mounts work just fine, thank you very much.
:unionfs (which should have been
On Tue, Feb 09, 1999 at 09:59:52AM -0600, Charlie ROOT wrote:
> If someone will agree to commit the files, I'd be happy to supply
> the pieces for the ISC DHCP2 client to drop in.
I already have a bmaked ISC v2 dhclient. I bmaked both so I would more
informated about how easy either would be to a
< said:
> union mounts are broken. I must have panic'd my test box 50 times
> trying to get them to work.
> Fortunately I found another way using the less sophisticated
> -o union type of mount
That is a union mount. Which is it -- broken or not?
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Woll
On Tue, Feb 09, 1999 at 09:27:44AM -0700, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
>
> Platform Has DHCP
>
> Irix 6.5 Yes
> Solaris 2.5.1 No
Solaris 2.6 Yes
You should have used a more modern Solaris. It helps your argment. :-)
Matthew Dillon writes:
> union mounts are broken. I must have panic'd my test box 50 times
> trying to get them to work.
Nonono. The union filesystem ('mount -t union') is broken. Union
mounts ('mount -o union') are not.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - d...@flood.ping.uio.no
To Unsubscri
On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 09, 1999 at 09:27:44AM -0700, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> >
> > PlatformHas DHCP
> >
> > Irix 6.5Yes
> > Solaris 2.5.1 No
> Solaris 2.6 Yes
>
> You should have used a mor
:Matthew Dillon writes:
:> union mounts are broken. I must have panic'd my test box 50 times
:> trying to get them to work.
:
:Nonono. The union filesystem ('mount -t union') is broken. Union
:mounts ('mount -o union') are not.
:
:DES
:--
:Dag-Erling Smorgrav - d...@flood.ping.uio.no
In article <19990209003618.b19...@relay.nuxi.com>, David O'Brien
wrote:
> Maybe Gary isn't yelling loud enought, so let me try.
>
> I AM part of the FreeBSD Project. I'm contributing about as much as
> I possibly can.
David, please Just Do It. As is often the case, the loudest of the
obstructi
> Fortunately I found another way using the less sophisticated
> -o union type of mount ( verses the more sophisticated mount_union ).
Well, there are problems here too. I had /var/mail mounted with -o union
from another host. My own, local, mailbox would get corrupted every once
in a whil
In article
, Richard
Wackerbarth wrote:
> I object to the idea that the selection of which dhcp client is
> being made on the basis that David has commit privledges and I do
> not.
It's not. It's being made on the basis that David took the initiative
and did the work, and you did not.
--
Joh
On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, Mikhail Teterin wrote:
> > Fortunately I found another way using the less sophisticated
> > -o union type of mount ( verses the more sophisticated mount_union ).
>
> Well, there are problems here too. I had /var/mail mounted with -o union
> from another host. My own,
Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
>
> An alternative to dhclient and bpf would be to add an ioctl that would
> force an interface to initiate a DHCP configuration. This would allow
> for something like:
>
> ifconfig ep0 dhcp
>
> Of course, this means moving the entire DHCP state engine into the
> ke
At 9:25 AM -0800 2/9/99, David O'Brien wrote:
> I already have a bmaked ISC v2 dhclient. I bmaked both so I would
> more informated about how easy either would be to add to the tree.
>
> I will spend some time today and reflect on which client I still
> prefer in import.
Does anyone have a good f
> Wackerbarth wrote:
>
> > I object to the idea that the selection of which dhcp client is
> > being made on the basis that David has commit privledges and I do
> > not.
>
> It's not. It's being made on the basis that David took the initiative
> and did the work, and you did not.
I think, he d
> Erm, you forgot to include the patches to do this...
I'll leave that to the anti-bpf fanatics (who can also supply patches
to eliminate /dev/[k]mem while they're at it). I'm quite happy seeing
ISC dhclient move into /sbin.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe f
> > What impact will this have on the rc files? How will it affect
> > rc.conf, seeing as it overrides several values therein?
>
> Most basic, you would have ``network_interfaces="lo0 fxp0"'' as usual,
> but no "ifconfig_fxp0="inet " line.
