lem.
> Please Check with Megaraid FreeBSD drivers.
>
> ~ Kashyap
>
>>
>> It should be supported by mfi(4). Try adding the PCI ID to that
>> driver and see if that works. Or you can grab the driver from the
>> head_mfi branch, it looks like it already supports th
-t 9390
procstat -i 9390 | grep -vE -- '---$'
procstat -j 9390 | grep -vE -- '--$'
As well as ps output for the process:
ps auwwx | grep -w 9390
Also ktrace'ing the process and sending a kdump (or part of it) could be useful.
Thanks,
Josh
___
ust do a "simple
overclock" as was possible in the past. I don't plan to run it at 4
GHz forever, I just figured I should be able to see at least a 10-15%
increase in speed (if not more) if the turbo were working. And so far
I'm not seeing any evidence of the tur
nning for the install only
which is in most circumstances something that happens locally.
--
Thanks,
Josh Paetzel
FreeBSD -- The power to serve
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
re at MeetBSD (sorry I don't know his name) who said it
was a horrible idea because it would "bloat the installer way too much" (I'm
still laughing at that, he was saying something about floppies too, I guess
we're locking out people using 386's or something.) and q
Building a custom mfsroot has a bit of a learning curve with
a fairly expensive trial and error penalty.
At any rate. There are a lot of compelling reasons to not use sysinstall for
automated installs. And while there are compelling reasons to use sysinstall
for this task, most of them invol
either manually partition disks and then mount them at /mnt (or
> have a script do it), and tell sysinstall to just skip the disk stuff and
> assume /mnt is mounted.
David,
I second the ditching sysinstall for a shell script idea. A shell script that
replaces sysinstall is nearly as short as the install.cfg and a lot easier to
figure out. I've written a half dozen auto installers for FreeBSD, from
trivial to complex and would be more than willing to help you get something
set up. I can send you code if you want as well.
--
Thanks,
Josh Paetzel
FreeBSD -- The power to serve
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
g that reads movie DVDs on
FreeBSD (libdvdcss) is unmaintained by anyone upstream, as time goes on more
and more dvds are released that it either can't decrypt or are able to choke
it.
--
Thanks,
Josh Paetzel (wearing libdvdcss port maintainer hat)
PGP: 8A48 EF36 5E9F 4EDA 5A8C 11B4 26F9 01F1 27AF AECB
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
forget data
>
> atacontrol attach ata0
>
> gmirror insert data ad0
IDE devices generally aren't hot swappable, so you're going to have to take
the box down to replace the failed drive (that's why it detached from the
bus). Once you do that you can rebuild the gmirror.
different machines, and it's entirely possible that ftp.freebsd.org
isn't a cvsup server.
--
Thanks,
Josh Paetzel
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
and 4 100tx interfaces on the same PCI bus? If so
you're going to run into bus saturation long before you're able to
max out the throughput on the NICs.
Which isn't to say that 200 kBps isn't a problem, but perhaps you are
dealing with a bad cable or switchport.
--
Than
ave a gigabit card that autonegotiated to
100baseTx-FD or similar.
You could probably take a look at /usr/src/sbin/ifconfig/ifmedia.c for
details on how to query what the card's current media setting is.
Regards,
Josh
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org ma
On Sunday 12 November 2006 15:13, Mike Meyer wrote:
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Josh Paetzel
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> > I'm the port maintainer for irc/epic4 and irc/epic5 and try to
> > liason with the developers as much as possible. I've received a
> &
if a kind
soul wishes to get in contact with the epic team I can give contact
info out privately.
Another (possibly useful) data point that occurs to me is that it
hasn't been tested on any sort of 64 bit linux at all, so it's really
unknown if this is FBSD specific.
--
Thanks,
Jos
useful going forward? Or does anyone else have suggestions
for the code?
Regards,
Josh
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
floyd/sockstat.patch
Thanks,
Josh
--- sockstat.c.orig Thu Jun 9 23:36:03 2005
+++ sockstat.c Tue Nov 7 10:49:28 2006
@@ -66,8 +66,15 @@
static int opt_u; /* Show Unix domain sockets */
static int opt_v; /* Verbose mode */
+/* default protocols to use if no -P was de
On other suggestion I'd have it to consider using strsep to parse the
string. I'm pretty the code will be smaller and more readable.
Good point. And yes, per the other mail I do need to fix the
MAX_PROTO_LEN checking, but I'll make sure that is proper when I
update it to us
-P as well.
Thanks,
Josh
--- sockstat.c.orig Thu Jun 9 23:36:03 2005
+++ sockstat.c Mon Nov 6 15:12:43 2006
@@ -66,8 +66,18 @@
static int opt_u; /* Show Unix domain sockets */
static int opt_v; /* Verbose mode */
+/* maximum length of a given protocol name to acce
ect to get me ramped back up into C and I do appreciate all the
feedback!
