ly enough, their all good for the rd kernel, the x* series and
the install isos. Also the erroneous shasums are consistent across all
three mirrors...
Having never encountered this issue before I'm not too sure how suspicious
I should be
Kind regards,
Toby
> This happens from time-to-time with Snapshots. It usually does not mean
> there is a problem, but that a partial snap went out. Wait a while for
> the mirrors to catch up.
Oh ok, but how come all the time stamps say that all the files in the
directory were last modified on the 24th (both the
Hi, IACmusic.com has started a major song contest and this one you can
enter for free! Thanks to a major new sponsorship, we're throwing a party
that will make major waves in the Indie World. Got a song you know is
good ? You could win, there are going to be a lot of winners.. It's our
YEAR OF T
RIC kernel) could have an
effect?
Anyway, here is my dmesg and sysctl output (both bsd.sp & bsd,mp - oddly
the sp kernel produces different sysctl sensor values - why is that?). If
there's anything else I can provide, please let me know.
Kind Regards,
Toby
P.S. I have tried apmd with both -A
0: 256 targets
softraid0 at root
scsibus3 at softraid0: 256 targets
sd1 at scsibus3 targ 1 lun 0: SCSI2 0/direct fixed
sd1: 102406MB, 512 bytes/sector, 209727983 sectors
root on sd1a (78b43ce6c771db63.a) swap on sd1b dump on sd1b
If there's any other info I can provide please let me know.
Cheers,
Toby
--
(0x2b || !0x2b) == 0xff
Thought I'd try giving this a whirl on my T430 (which thankfully support
CSM legacy mode). The miniroot58.fs snapshot from today (10 September) gets
to the bootloader when UEFI is enabled and CSM is disabled in the BIOS,
however it hangs when trying to boot the kernel, as shown in the attached
imag
On 10 September 2015 at 13:09, Toby Slight wrote:
> Thought I'd try giving this a whirl on my T430 (which thankfully support
> CSM legacy mode). The miniroot58.fs snapshot from today (10 September) gets
> to the bootloader when UEFI is enabled and CSM is disabled in the BIOS,
>
OK, so I finally managed to boot the 12th's snapshot on an EFI only T430.
Weirdly enough one time it just worked, but when I tried again I got the
same results as the 9th's snapshot installer.
It seems that sometime the bootblocks get loaded, sometimes not, 9 times
out of 10 I get http://i.imgur.c
On 13 September 2015 at 18:34, Toby Slight wrote:
> OK, so I finally managed to boot the 12th's snapshot on an EFI only T430.
> Weirdly enough one time it just worked, but when I tried again I got the
> same results as the 9th's snapshot installer.
>
> It seems that so
On 13 September 2015 at 19:26, Toby Slight wrote:
> On 13 September 2015 at 18:34, Toby Slight wrote:
>
>> OK, so I finally managed to boot the 12th's snapshot on an EFI only T430.
>> Weirdly enough one time it just worked, but when I tried again I got the
>> same
On 14 September 2015 at 00:04, YASUOKA Masahiko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thank you for your report. Can you provide a result of
>
Sure thing :-)
>
> machine memory
>
http://i.imgur.com/HDzrApt.jpg
> machine disk
>
http://i.imgur.com/WJLuNKJ.jpg
> on boot prompt?
>
Apologies for the crappy
The plot thickens...
So I finally managed a successful UEFI install (I won't tell you how many
chickens I had to sacrifice...) with the latest snapshots (15/09/2015), and
following http://blog.jasper.la/openbsd-uefi-bootloader-howto/.
This time I opted to keep it simple and not attempt my usual e
On 15 September 2015 at 14:09, Toby Slight wrote:
> The plot thickens...