Actually, I'm not sure I'd want to be that locked
on Feb 9, David O'Brien wrote:
> > What impact will this have on the rc files? How will it affect
> > rc.conf, seeing as it overrides several values therein?
>
> Most basic, you would have ``network_interfaces="lo0 fxp0"'' as usual,
> but no "ifconfig_fxp0="inet " line.
>
> Rather you wo
Just wanted to mention something that I haven't seen mentioned here in
all the flaming and whatnot.
OpenBSD ships out-of-the-box with dhcp client support available as an
install option. This turned out to be very nice when I was installing
it on one of my friend's Sparcs. His network is on a
May I suggest looking at the OpenBSD dhcp client/server? I'm not sure
which one they're derived from, but the CHANGES file lists a bunch of
bug and security fixes.
-- Parag Patel
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the
> Ok! So I'll stop passing on this information, I'll try it again. Last
> time I used ISC-dhclient, it did infact REQUIRE a configuration file.
> Now a zero length file might of done the trick.. but it bitched about a
> non-existent file. and would not fetch an IP address for me when I ran
> it.
> > Most basic, you would have ``network_interfaces="lo0 fxp0"'' as usual,
> > but no "ifconfig_fxp0="inet " line.
>
> then specify a 'DHCP' token to have all non-listed interfaces do the
> DHCP thing, eg:
>
> network_interfaces="lo0 dhcp"
Hum... can you give a little more of the approach?
:> Well, there are problems here too. I had /var/mail mounted with -o union
:> from another host. My own, local, mailbox would get corrupted every once
:> in a while -- lots of \0, some other strings. 16K in size.
:>
:> This is on 3.0-RELEASE, with NFSv3. The server is Solaris.
:
:There were sever
Is anyone having problems loading the SVR4 module? I have it loading
up thru loader.rc, and I get:
Preloaded elf kernel "kernel" at 0xf02a3000.
Preloaded splash_image_data "/boot/splash.bmp" at 0xf02a309c.
Preloaded elf module "splash_bmp.ko" at 0xf02a30ec.
Preloaded elf module "cd9660.ko" at 0xf
> May I suggest looking at the OpenBSD dhcp client/server? I'm not sure
> which one they're derived from, but the CHANGES file lists a bunch of
> bug and security fixes.
It looks like they're using the ISC dhcp client (and server).
Dan Eischen
eisc...@vigrid.com
To Unsubscribe: send mail to m
> > > Most basic, you would have ``network_interfaces="lo0 fxp0"'' as usual,
> > > but no "ifconfig_fxp0="inet " line.
> >
> > then specify a 'DHCP' token to have all non-listed interfaces do the
> > DHCP thing, eg:
> >
> > network_interfaces="lo0 dhcp"
>
> Hum... can you give a little more
On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, Viren R. Shah wrote:
> I do have "pseudo-device streams" in my kernel config. Is there
> anything else that I require?
Yes, I needed to add "options KTRACE".
Blaz Zupan, b...@medinet.si, http://home.amis.net/blaz
Medinet d.o.o., Linhartova 21, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia
To Unsub
On Mon, 08-Feb-1999 at 17:44:33 -0700, John Galbraith wrote:
> Dag-Erling Smorgrav writes:
> > Steve Kargl writes:
> > > Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > > > I stumbled upon the (undocumented) gpib driver today [...]
> > > Actually, John Galbraith has written
> > > a better driver for the Nati
Everybody who is experiencing spontaneous reboots under 3.0-STABLE or
4.0-CURRENT (and did not experience them with 2.2.8 or earlier) and cannot
find any indication of what could be wrong (nothing on the console and
nothing in syslog), please send me (in *private* mail) the output of
"dmesg" on you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
MS> It seems to me that most of all people in the developer list carried
MS> away with DHCP issue and just ignore that buildworld fails continuously
MS> for 2 days in /usr/src/sys/i386/ibcs2/ibcs2_ipc.c. Please get rid
>
> I would greatly appreciate to see this thing go into the tree. I
> still have to build a measurement system in our lab (you remeber,
> John :-)) and people there are talking about linux already :-(.