Regards,
Josh
--- sockstat.c.orig Thu Nov 2 15:04:39 2006
+++ sockstat.c Fri Nov 3 15:25:34 2006
@@ -66,8 +66,15 @@
static int opt_u; /* Show Unix domain sockets */
static int opt_v; /* V
sume without -P we'd want to show both, so perhaps udp,tcp and
tcp,udp aren't necessary.
Thanks,
Josh
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
patch below.
also for portability you should use:
no_argument or required_argument as a second field
Thank you for the feedback, I've modified that and the new patch is below.
Thanks,
Josh
--- sockstat.c.orig Thu Nov 2 15:01:16 2006
+++ sockstat.c Thu Nov 2 15:02:32 2006
@@ -58
irectory.
Please cc: me on replies, as I am not subscribed to the hackers mailing list.
Thanks!
Josh
--- sockstat.c.orig Tue Oct 31 10:51:40 2006
+++ sockstat.c Tue Oct 31 10:51:58 2006
@@ -58,6 +58,7 @@
#include
#include
#include
+#include
static int opt_4; /* Show IPv4
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
uot;inconvenience"
> from the usability standpoint. That's a breaking point.
>
>
I'll donate the disk space and CPU time if you want to run with this. I
have an interest in keeping floppies around, but not much ability to help out.
Josh Paetzel
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Hello,
If I create a lot of vn-backed filesystems ... say ... 30 of them, and
then do heavy i/o inside one or more of them, I can reliably lock up a
FreeBSD 4.x system.
I have seen this in every version from 4.5-4.8.
Two questions:
1) can anyone confirm this ? Has this been discussed ?
2) I
1. What is the workaround for this issue ? Be creative. Not everyone can
update their userland in a normal fashion - and no, I won't sit here and
justify that statement. Think embedded systems.
2. Is there really an exploit in the wild ? Any comments appreciated.
___
I know it's lame, but I am curious if there is a ETA on 4.9.
Any feedback (one day, one week) appreciated.
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, Bruce M Simpson wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 10:43:19PM -0700, Josh Brooks wrote:
> > I have loaded two 5.1-RELEASE systems, both of them have PROCFS and
> > PSEUDOFS in the kernel, and yet neither of them have a procfs mounted.
>
> I think on
Hello,
I have loaded two 5.1-RELEASE systems, both of them have PROCFS and
PSEUDOFS in the kernel, and yet neither of them have a procfs mounted.
There is no procfs line in /etc/fstab by default, and no procfs is mounted
on the system in any way.
Question 1: Is this intentional ? Is it no lo
Hello,
A new option in FreeBSD 5.x `dump` is the -L option for backing up a
live filesystem ...
Is there a way to examine/check a dump file to see if it was created
using the -L or not ?
ALSO, if I do use -L when creating a dump, do I need to restore it any
differently, or can I restore it the
Long story short, I have a 4gig vn-backed filesystem. The file backing it
is now missing the last 750megs ... I can vnconfig it, but when I fsck it
I see:
# fsck -y /dev/vn1
** /dev/vn1
CANNOT READ: BLK 44109856
CONTINUE? yes
THE FOLLOWING DISK SECTORS COULD NOT BE READ: 44109856, 44109857,
44
I have been researching the various of ways people add devfs to a jail to
give the jail certian /dev devices necessary to function ...
One strategy I saw was:
mount -t devfs devfs /home/jail/dev
( cd /home/jail/dev ; rm $devices_i_dont_want_in_my_jails )
mount -u -o nonewdev /home/jail/dev
Ho
Hi Robert,
On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Robert Watson wrote:
> As you may have noticed in trying the vn-backed mechanism, there are some
> inefficiencies that turn up in FreeBSD when have large numbers of
> pseudo-devices, etc. The resizing problem is real, also, since we don't
> have online file syste
Normally, quotas work on a per-user, per-filesystem basis - so if a user
has a home directory and other processes _not owned by that user_ are
placing files and using up space into that directory, it will not count
toward the quota (unless they get chowned/chgrpd to that user/group).
Is there any
On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, Joshua Oreman wrote:
> > maxusers to 512 ... any new toggles I should know of to be able to use max
> > ptys on the system, or can I just follow whatever directions I hope to
> > receive regarding creating the devices ?
>
> 5.x creates the devices automatically. So if you ha
For various reasons, in 4.x, I have been creating all possible pty /dev
nodes ...
# pwd
/dev
# ls *pty* | wc -l
256
So far so good...now I am wondering how to do this in 5.x, what with the
devfs and all. Basically the number of interactive users that log into
this system means I need to h
Hello,
When I run out of files, I can see how many files are actually open by
looking at the kern.openfiles sysctl. This makes it easy to see if I am
hitting my limit or not.