>
> So I finally managed a successful UEFI install (I won't tell you how many
> chickens I had to sacrifice...) with the latest snapshots (15/09/2015), and
> following http://blog.jasper.la/openbsd-u
On 15 September 2015 at 18:09, Chris Cappuccio wrote:
>
> Sounds like a bug in the brand new EFI boot blocks which affects your uefi
> firmware and not some others. It seems all of your tests are pointing in
> the
> same direction, they are not a result of differences in the kernels,
> rather,
>
On 16 September 2015 at 00:39, YASUOKA Masahiko wrote:
>
>
> Can you try
>
> http://yasuoka.net/~yasuoka/BOOTX64.EFI
>
> this and "machine test" on boot prompt? It will show
>
> 0 blocksize=512
>
> like this. Disk number and blocksize.
>
Yup - that's what I get:
http://i.imgur.com/9rpEGnP.j
Hi there,
I just started getting to know doas a bit, and am already stumped (pretty
typical for me..).
I'm trying to let my user shutdown, reboot and suspend the computer without
entering a password. This is my doas.conf:
permit keepenv { ENV PS1 SSH_AUTH_SOCK } :wheel
permit nopass to
On 20 September 2015 at 14:51, Theo Buehler wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 02:19:19PM +0100, Toby Slight wrote:
> > I'm trying to let my user shutdown, reboot and suspend the computer
> without
> > entering a password. This is my doas.conf:
> >
> > per
I have an IPSec connection set up to an external site, over which
I have no control and whose topololgy I know nothign about (i.e. I
don't know what subnets they use, etc.) Using ipsecctl, I have one
flow set up, from my external IP A.B.C.D to an internal IP on their
side, 172.25.0.1.
I can ping
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 01:24:59PM +0900, william dunand wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I tried to reproduce what you want in my testing environment and
> managed to make it work.
>
> What you have to do is :
> - In your ipsec.conf, add an rule from your local network to the
> distant 172.25.0.1 (this rule is
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 05:09:08PM +0900, william dunand wrote:
> Of course, as it is a testing environment it is a lot easier to make
> it work for me...
> On the remote side, a configured something like this (I suppose they
> have something of this kind on the other side) :
> ike passive esp from
Well, I've got it. It turns out it's kind of easy, although not
as pretty as it could be.
Basically, you use relayd. The one caveat is that this means that
from the OpenBSD box, you need to be able to talk to the remote,
private IPs without binding to a particular address.
In relayd.conf, you e
operating
systems.
Please enlighten me.
Respectfully Submitted,
R. Toby Richards
Network Administrator
Superior Court of California
In and for the County of San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-4150
espectfully Submitted,
R. Toby Richards
Network Administrator
Superior Court of California
In and for the County of San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-4150
From: Mike Erdely [m...@erdelynet.com]
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 7:05 PM
To: Richards, Toby
Cc: misc@openbsd.org
OD's ;)
I really *really* want to go the BSD path, but it seems
so much more difficult.
Respectfully Submitted,
R. Toby Richards
Network Administrator
Superior Court of California
In and for the County of San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-4150
From: Kenne
Outstanding point. The thing is this: With MS
PHP is clearly distinct from the OS. I go get it
from php.org. With BSD I must rely on the
package system.
Respectfully Submitted,
R. Toby Richards
Network Administrator
Superior Court of California
In and for the County of San Luis Obispo
(805) 781
in any way. With all these replies, I suppose
I've got my answer and then some.
-Toby
-Original Message-
From: owner-m...@openbsd.org [mailto:owner-m...@openbsd.org] On Behalf Of
Weldon Goree
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 5:38 AM
To: misc@openbsd.org
Subject: Re: Upgrading Open
That's not me. That guy works for Microsoft. Please
notice my e-mail address. I work for the State of
California.
-Toby
-Original Message-
From: owner-m...@openbsd.org [mailto:owner-m...@openbsd.org] On Behalf Of
Matthew Weigel
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 6:59 AM
To:
A while back I was wondering if there was a good way to deal with
overlapping network addresses in OpenBSD when setting up site-to-site
VPNs.
At the time the best solution I could find was just to use relayd (which
iirc is now called something else), which works but isn't pretty.
I've since found
28 matches
Mail list logo
