Re: [OmniOS-discuss] COMMUNITY EXERCISE: illumos 7590

[Dan McDonald]

> On May 16, 2017, at 5:22 PM, Dan McDonald  wrote:
> 
> The tests are collidy-enough where I'm running an illumos-omnios build before 
> I push them.  For now, let's assume it works and I push these upstream to the 
> illumos-omnios repo.

The illumos-omnios build worked for bloody, and now the master and upstream 
branches are updated.

Dan

___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] COMMUNITY EXERCISE: illumos 7590

[Dan McDonald]

Found my first error

> On May 16, 2017, at 5:22 PM, Dan McDonald  wrote:
> 
> YOUR HOMEWORK PART 0:  Figure this out.


Correction:  "Figure out whether or not illumos 7590 is worth a backport all by 
itself."


Dan

___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] OmniOS r151022 is now out!

[Dominik Hassler]

On 05/16/2017 09:12 PM, Paul B. Henson wrote:

From: Dominik Hassler
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 8:50 AM

This system has a different mainboard, so I wonder if it is BIOS related
and a BIOS upgrade on system 1 could help?


Perhaps a silly question, but had you tested booting from both drives before
the upgrade :)?



Not a silly question at all. Yes I did, and the device that fails was 
the primary boot device before; so when the initial boot after enabling 
loader failed I tried the second and since that one worked I changed 
primary and secondary now.

___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] Legal next steps

[Peter Tribble]

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Theo Schlossnagle  wrote:

> My experience here is limited to the United States for approaching these
> problems.  I don't mean to indicate that it is the right solution, but I
> can only speak of what I know.
>
> A legal entity must hold the assets. That can be a person, or a trust, or
> an corporation or a community*, etc.  Community here is defined in such a
> way by the IRS that I don't believe we would ever quality (and it's never
> worth arguing). Given the history of "things" I would steer away from an
> individual and I feel that given unknown nature of assets required to
> operate and our weak starting point that a trust is likely not
> self-sustaining.
>
> What I would suggest is us setting up an corporation here in the US,
> setting a purpose and a missions statement (that includes education and
> science as we do those and they are eligible for non-profit status), elect
> 5-7 board members (who will be legally responsible for the entity) come up
> with a small operating budget (< $10k USD) and apply for non-profit
> (501(3)c).  This process would take a few hundreds of dollars.
>

My question here would be: Do it yourself, or apply to something like the
Software Freedom Conservancy

https://sfconservancy.org/about/

and let them deal with the paperwork?

Thanks,

-- 
-Peter Tribble
http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

[OmniOS-discuss] how about https://github.com/omniosorg

[Tobias Oetiker]

since omnios is already taken  how about 

https://github.com/omniosorg 

cheers 
tobi 


-- 
Tobi Oetiker, OETIKER+PARTNER AG, Aarweg 15 CH-4600 Olten, Switzerland 
www.oetiker.ch t...@oetiker.ch +41 62 775 9902 
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] OmniOS r151022 is now out!

[Dominik Hassler]

Addendum:

Just upgraded another system and there booting from both rpool devices 
works.


This system has a different mainboard, so I wonder if it is BIOS related 
and a BIOS upgrade on system 1 could help?


Another difference:

System 1 has been set-up in summer 2013, so it went r06 -> r08 -> ... -> r22
System 2 has been set-up in end of 2014, so it went r12 -> R14 -> ... -> r22

Not sure if that might have an impact, when OmniOS was set-up first 
(e.g. how partitions are created by installer)


On 05/16/2017 03:53 PM, Dominik Hassler wrote:

Ok, I did an installboot -mFf on both disks again (-v is not available
for installboot)

$ sudo installboot -mFf /boot/pmbr /boot/gptzfsboot
/dev/rdsk/c9t5000CCA04103E0B5d0s0
bootblock written for /dev/rdsk/c9t5000CCA04103E0B5d0s0, 223 sectors
starting at 1024 (abs 33154)
stage1 written to slice 1 sector 0 (abs 16065)
stage1 written to master boot sector