However, I am experiencing "No buffer space available" errors, and since I
am not running out of mbufs:
netstat -m
1728
Hello,
I have a new system that has 4gigs of physical memory ... and I am
concerned about running into problems due to running out of KVM.
I am running FreeBSD 4.8, and in addition to 4gigs of ram, I have
configured 2gigs of swap space. The system does not swap much at all, but
I need it there
> If I remember correctly he has less then 10Mbit
> uplink and a lot of count rules for client accounting.
> It is reason I recommend him to use userland accounting.
> And as far as I understand a lot of count rules is
> the reason for trouble.
I removed all the count rules a week or so ago. Now
> In any case, he's got something else strange going on, because
> his load under attack, according to his numbers, never gets above
> the load you'd expect on 10Mbit old-style ethernet, so he's got
> something screwed up; probably, he has a loop in his rules, and
> a packet gets trapped and repro
> Run 'ipfw -v list' on it.
Yes .. I do that ... and it shows me a list of my firewall rules. I
usually use `ipfw show`. What is the difference, and what does this
accomplish ? Sorry if I am missing somthing.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hacker
>
> If attacks are a predominant problem for you, I recommend sticking a
> machine in between your internet connection and everything else whos
Actually this is what I already do - my ISP does all the routing, and it
feeds in one interface of my freebsd machine, and everything else is on
t
> You don't want to stick the 'block abnormal packets' rules at the top of
> the list, IMO. You want those at the end, since abnormal packets are
> *usually* the exception. Optimize for the standard case.
Wow - that is _very interesting_ that you say this. We were having a
similar discussion
Nate,
So you are saying that if I put in:
ipfw add 1 deny tcp from any to 10.10.10.10 6667
That an incoming packet for 10.10.10.10 on port 6667 will go through the
rule set _twice_ (once for each interface) ? I don't understand this - if
it comes in on the external and hits that rule, it i
Again, thank you very much for your advice and comments - they are very
well taken.
I will clarify and say that the fbsd system I am using / talking about is
a _dedicated_ firewall. Only port 22 is open on it.
The problem is, I have a few hundred ipfw rules (there are over 200
machines behind t
know if it is all just a waste because no matter how good I get at
a freebsd firewall, a netscreen 10 will always be better ?
thanks.
On Thu, 16 Jan 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Josh Brooks wrote:
> > If I have a large network with high profile hosts (50+ shell servers, 50
> > or
Hi,
If I have a large network with high profile hosts (50+ shell servers, 50
or more different ircds running) am I wasting my time trying to hack and
tweak a FreeBSD host-based firewall running ipfw ?
I am getting hammered by a different (D)DoS attack every single day - it's
always something new
en after a day or two you can go see how many there were..
>
>
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, Josh Brooks wrote:
>
> >
> > Will I ever see a _legitimate_ packet in the wild that is a SYN, and has
> > no MSS ?
> >
> >
> > If the answer is no, then is this a
Will I ever see a _legitimate_ packet in the wild that is a SYN, and has
no MSS ?
If the answer is no, then is this a good rule to block those:
ipfw add 1 deny tcp from any to any tcpflags syn tcpoptions !mss
Or is this one better:
ipfw add 2 deny tcp from any to any setup tcpoptions
Hi,
I have a rc.conf that looks like:
defaultrouter="10.10.10.1"
ifconfig_fxp0="inet 10.10.10.2 netmask 255.255.255.0"
ifconfig_fxp0_alias0="inet 10.10.10.3 netmask 255.255.255.255"
Ok, easy enough - one interface, one default router, and two IPs on that
subnet.
BUT - as it happens, 10.10.10.1
Hello, I just noticed in the advisory (FreeBSD-SA-02:44.filedesc) that the
patch has only been verified for 4.6 and 4.7.
Hs anyone used it on 4.5 ? If not, can anyone comment on the chances it
will apply and work on 4.5 ?
thanks.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscrib
First off, the target looks like this:
Port State Service
21/tcp openftp
22/tcp openssh
25/tcp opensmtp
53/tcp opendomain
80/tcp openhttp
110/tcpopenpop-3
/tcp opendec-notes
1/tcp opensn
ectly when they are done inside the jail - which is
worrisome, since these counters are system-wide...
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Ian Dowse wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Josh Brooks
> writes:
> >
> >I run netstat -i fxp0 while _innside_ a jail:
>
> >and
I run netstat -i fxp0 while _innside_ a jail:
Name Mtu Network AddressIpkts IerrsOpkts Oerrs
fxp0 1500 10.10.10.10/ host 7908671 -39559 -
and then, I transfer a large file from the jail to some external host.
