Re: Removing fdisk and bsdlabel (legacy partition tools)

2024-01-25 Thread Rolf M. Dietze



Quoting Cy Schubert :


In message 
, Warner Losh writes:

--b0adc9060fbe7411
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Jan 24, 2024, 10:07=E2=80=AFPM Cy Schubert 
wrote:

> In message <202401242347.40onlwkz099...@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, "Rodney W.
> Grimes"
> writes:
> > > I would agree personally, to moving to ports (eg ports/sysutils) with
> > > a DEPRECATED in the DESCR or something, or better yet a Make
> > > invokation event to say "superceded, here is how to proceed against
> > > advice") or something.
> >
> > They are totally useless as ports when your booted from install
> > media and working from a standalone shell.  These are the exact
> > times you want things like fdisk and bsdlabel so you can figure
> > out wtf is going on, and bsdinstall is NOT gona help you.
>
> This is certainly a good point.
>

What can they do that gpart can't do?


This was quite a while ago, booted off my recovery USB attempting to repair
some self caused damage. The ability to edit (vi) a file with starting
addresses and lengths, visually using bsdlabel, was suited to my panicked
state as I worked to recover the machine.

A visual view of columns of a bsdlabel, editing a label using vi, checking
and double checking numbers before committing them is handy.The visual
format and the ability to adjust the numbers in an editor before committing
them is handy. You can't do this with gpart, as it's transactional. And
bsdinstall doesn't give one the opportunity to check the numbers in detail
on a console before committing them.

Maybe a good GSoC project may be to replace bsdlabel's driect writes to
disk with geom calls. Though, t doesn't need to be bsdlabel, but some kind
of utility that displays the existing label in an editor session where
changes can be made, using the editor, and committed. This could even be an
enhancement to bsdinstall: call it expert mode or whatever.


well, I'v been there many times.

There is another regular usecase, this time for fdisk for me, that ist
repairing a windows boot disk. I have no idea of waht to use if not fdisk
to do that, rather than booting linux to run fdisk for windows repairs.
That in fact would be the only linux box, only to support windows...

/rmd






Re: CDE on FreeBSD 14.0 Release

2023-11-27 Thread Rolf M. Dietze




Hi,

uh, I forgot the entry in services, thanks for the link:)

Rolf

Quoting Mario Marietto :


I asked the same recently and I'd got a good answer,here :

https://forums.FreeBSD.org/threads/cde-users-unite.85143/post-576559

On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 5:25 PM Rolf M. Dietze 
wrote:


Hi,

might be that I am on the wrong list for this, since my Problem
exists on 14.0Release.

After an out of the box install of FreeBSD 14.0 Release and following

https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/setting-up-common-desktop-environment-for-modern-use.69475/
I am stuck with CDE. CDE loads, dtlogin starts an presents the login
or greeter window, but upon logging in I get a popup telling
"The desktop messaging system could not be started". Guess I am
missing some config steps. Any pointer for further reading?
I had CDE running on 13.2Release

yours, Rolf





--
Mario.







Re: CDE on FreeBSD 14.0 Release

2023-11-27 Thread Rolf M. Dietze




Hi,
sorry for this, user error...

I did put a dtlogin_enable="YES" in /etc/rc.conf having the
dtlogin copied to /usr/local/etc/rcd This did not work.

Just having a /usr/local/dt/bin/dtlogin in /etc/rc.local as
it is outlined in the link below, does work.

Still, having an issue with dtspc upon startup, but CDE works fine

/rmd

Quoting "Rolf M. Dietze" :


Hi,

might be that I am on the wrong list for this, since my Problem
exists on 14.0Release.

After an out of the box install of FreeBSD 14.0 Release and following
https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/setting-up-common-desktop-environment-for-modern-use.69475/
I am stuck with CDE. CDE loads, dtlogin starts an presents the login
or greeter window, but upon logging in I get a popup telling
"The desktop messaging system could not be started". Guess I am
missing some config steps. Any pointer for further reading?
I had CDE running on 13.2Release

yours, Rolf







CDE on FreeBSD 14.0 Release

2023-11-27 Thread Rolf M. Dietze

Hi,

might be that I am on the wrong list for this, since my Problem
exists on 14.0Release.

After an out of the box install of FreeBSD 14.0 Release and following
https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/setting-up-common-desktop-environment-for-modern-use.69475/
I am stuck with CDE. CDE loads, dtlogin starts an presents the login
or greeter window, but upon logging in I get a popup telling
"The desktop messaging system could not be started". Guess I am
missing some config steps. Any pointer for further reading?
I had CDE running on 13.2Release

yours, Rolf




Re: [HEADSUP] making /bin/sh the default shell for root

2021-09-23 Thread Rolf M. Dietze



Quoting Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz>:


On 22/09/2021 22:50, grarpamp wrote:

propose to make it the default shell for root starting FreeBSD 14.0-RELEASE


Make it so.

The whole rest of rc, pkg, base scripts and subsystems use a lot of  
sh, not csh.

So this is a good compatibility, consistancy, and gotcha-removing update,
needed for decades.

Even "bash" is a majority spoken shell in Linux/world, helping
make crossovers if BSD becomes a bit more bash-like.


More bashism and linuxism in BSD world, you are waking the devil.


The bsd sh feature updates are filling useful/needed capability gaps.


Moving to sh without maintain the same history search behavior  
(start of the command and Up & Down arrows) are like cutting one leg.


The (t)csh is what I really like on every FreeBSD machine. Never  
seen good configured bash (prompt + history search) on any other OS  
I ever visited. Not saying it is not possible but if FreeBSD will  
switch default shell to something else I expect to do it the way  
that it is more user friendly and powerful than on other OSes where  
everything is leaved to "users can customize it". Current state of  
sh behavior is really that "bad" way.

we are talking of the default sehll for the root user. One does not
really work as root user, but if son nothing stops who ever wants to
to exec zsh or exec tcsh?

Whoever wants is free to add other users with root pemissions is free
to do so.


Rolf M Dietze