I just updated to 6-STABLE but my ipfw rules stopped working.
It seems that me6 is vanished into thin air.
# ipfw add 7000 allow ip from me6 to me6
ipfw: hostname ``me6'' unknown
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 06:11:14AM -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote:
I was unable to obtain confirmation from anyone else (including the
submitter who previously claimed it was necessary, and my own testing)
that the patch actually solved a problem. Since it involves reverting
useful functionality,
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 02:17:50AM +0800, Darryl Yeoh wrote:
Nope. Just to be sure, I've tested this on another two machines at my office,
both are
Maybe gif interface is your default route?
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
Hello!
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, Darryl Yeoh wrote:
While destroying gif interface, I notice it also removes IPv4 default route.
Has anyone else
encountered this ?
Command:
# netstat -rn -f inet
Routing tables
Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif Expire
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 07:26:08PM +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote:
Am 14.08.2006 um 22:07 schrieb Darryl Yeoh:
While destroying gif interface, I notice it also removes IPv4
default route. Has anyone else
encountered this ?
No problem on a FreeBSD 6.1-STABLE #8: Fri Jun 16 17:15:03 CEST
Am 16.08.2006 um 10:11 schrieb Yar Tikhiy:
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 07:26:08PM +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote:
Am 14.08.2006 um 22:07 schrieb Darryl Yeoh:
While destroying gif interface, I notice it also removes IPv4
default route. Has anyone else
encountered this ?
No problem on a FreeBSD
On Tue, 2006-Aug-15 22:34:55 +0300, Android Andrew [:] wrote:
In this case I could only replace PSU for testing.
That's probably a worthwhile step.
It might be worthwhile setting up a serial console and logging it
on another box to see if anything is written to the console before
it dies.
It's
On Tue, 2006-Aug-15 15:32:55 -0400, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
It ended up that something had gone wrong with the
motherboard itself. It was about two months from the
time I first started to see problems to the point
where it completely died. It was a very frustrating
two months!
On two
Hello!
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
The question is: Do all the routes really need to be flushed upon
the destruction of an interface?
I've killed devd on my test machine (yesterday's RELENG_6) and done
the following:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ifconfig vlan0 create
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 08:13:20AM +0200, Kees Plonsz wrote:
I just updated to 6-STABLE but my ipfw rules stopped working.
It seems that me6 is vanished into thin air.
# ipfw add 7000 allow ip from me6 to me6
ipfw: hostname ``me6'' unknown
I think it was broken by some missing brackets in
Dear 6-STABLE users,
In the next 2-3 weeks, I plan to MFC support for CAPP security eventing
auditing from 7-CURRENT to 6-STABLE. The implementation has been running
quite nicely in -CURRENT for several months. Right now, I'm just waiting on a
confirmation from Sun regarding formal
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 11:46:39 +0300 (EEST)
Dmitry Pryanishnikov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello!
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
The question is: Do all the routes really need to be flushed upon
the destruction of an interface?
I've killed devd on my test machine (yesterday's
[ Kevin reported a similar problem on monday in Lost IPv6 with ipfw in
latest stable - added to CC-list. ]
On Wednesday 16 August 2006 10:53, David Malone wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 08:13:20AM +0200, Kees Plonsz wrote:
I just updated to 6-STABLE but my ipfw rules stopped working.
It
There is an error in the NTPD manpage.
The option -L means do NOT listen to Virtual IPs the present manpage
(FreeBSD-6.1-STABLE) says:
-L Listen to virtual IPs.
looking at the code in /usr/src/contrib/ntpd/cmd_args.c shows this:
/*
* Definitions of things either imported
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 10:23:13AM +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote:
Ouch. Don't ppp(8), OpenVPN etc. destroy the tun interface they're
using when they exit? Flushing all routes then would be rather
harmful. I'm glad I haven't updated to a newer -stable yet then :-)
In general, no since tun
On Wednesday 16 August 2006 04:53, David Malone wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 08:13:20AM +0200, Kees Plonsz wrote:
I just updated to 6-STABLE but my ipfw rules stopped working.
It seems that me6 is vanished into thin air.
# ipfw add 7000 allow ip from me6 to me6
ipfw: hostname ``me6''
Hi,
I get this type of messages in on my FreeBSD.
ad4: TIMEOUT - WRITE_DMA retrying (1 retry left) LBA=70938623
Under steady IO load it panics, that started when we changed SATA
controller (FreeBSD detects it as SiI 3512). I've tried to switch
ports, cable, move card into a different PCI slot,
On 8/16/06, Vlad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I get this type of messages in on my FreeBSD.
ad4: TIMEOUT - WRITE_DMA retrying (1 retry left) LBA=70938623
Under steady IO load it panics, that started when we changed SATA
controller (FreeBSD detects it as SiI 3512). I've tried to switch
ports, cable,
I just got the message it panics with:
ad4: TIMEOUT - WRITE_DMA48 retrying (1 retry left) LBA=380273047
ad4: FAILURE - WRITE_DMA48 status=51READY,DSC,ERROR
error=10NID_NOT_FOUND LBA=380273047
g_vfs_done():ad4s1a[WRITE(offset=194699767808, length=2048)]error = 5
panic: newdirrem: not ATTACHED
Note that the strcmp() != 0 doesn't need extra ()'s as != is higher than
in precedence.