$ sudo installboot -mFf /boot/pmbr /boot/gptzfsboot
/dev/rdsk/c10t5000CCA04103E095d0s0
bootblock written for /dev/rdsk/c10t5000CCA04103E095d0s0, 223 sectors
starting at 1024 (abs 33154)
stage1 written to slice 1 sector 0 (abs 16065)
stage1 written to master boot sector

checked the version:

$ installboot -i /boot/gptzfsboot
Extended version string: 1.1-2017.4.23.2
MD5 hash: 766b5059c45796f049bb38b80e1a1c4d

and compared it to the version of both disks:

$ sudo installboot -i /dev/rdsk/c9t5000CCA04103E0B5d0s0
Extended version string: 1.1-2017.4.23.2
MD5 hash: 766b5059c45796f049bb38b80e1a1c4d

$ sudo installboot -i /dev/rdsk/c10t5000CCA04103E095d0s0
Extended version string: 1.1-2017.4.23.2
MD5 hash: 766b5059c45796f049bb38b80e1a1c4d


everything matches, but still the system boots only from one disk and
not the other. Since it is not the latest version you mentioned I'll
just wait until it is updated I guess. I can at least boot from one disk
so I am not too worried about it at the moment. Still I would prefer to
be able to boot from both.

On 05/16/2017 03:18 PM, Toomas Soome wrote:



On 16. mai 2017, at 15:58, Dominik Hassler  wrote:

Toomas,

using a (forced) installboot on both rpool mirror devices did the
trick. Loader is now being used.

However there is another problem. I can boot w/o problems from the
first device. But booting fails from the second device w/ the
following message:

Can't find /boot/zfsloader

illumos/x86 boot
Default: disk-1:/boot/zfsloader


Somehow the MBR on second disk is not properly updated and I think it
has wrong size recorded for stage2.

The initial installboot was implemented based on installgrub source
and we record the LBA with gptzfsboot start sector, and size (in
sectors) into MBR.

Now the copy of the MBR (the /boot/pmbr file) is also installed into
partition start sector 0), and when the beadm activate is run, the
boot blocks are updates, but with same logic, that with MBR+VTOC case,
the MBR itself is not updated (to keep multi boot setups safe), and
only partition sector 0 and stage 2 are updated. The oversight is that
the MBR is loading stage2 directly, and if the gptzfsboot size was
changed, the result is that not the entire gptzfsboot is read into the
memory and resulting with just the output as you can see.

later we did create the fix for installboot - the fixed installboot
will only record the location and size (1 sector) of the partition
boot recors (partition relative sector 0), and after that the MBR code
will read in the partition block, the partition block will read the
stage2, and so the MBR+VTOC case is not an issue any more.

to fix this, run installboot -mFfv against that second disk to ensure
the MBR block is properly updated - note the -v again, so you can
confirm the MBR and partition block and stage2 are all updated.

With installgrub we actually have the same issue, except, the grub
stage2 size virtually did not change and thats why the problem was
never revealed.

note, if your installboot command does allow to read the version from
/boot/gptzfsboot like that:

$ installboot -i /boot/gptzfsboot
Extended version string: 1.1-2017.5.6.2
MD5 hash: 2907581de9ca6bd4d2c12695a32cb749

then it has the bug fixed, and after installing MBR with such binary,
the MBR is always reading the sector 0 from partition start, and the
future updates are ok.

also note that MBR is always updated with GPT, and hence there the
issue does not appear (which why it took some time to notice it - my
own test systems were all using GPT:)

rgds,
toomas


boot:


Debug info below:

$ sudo installboot -i /dev/rdsk/c10t5000CCA04103E095d0s0
Extended version string: 1.1-2017.4.23.2
MD5 hash: 766b5059c45796f049bb38b80e1a1c4d

same on both devices


$ sudo format -> select disk -> fdisk
Total disk size is 36481 cylinders
Cylinder size is 16065 (512 byte) blocks

  Cylinders
 Partition   StatusType  Start   End   Length%
 =   ==  =   ===   ==   

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] Legal next steps

[Dan McDonald]

> On May 16, 2017, at 10:53 AM, Alexander Lesle  
> wrote:
> 
> No NSA or U.S. laws pressure to code a backdoor for them.