Name Mtu Network Address
enable="NO"
> nfs_reserved_port_only="YES"
> sendmail_enable="YES"
> sshd_enable="YES"
> usbd_enable="YES"
> ifconfig_fxp0="DHCP"
> ifconfig_fxp1="inet 172.17.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> hostname="The-Server.KnightRaven.com"
> firewall_enable="YES"
> firewall_type="open"
> firewall_quiet="NO"
> natd_enable="YES"
> natd_flags="-f /etc/natd.conf"
> natd_interface="fxp0"
>
> Let me know if there are any other configuration files you need to look at...
>
> Any ideas or help is greatly appreciated!
>
> Thank you!
> Devon
Remove option IPFIREWALL_FORWARD and option BRIDGE from you kernel and
recompile.
Josh
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
BSD 1.5.2 (SUN) #0: Sat Feb 9
15:20:35 CST 2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/arch/sparc/compile/SUN sparc
Josh
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
for IO.
>
> Ideal systems release and reacquire locks when they are going
> to suspend for a long time (Djikstra's "Banker's Algorithm").
>
> -- Terry
>
Of course, the downside of this is that a low priority process that
needs a lot of resources may never be a
On Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 10:27:22AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Josh Paetzel wrote:
> > This is a perfect example of, "Just because you can do something,
> > doesn't mean you should."
> >
> > I wouldn't see anything wrong with grabbing the clock f
to the first cpu.
This would save a ton of time in implementing Jordan's ideas, at the
cost of not being able to deal correctlywith a situation that
(hopefully) isn't too common in the field. The other less tangible
disadvantage to my suggestion is that it takes us one step further in ou
gt;
> --
> Ted Sikora
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Well, for starters, you are going to need support on your ISP's end of
things to make that go. Do y
I was told that this would be the more appropiate place to send my
question. I am not currently subscribed to the list, so please Cc: all
msg's too my email. Thanks
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:41:55 +0100
From: Stijn Hoop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
0.10 192.10.10.90;
}
There's more you can do than that, but I think seeing this will ring
your bell, especially if you are looking in the man pages.
Josh
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
I am getting with ftp. Doesn't
matter whether I use ssh or telnet.
Josh
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
er another poster's
> response to this thread?
>
> sysctl net.inet.tcp.delayed_ack=0
>
I tried this out and it made no difference whatsoever. I also tried
out moving the same file via NFS and get transfer times that are
within 5 seconds of the FTP times. I am beginning to suspe
so only looked into this as
a curiosity when seeing this thread. I also intend to try some NFS
mounts out to see if this is a protocol issue or not.
Josh
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 02:10:29AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
[...]
> The BSD/OS 4.1 code is also available for us to take this utility from.
Really? I didn't know they donated all of that.
Anyway it isn't a complex program. When I migrated from BSD/OS to
FreeBSD it is one of the things I mis
I'm attempting to use kevent with /dev/bpf to check to see if it
is ready for reads, but it seems to always return ready to read,
but the reads get EAGAIN.
Does /dev/bpf not work with kevent? Or should I look elsewhere
for my bug (like forgetting some random ioctl)?
If you can't use /dev/bpf ca
On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 01:51:20PM -0400, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
[.../dev/bpf...kevent...EAGAIN...]
> Are you trying this on current or stable? current has a bug fix
> to bpf which still hasn't been merged to stable.
4.3-RELEASE, and 4.3-STABLE
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
w
On Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 12:42:12PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
> > Instead, AMD implemented the Intel APIC specification;
> > I'm not sure if they did it by licensing the patent
> > (Intel had a patent on the APIC design), or if it's
> > just been long enough for it to come off patent
>
[...]
>> AIO is good when you are not receiving much data (or not receiving
>> it very frequently), and presumably want very low latency.
>
> What if you want good performance with "moderate" disk IO, say ten
> to twenty megabytes per second continuously?
I don't know if select/kqueue/poll "work"
On Friday, June 22, 2001, at 07:01 PM, E.B. Dreger wrote:
> Quick question, hopefully not too basic for this list:
>
> AIO vs. non-blocking IO vs. kernel queues
>
> I'm familiar with (and *love*) kernel queues. Non-blocking IO is
> straightforward. AIO seems simple enough.
>
> My question is, f
On Friday, June 15, 2001, at 02:37 PM, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 10:23:21PM -0400, Rajappa Iyer wrote:
>> http://www.sysadminmag.com/articles/2001/0107/0107a/0107a.htm
>>
>> Any obvious reasons why FreeBSD performed so poorly for these people?
>
> Yes, it's not very dif
pam_unix.so try_first_pass
sshdsession requiredpam_permit.so
These lines are not in 4.2-rel and they are needed in 4.3-rel.
Have fun.
Josh
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
laris 7/x86 was running on this machine, there
> were no such problems, but we don't really want to run Solaris... :-}
>
> Any clue ?
>
If it is worth anything, I tried installing on a poweredge 2450 once and to
make a long story short could
74 matches
Mail list logo