>
> Don't shoot me, but I would like to see it in 2.2.x if possible,
> since 3.x-STABLE still h
Rather that listen to people wail over the next few months, it was
decided instead to go to a slight variation on the previous theme in
hopes that more people will be happy with the compromise.
In essence, what used to be everything in /etc/rc.conf has moved to
/etc/defaults/rc.conf and this file
Mike Smith wrote:
>
>> I've got a machine on the DHCP required network with two NICs. Currently
>> I'm only using one of them and thus don't have it listed in
>> ``network_interfaces''. So it just happily sits there. IMHO we
>> shouldn't try to dhcp configure it. It will just fill up logs as i
> Mike Smith wrote:
> >In a situation like that, you would just tune the dhcp client not to
> >ask for a lease on that interface. You know you've done something
> >silly; there's a mechanism to stop it breaking things. What more could
> >you ask for?
>
> POLA. Currently, an interface that is
>Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 14:21:09 -0800
>From: "Jordan K. Hubbard"
>Since that made rc.conf.site obsolete, it was taken out of the
>configuration. Please move it to rc.conf on your system, should you
>be one of those folks who installed from an earlier snapshot and are
>now updating your /etc fro
:>configuration. Please move it to rc.conf on your system, should you
:>be one of those folks who installed from an earlier snapshot and are
:>now updating your /etc from -current or -stable sources (not likely to
:>be all that many people). This change will also be in 3.1.
:
:OK; I gather that (
On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> Sniff. I liked rc.conf where it was. /etc/rc, /etc/rc.conf.
> /etc/rc.local, /etc/rc.conf.local. Simple and obvious.
>
> Now we have /etc/defaults/rc.conf, /etc/rc.conf, and /etc/rc.conf.local.
> Considerably less simple and quite uno
> Now we have /etc/defaults/rc.conf, /etc/rc.conf, and /etc/rc.conf.local.
> Considerably less simple and quite unobvious.
Until you have to upgrade to the latest set of "knobs"; that problem
is something I think people are not focusing sufficiently on in
commenting only on the downsides o
:> Now we have /etc/defaults/rc.conf, /etc/rc.conf, and /etc/rc.conf.local.
:> Considerably less simple and quite unobvious.
:
:Erm... I thought that the point of /etc/defaults/rc.conf was that one
:wouldn't touch it, and only work with rc.conf?
:
:(Haven't looked at the change myself, as
:> Now we have /etc/defaults/rc.conf, /etc/rc.conf, and /etc/rc.conf.local.
:> Considerably less simple and quite unobvious.
:
:Until you have to upgrade to the latest set of "knobs"; that problem
:is something I think people are not focusing sufficiently on in
:commenting only on the down
Which rc.conf do you mean? :) The one in defaults/ will do everything
the old one did save source rc.conf.site.
- Jordan
> >Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 14:21:09 -0800
> >From: "Jordan K. Hubbard"
>
> >Since that made rc.conf.site obsolete, it was taken out of the
> >configuration. Please move it t
> If you want to put 'read only' junk into /etc/defaults, then why aren't
> you also sticking /etc/rc, /etc/rc.network, /etc/rc.firewall, etc etc etc
> into /etc/defaults ? It makes no sense to have an /etc/defaults/
> directory if you are still mixing read-only and user-modifiabl
On Mon, 08 Feb 1999 22:34:52 PST, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > How can we make this any clearer to you? Its fine to say `I don't
> > want to see DHCP in the base system' when you have the choice
> > of getting a static IP. A lot of the emerging high-speed access
> > providers aren't giving you that op
Personally, I have to side with Matt.
I like to have ALL of the files in one directory.
That way I can "grep ntpd /etc/rc*" and find ALL the line that are likely
to affect it. Moving some of the files into another directory just
complicates things.
I like the idea of having all the "default knobs"
> I like the idea of having all the "default knobs" in one file.
> I recommend /etc/rc.conf.defaults
The problem is that this doesn't scale. We (Mike and I) already
debated this one back and forth for awhile and decided that quite a
few files in /etc were due to be ".defaulted" and if this were k
:
:Personally, I have to side with Matt.
:I like to have ALL of the files in one directory.
:That way I can "grep ntpd /etc/rc*" and find ALL the line that are likely
:to affect it. Moving some of the files into another directory just
:complicates things.