As someone who worked in the shadow of such a threat for many years (Building 
IPsec both at NRL, and pre-OpenSolaris Sun), the open-source nature of OmniOS 
mitigates (at least partially) explicit pressure as a concern.  Open-source 
code has a strong (albeit not fully court-tested) 1st amendment defense -- see 
here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernstein_v._United_States

There may be good reasons to have an outside-the-US foundation, but backdoor 
concerns is not one of them.

Dan

p.s. I have good 90s-crypto-wars stories.

___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] Legal next steps

[Volker A. Brandt]

> Switzerland or EU sounds good.
>
> No NSA or U.S. laws pressure to code a backdoor for them.
>
> On 16. May 2017 at 16:19  wrote
> in mid:680c52d7-4157-4f9e-ab69-375380cf4...@oetiker.ch :
> > In switzerland, any three people
> > can found an association by stating that they do so and
> > creating a bylaws document. no fees. no official registration
> > necessary. only if substantial money is handled or if there is
> > profit, the association has to talk to the swiss irs.

This does indeed sound good.


Regards -- Volker
-- 

Volker A. Brandt   Consulting and Support for Oracle Solaris
Brandt & Brandt Computer GmbH   WWW: http://www.bb-c.de/
Am Wiesenpfad 6, 53340 Meckenheim, GERMANYEmail: v...@bb-c.de
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn, HRB 10513  Schuhgröße: 46
Geschäftsführer: Rainer J.H. Brandt und Volker A. Brandt

"When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead"
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] Legal next steps

[Alexander Lesle]

Hello,

Switzerland or EU sounds good.

No NSA or U.S. laws pressure to code a backdoor for them.

On 16. May 2017 at 16:19  wrote
in mid:680c52d7-4157-4f9e-ab69-375380cf4...@oetiker.ch :
> In switzerland, any three people
> can found an association by stating that they do so and
> creating a bylaws document. no fees. no official registration
> necessary. only if substantial money is handled or if there is
> profit, the association has to talk to the swiss irs.


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_association


> I'll be glad to help :)


> cheers
> tobi


> Tobias Oetiker
> t...@oetiker.ch
> 062 775 9902

> On 16 May 2017, at 15:47, Doug Hughes  wrote:


>  
> Having done this once before, if done in the USA, NJ and DE
> are   somewhat preferred states for ease of such 501c3
> incorporation.   lowest fees, smallest hurdles, etc.
> If NJ.US is acceptable/chosen I'm very proximate to Trenton
> and   could facilitate any in-person matters.


> On 5/16/2017 9:22 AM, Theo Schlossnagle   wrote:
> My experience here is limited to the United States for
> approaching these problems.  I don't mean to indicate that 
> it is the right solution, but I can only speak of what I know.  

> 
> A legal entity must hold the assets. That can be a person,
> or a trust, or an corporation or a community*, etc.  Community 
> here is defined in such a way by the IRS that I don't believe  
> we would ever quality (and it's never worth arguing). Given
> the history of "things" I would steer away from an individual  
> and I feel that given unknown nature of assets required to 
> operate and our weak starting point that a trust is likely not  
> self-sustaining.
>   

> 
> What I would suggest is us setting up an corporation here 
> in the US, setting a purpose and a missions statement (that
> includes education and science as we do those and they are 
> eligible for non-profit status), elect 5-7 board members   
> (who will be legally responsible for the entity) come up   
> with a small operating budget (< $10k USD) and apply for   
> non-profit (501(3)c).  This process would take a fewhundreds of 
> dollars.

> 
> Then we request that OmniTI donate the appropriate assets 
> related to OmniOS.  This organization can take donations   
> (from basically anywhere) and apply them to operational
> costs to forward its mission.  There is a chance that this 
> organization could be denied non-profit status as the IRS is   
> (sadly) a bit odd when it comes to approving that for  
> initiatives for the public good if their around open source
> software.  I don't see that as a specific risk, it only
> means that donations made are not tax-deductible.  

> 
> The gating factors here is can we get 5-7 people willing  
> to participate as legally responsible board members (I am  
> not a lawyer, but the risk is very lower here as there is   very little 
> money involved).