Yep - I noticed that after sending! I think I was just rabidly
adding brackets to match the intended meaning.
(I think ipfw may have more problems like this - if you turn up
WARNS there are some warnings
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 09:54:19AM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 10:23:13AM +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote:
Ouch. Don't ppp(8), OpenVPN etc. destroy the tun interface they're
using when they exit? Flushing all routes then would be rather
harmful. I'm glad I haven't
Am 16.08.2006 um 10:11 schrieb Yar Tikhiy:
In turn, pccard_ether will flush all -inet routes if the rc.conf(5)
variable removable_route_flush is set to YES, which is its default
setting.
Why is it doing that, then? From the commit message for 1.23 for src/
etc/pccard_ether, which
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 07:58:44PM +0400, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 09:54:19AM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 10:23:13AM +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote:
Ouch. Don't ppp(8), OpenVPN etc. destroy the tun interface they're
using when they exit? Flushing
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, Christian Walther wrote:
This is just a wild, uneducated guess, because I'm not a long FreeBSD
user, but from my point of view this error could really be related to
ACPI/APM, as already has been suggested.
It smells a bit that way to me too. I've just read the whole
On Wednesday 16 August 2006 10:53, David Malone wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 08:13:20AM +0200, Kees Plonsz wrote:
I just updated to 6-STABLE but my ipfw rules stopped working.
It seems that me6 is vanished into thin air.
# ipfw add 7000 allow ip from me6 to me6
ipfw: hostname ``me6''
Another good indication for a hosed motherboard (probably caused by
bad power supply)
is to check the large cylindrical capacitors between the processor and
the PS/2 ports. There are at most 10 of them.
If the capacitors have a flat top head they are ok. If their top head
is curved upwards and
kmail prompted me for password, which I supplied. Then, all of a sudden,
the system slowed to a crawl -- even the mouse curse was barely moving.
It took many minutes to login from the outside and some more to start top.
Below you can see kmail in kserel keeping the processor(s) EXTREMELY busy.
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 12:15:25PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 07:58:44PM +0400, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 09:54:19AM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 10:23:13AM +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote:
Ouch. Don't ppp(8), OpenVPN etc.
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 08:49:27AM +1200, Andrew Thompson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 12:15:25PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 07:58:44PM +0400, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 09:54:19AM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 10:23:13AM
Thank you for answers!
Yesterday the last iteration of high load testing finished with just
another power off.
There are two ways of problem-solving have been outlined in this thread.
One way - hardware problem, e.g. PSU.
Another way - software, e.g. APM/ACPI problem.
I could not find any PSU
It is fresh mobo (about 8 months). I've visually checked capacitors - it
looks good.
Well, it is time to change something in my life: mobo or PSU, or disks,
or memory, or something else
Apatewna wrote:
Another good indication for a hosed motherboard (probably caused by bad
power supply)
Dan Nelson wrote:
In the last episode (Aug 15), Mike Jakubik said:
35 processes: 7 running, 28 sleeping
CPU states: 58.1% user, 0.0% nice, 38.4% system, 1.1% interrupt, 2.4% idle
Mem: 642M Active, 416M Inact, 125M Wired, 112M Buf, 825M Free
Swap: 4071M Total, 4071M Free
PID USERNAME
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 04:18:34PM -0400, Mikhail Teterin wrote:
kmail prompted me for password, which I supplied. Then, all of a sudden,
the system slowed to a crawl -- even the mouse curse was barely moving.
It took many minutes to login from the outside and some more to start top.
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 08:49:27AM +1200, Andrew Thompson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 12:15:25PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 07:58:44PM +0400, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 09:54:19AM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 10:23:13AM
Mike Jakubik wrote:
Dan Nelson wrote:
How can mysql use 160%? Is this a reporting bug in top because mysql
is threaded?
You have multiple CPUs, so a threaded process can theoretically reach
100*ncpus cpu usage.
Ahh, thats makes sense, thanks.
Actually it doesn't. IMO, %CPU
O. Hartmann wrote:
I use FreeBSD 6.1-STABLE/AMD on an pure 64Bit box/environment, single
CPU Athlon 3500+, and sometimes I can see a 100%+ usage of WCPU in
'xine' or 'transmission'. So this is definitely not related to multiple
CPUs.
WCPU is supposed to be weighted in some way to take swap
36 matches
Mail list logo
