Michael Schuh schrieb:
hi Chuck,
hi @list
me again, behind the scenes,
i would take over my Server by an hoster from
Linux to FreeBSD on the running system,
while the hoster takes money for pressing 2 buttons and
put a disk in my Server...so
i create now a mfs based system that can bootet fr
Hello,
Can someone explain to me why next can happened on freebsd:
1. add 2 users in same group - user test and test-ro in group test
2. as user test: cd /home/test ; mkdir test; chmod 775 test; echo
"asdasd" > ~/test/del.me
3. su - test-ro ; cd /home/test; vim del.me - make changes; force sav
Just wanted to say thank you for clearing up my confusion about ECC.
And also, I want to excuse for being a bit harsh in some posts.
(I am a rather cynic person, this helps me against not going crazy over
all this stuff.)
Last night, after hours of working on the very same problem without any
s
Yes, the result may be correct.
'Do not take "ECC" for "equals additional security"'
So I understand what's ECC good for, other than the usual "marketing talk".
But, in FreeBSD, the function is a result of hardware-level correction.
Something that only kicks in in _real_ _serious_ situations.
I
So what do I need to do to make the box panic() on an ECC error?
Is there a kernel parameter, sysctl, or what else?
Thanks,
M.
Pete French schrieb:
I am not looking for workarounds, like ECC. I want the box to break
immediately once any single component goes wrong...
Uh, that *is* what
Wow, Steven,
you've been really helpful here...
M.
Steven Hartland schrieb:
My advice would be dont feed the troll.
Steve
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, se
Dmitry Pryanishnikov schrieb:
When you wrote "ECC is a way to mask broken hardware", you were plain
wrong.
If you're using hardware w/o ECC, it just can't tell whether error
present
or absent. So ECC _is_ the way to detect (not mask) broken hardware.
Ok, thanks. I think I understand the mean
Ok...
Does the standard fs, UFS2, do "extra sanity checks", then?
Sorry, replying to myself...
No, this does not matter.
If the OS thinks the data is ok, UFS will write OK data...
So, let me rephrase this:
How can I make sure there is no broken hardware in my cluster?
I am not looking for wor
Dmitry Pryanishnikov schrieb:
Hello!
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, M.Hirsch wrote:
ECC is a way to mask broken hardware. I rather have my hardware fail
directly when it does first, so I can replace it _immediately_
You got it backwards. If your data has any value to you, then you
don't wa
Wilko Bulte schrieb:
You really have never seen a machine used for serious business apparantly.
Depends on what you define "serious business"...
Yes, I am rather new to FreeBSD (2y+)
I am just trying to setup a /stable/ cluster of six machines right now.
For over a week straight.
4.11 work
Ok, sorry. Misunderstanding here.
My point was, along what has been posted here in this thread:
"An ECC error should raise a kernel panic immediately, not only a
message in the log files."
Any hardware showing ECC errors should be replaced asap..
Make them lazy admins do what they're getting pai
.. So the logs are there, all that's required is a utility to read them
and, optionally, alert the administrator to the event,
No, I think a panic _should_ occur, even if there was a correctable
error. Not "when there's no other option left".
Maybe make it optional via a kernel option.
Th
Nope,
I'd like my bank data to be stored on a system that does ECC, no question.
But please, on hard disk level (RAID; that is _permanent_), not in the
RAM of a single node.
If memory gets corrupted, please, raise a kernel panic... Even if
there's ECC in place.
Counter question:
Would you l
Sorry, doesn't help.
There is some kind of bug hiding somewhere in 6.1 where it does not
auto-detect the root partition under certain circumstances. Can't tell
when it worked last, as the last distro I consider "stable" was 4.X...
(sorry for the rant...)
I am not using (and don't want to use
ECC is a way to mask broken hardware. I rather have my hardware fail
directly when it does first, so I can replace it _immediately_
What's your hardware good for if it passes a "test", but fails in
production?
ECC is totally overrated.
(sorry, couldn't resist...)
M.
__
I had the same problem with 6.1. But only on some occasions, not always
(iirc).
The installations I made over the last weeks had all very different
environments and deployment methods.
I can't tell anymore when it happens and when not because I simply added
the below loader.conf setting to my po
Another problem solved :)
So when my script overwrote rc.conf, the file was already loaded and
thus overwriting it had no effect.
That's why it didn't work. (not with "BEFORE: initrandom" either).
This must have changed somewhen between 6.0 and 6-STABLE because it did
work in 6.0.
Thanks vm
Ah, ok. I didn't get that correctly before.
"It's just another shell script" - nice hack, thanks ;)
M.
Brooks Davis schrieb:
Pete is suggested that you put the code in /etc/rc.conf. It's just
another shell script.
-- Brooks
___
freebsd-stable
This is what I initially tried, but it didn't work due to a wrong
"BEFORE:" tag.
"rcconf" was removed from 6-STABLE, so my scripts didn't start at all
anymore.
Invalid dependencies seem to make rc-scripts not execute *at all* in
6-STABLE. (note taken)
So far I think I got it working now.
Tha
As stated in my initial post, I used "BEFORE: rcconf" up to and
including 6.0.
So what is an "appropriate BEFORE entry" for 6-STABLE?
Sorry, I really can't find any documentation on this issue, not in
UPDATING and not in the mailing list archives either.
Thanks,
M.
Brooks Davis schrieb:
One question remains though:
How can I make my script to be the very first rc script to be executed?
M.
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTEC
Yes, I think this is the solution.
It seems to depend on the filename, specifically the ".sh" extension.
CODE (in /etc/rc):
/etc/rc.d/*.sh) # run in current shell
Thanks, I am testing this now. I'll post back as soon as I got results
(1h or so...)
M.
[LoN]Kamikaze sch
I have investigated a bit more.
Setting the variables can't work. As far as I can see, rc.conf is
sourced from rc.subr. And every single script in /etc/rc.d/ sources
rc.subr, so they reload the rc.conf file for each call.
The "rc" scripts are being executed in a sub-shell though. So
overwritin
Hello everybody,
Before FreeBSD 6.1, I was able to write a rc script which modifies the
rc.conf file.
All rc scripts exectuted after this first one would use the new rc.conf
then.
To make this work, I put the script in /etc/rc.d/ and "tagged" it with
"BEFORE: rcconf".
Unfortunately, rcconf
24 matches
Mail list logo