> 
> Back to my first point, if there is a better avenue   
> outside the United States for this, I would love to be  educated 
> about it.

> 
> Best regards,  

> 
> Theo  

>  -- 
>   
>   
> Theo Schlossnagle
>   
> http://omniti.com/is/theo-schlossnagle
>   


>   
>   
> ___
> OmniOS-discuss mailing list
> OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
> http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

>   

> ___
> OmniOS-discuss mailing list
> OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
> http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

>  

-- 
Mit freundlichem Gruss
Alexander
mailto:gro...@tierarzt-mueller.de
eMail geschrieben mit: The Bat! 7.4.16
unter Windows 10 Pro x64 Build 14393


___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] Legal next steps

[Michael Rasmussen]

On Tue, 16 May 2017 09:22:11 -0400
Theo Schlossnagle  wrote:

> What I would suggest is us setting up an corporation here in the US,
> setting a purpose and a missions statement (that includes education and
> science as we do those and they are eligible for non-profit status), elect
> 5-7 board members (who will be legally responsible for the entity) come up
> with a small operating budget (< $10k USD) and apply for non-profit
> (501(3)c).  This process would take a few hundreds of dollars.
> 
The letter stating FreeBSD foundation is free of federal income tax:
https://www.freebsdfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/DeterminationLetter.pdf

-- 
Hilsen/Regards
Michael Rasmussen

Get my public GnuPG keys:
michael  rasmussen  cc
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get=0xD3C9A00E
mir  datanom  net
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get=0xE501F51C
mir  miras  org
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get=0xE3E80917
--
/usr/games/fortune -es says:
"What terrible way to die."
"There are no good ways."
-- Sulu and Kirk, "That Which Survives", stardate
unknown


pgpiXiZMugZcK.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] Legal next steps

[Michael Rasmussen]

On Tue, 16 May 2017 09:22:11 -0400
Theo Schlossnagle  wrote:

> 
> Back to my first point, if there is a better avenue outside the United
> States for this, I would love to be educated about it.
> 
You could get inspired by the FreeBSD foundation:
https://www.freebsdfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/FoundationBylaws.pdf

The FreeBSD foundation is US based in Colorado.

-- 
Hilsen/Regards
Michael Rasmussen

Get my public GnuPG keys:
michael  rasmussen  cc
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get=0xD3C9A00E
mir  datanom  net
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get=0xE501F51C
mir  miras  org
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get=0xE3E80917
--
/usr/games/fortune -es says:
"What terrible way to die."
"There are no good ways."
-- Sulu and Kirk, "That Which Survives", stardate
unknown


pgpKKWtlkC78H.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

[OmniOS-discuss] Legal next steps

[Theo Schlossnagle]

My experience here is limited to the United States for approaching these
problems.  I don't mean to indicate that it is the right solution, but I
can only speak of what I know.

A legal entity must hold the assets. That can be a person, or a trust, or
an corporation or a community*, etc.  Community here is defined in such a
way by the IRS that I don't believe we would ever quality (and it's never
worth arguing). Given the history of "things" I would steer away from an
individual and I feel that given unknown nature of assets required to
operate and our weak starting point that a trust is likely not
self-sustaining.

What I would suggest is us setting up an corporation here in the US,
setting a purpose and a missions statement (that includes education and
science as we do those and they are eligible for non-profit status), elect
5-7 board members (who will be legally responsible for the entity) come up
with a small operating budget (< $10k USD) and apply for non-profit
(501(3)c).  This process would take a few hundreds of dollars.

Then we request that OmniTI donate the appropriate assets related to
OmniOS.  This organization can take donations (from basically anywhere) and
apply them to operational costs to forward its mission.  There is a chance
that this organization could be denied non-profit status as the IRS is
(sadly) a bit odd when it comes to approving that for initiatives for the
public good if their around open source software.  I don't see that as a
specific risk, it only means that donations made are not tax-deductible.

The gating factors here is can we get 5-7 people willing to participate as
legally responsible board members (I am not a lawyer, but the risk is very
lower here as there is very little money involved).