:
:I like the idea of having all the "defau
On Sun, Feb 07, 1999 at 03:14:22PM -0500, Christopher Masto wrote:
> I haven't used it yet, but I definately think the idea is an
> improvement. I hate trying to update /etc after an upgrade.. if it's
> been a while, or it's between major versions, it can take a very
> significant amount of time.
> :
> :Personally, I have to side with Matt.
> :I like to have ALL of the files in one directory.
> :That way I can "grep ntpd /etc/rc*" and find ALL the line that are likely
> :to affect it. Moving some of the files into another directory just
> :complicates things.
> :
> :I like the idea of havin
Andre Albsmeier writes:
> Don't shoot me, but I would like to see it in 2.2.x if possible,
> since 3.x-STABLE still has some problems which makes it impossible
> for me to use it on production machines.
No, 2.2 is dead now exept for bug fixes.
Anyway, you're a committer - who's stopping you?
DE
On Tue, Feb 09, 1999 at 10:11:48PM +, Adrian Wontroba wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 07, 1999 at 03:14:22PM -0500, Christopher Masto wrote:
> > I haven't used it yet, but I definately think the idea is an
> > improvement. I hate trying to update /etc after an upgrade.. if it's
> > been a while, or it's
:As Jordan pointed out, this gets very messy very quickly.
:
:> I don't think we should have an /etc/defaults/ directory, but if
:> it is insisted on then *ALL* the read-only files should be moved into
:> it, not just one of them.
:
:All of the files that currently mix read-only and rea
"Jordan K. Hubbard" writes:
> > Andre Albsmeier writes:
> > > Don't shoot me, but I would like to see it in 2.2.x if possible,
> > > since 3.x-STABLE still has some problems which makes it impossible
> > > for me to use it on production machines.
> > No, 2.2 is dead now exept for bug fixes.
> >
Actually, I would. I would prefer to see 2.2.x left to die
in peace. The vinum import to that branch already has me on
edge enough as it is.
- Jordan
> Andre Albsmeier writes:
> > Don't shoot me, but I would like to see it in 2.2.x if possible,
> > since 3.x-STABLE still has some problems whic
> I meant "who's stopping you from committing the driver", not "who's
> stopping you from committing the driver to 2.2". I too think 2.2
> should be left to die in peace.
Well, before it is committed I would like to see one of you FreeBSD
wizards to check it over for a half hour first. My expe
On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> I think it's a *BAD* idea to change rc.conf operation for the 3.1
> distribution. Bad Bad Bad.
I have to agree. Let's not forget that there are over 30 man
pages with references to /etc/rc.conf. There is already enough
confusion over wcd in
I have just commited changes to devstat(9) that will require recompilation
of the following things:
libdevstat [ do this first! ]
systat
iostat
vmstat
rpc.rstatd
You'll have to recompile those things in order to use them with the new
kernel changes.
You will probably also have to recompile any
> Should I send it in with this "send-pr" command myself, or should I
Please, thanks!
- Jordan
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
In addition to Irix 6.5, you should also add Irix 6.3 and 6.4 to that list.
It's been there since 6.3 first shipped on the O2s in '97.
-steve
From: owner-freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org
[mailto:owner-freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of John Fieber
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 12:41 PM
To:
I understand the scaling issue.
However, I like to keep related things in one place.
Perhaps we need to move ALL the rc files into a common
directory.
As for the "read-only" argument, I recommend, for those
who wish to separate them, symbolic links from the read
only area to a writable area. When t
On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, jack wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
>
> > I think it's a *BAD* idea to change rc.conf operation for the 3.1
> > distribution. Bad Bad Bad.
>
> I have to agree. Let's not forget that there are over 30 man
> pages with references to /etc/rc.conf.
>From: "Daniel C. Sobral"
>
>>Steve Kargl wrote:
>>
>> > > The plan is to make a boot floppy / boot CDROM with a DHCP client on it.
>>
>> Content-Type: text/BLOAT
>>
>> These should be left has ports.
>
>I disagree. It is very common nowadays to need to extract your IP
>address through DHCP. N
1 - 100 of 124 matches
Mail list logo