Back to my first point, if there is a better avenue outside the United
States for this, I would love to be educated about it.

Best regards,

Theo

-- 

Theo Schlossnagle

http://omniti.com/is/theo-schlossnagle
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] OmniOS r151022 is now out!

[Dominik Hassler]

Toomas,

using a (forced) installboot on both rpool mirror devices did the trick. 
Loader is now being used.


However there is another problem. I can boot w/o problems from the first 
device. But booting fails from the second device w/ the following message:


Can't find /boot/zfsloader

illumos/x86 boot
Default: disk-1:/boot/zfsloader
boot:


Debug info below:

$ sudo installboot -i /dev/rdsk/c10t5000CCA04103E095d0s0
Extended version string: 1.1-2017.4.23.2
MD5 hash: 766b5059c45796f049bb38b80e1a1c4d

same on both devices


$ sudo format -> select disk -> fdisk
 Total disk size is 36481 cylinders
 Cylinder size is 16065 (512 byte) blocks

   Cylinders
  Partition   StatusType  Start   End   Length%
  =   ==  =   ===   ==   ===
  1   ActiveSolaris2  1  3648036480100

same on both devices


$ sudo prtvtoc /dev/rdsk/c10t5000CCA04103E095d0s2
* /dev/rdsk/c10t5000CCA04103E095d0s2 partition map
*
* Dimensions:
* 512 bytes/sector
*  63 sectors/track
* 255 tracks/cylinder
*   16065 sectors/cylinder
*   36480 cylinders
*   36478 accessible cylinders
*
* Flags:
*   1: unmountable
*  10: read-only
*
* Unallocated space:
*   First SectorLast
*   Sector CountSector
*   0 16065 16064
*
*  First SectorLast
* Partition  Tag  FlagsSector CountSector  Mount Directory
   0  200  16065 586003005 586019069
   2  501  0 586051200 586051199
   8  101  0 16065 16064


same on both devices


boot: status
Default: disk-1:/boot/zfsloader
boot: statusdisk devices:
disk0:   BIOS drive C ...
  disk0a: root
  disk0i: boot
disk1:   BIOS drive D ...
  disk1s1: Solaris 2
disk1s1a: root
disk1s1i: boot

zfs devices:
  pool: rpool
bootfs: rpool/ROOT/omnios-r151022
config:

NAME STATE
rpool DEGRADED
  mirror DEGRADED
c9t5000CCA04103E0B5d0s2 ONLINE
c10t5000CCA04103E095d0s0 OFFLINE

illumos/x86 boot
Default: disk-1:/boot/zfsloader
boot:


Any hints on how to get the system boot from both rpool devices are 
highly appreciated.



Kind regards,
Dominik

On 05/15/2017 08:40 PM, Toomas Soome wrote:



On 15. mai 2017, at 21:06, Dan McDonald  wrote:



On May 15, 2017, at 12:49 PM, Dominik Hassler  wrote:

Hey,

after the upgrade, the boot loader is still GRUB.

I did the upgrade according to the upgrade notes. Rebooted once, did a:

$ sudo beadm activate omnios-r151022
WARNING: menu.lst file /rpool/boot/menu.lst does not exist,
   generating a new menu.lst file
Activated successfully

checked for a /etc/default/be file. there is none. Still the boot loader is 
GRUB instead of loader.


Are you on a mirrored root pool?  It's possible the libbe code that installs 
loader doesn't do it to all disks in a mirrored pool...

Worst-case scenario is to explicitly install it:

foreach (drive)
installboot -m /boot/pmbr /boot/gptzfsboot /dev/rdsk/

Dan



The problem you have is that beadm activate does not enforce MBR update in case 
of MBR+VTOC partitioning; you need to either run bootadm install-bootloader 
-Mfv or installboot -mv.

Note that installboot and bootadm install-bootloader have slightly different 
flags; -v is good to have there, so you will see if the MBR was updated or not.

The beadm activate and bootadm use the same mechanism to update the bootblocks 
on all pool member disks, bootadm does have extra flag to allow MBR update. 
installboot does only update specified disk.

rgds,
toomas


___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss