Re: pdksh cli as vi

2005-06-17 Thread Jochen Keil

User Bodza wrote:

 the same effect. after loggin in it's not working but if
 i give the set -o vi from the shell it's ok.

You have to put
 set -o vi
into your ~/.kshrc.

To make sure kshrc makes use of it you also have to put
 ENV=~/.kshrc
 export ENV
into your ~/.profile.

Most shells will use emacs mode as default. In my opinion you'll have to 
change the source code to get a different default setting for pdksh.


Regards,
Jochen
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: pdksh cli as vi

2005-06-16 Thread Jochen Keil

Hi.


if i switch to command mode strange things happen. like
i press 'h' to go to the left and it just adds 'h's to
the command line. but if i give it a export VISUAL=vi
from the command line everything is ok.


Did you try using set -o vi?

Regards,
Jochen
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Which mail server is the best for me?

2005-04-04 Thread Jochen Keil
Kiffin Gish wrote:
I would like to setup a mail server but am a little confused about whether
to use sendmail, qmail, postfix or whatever. Basically my web server is a
simple one to be used for personal use with maybe no more than a 10-20 mail
accounts.
Those statements made by someone about qmail needing patches are not 
true. Qmail runs very good here with the same usage you described above.
Someone else said that qmail breaks standards. This is true but DJB 
gives a good explanation for this on his homepage. Anyway i never 
experienced problems because of this (maybe because it just works?).
Furthermore configuration isn't a pain in the ass. It takes you some 
time to get the idea but then qmail will reveal you endless possibilitys 
to configure qmail in a very easy and effective way (one word: 
dotfiles). There are also a lot of examples and FAQs on http://cr.yp.to.
Another point for qmail: it will run reliable with daemontools.
Finally just have a look at this:
$ du -sh qmail-1.03
1.4Mqmail-1.03
$ du -sh /usr/src/gnu/dist/sendmail/
12M /usr/src/gnu/dist/sendmail/
$ du -sh /usr/src/gnu/dist/postfix/
14M /usr/src/gnu/dist/postfix/
(postfix and sendmail are from the netbsd source but i don't think this 
matters.)

What are the advantages and/or disadvantages of each choice, and where can I
find more information comparing them?
Again i can only speak about my own experiences. I had bind running a 
long time until a friend convinced me to try djbdns. It was like: What? 
It's that easy to run a dnscache/server?. After that i followed his 
recommendation straight to qmail and i don't want to miss it anymore or 
feel the urge to try something different also i haven't run a mail 
server before.

So much for djb advocacy.
Greetings,
Jochen Keil
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: different behaviour between 4.x and 5.x (ping response/disk io) [was Re: ]

2005-01-20 Thread Jochen Keil
stheg olloydson wrote:
Glad to be of help. Raidframe had been ported to FBSD 5.x, but it was
removed because kernel changes broke it, and no one volunteered to fix
it. I think gvinum replaced vinum in 5.3 for the same reason. I don't
use software raid, so I don't really know.
It's a pity that raidframe didn't make it into FreeBSD. It seems to be 
faster than (g)vinum at least for me. I tried gvinum because i wanted to 
look on gdbe but it didn't seem to be ripe. It lacked several options 
from gvinum help and if used not carefully enough it would crash the 
whole machine. On the other hand vinum seems to be very stable but 
hasn't GEOM support.

But NBSD 2.0 is very nice. A company that I do consulting for has just
chosen it as the OS for a new embedded product in their pipeline. I've
been toying with the idea of idea of web-enabling my toaster by hooking
up temperature sensors and a camera, so web surfers could make toast at
my house.
Good idea, maybe i should install NetBSD in my hair-drier and have the 
web crowd decide wether my hairs will be dry or wet. :)

I was going to use a 8051 chip and write the code, but maybe
I'll use NBSD on an embedded board. (Someday, I may want to add the
sprinkler system, pool pump,)
A fully controllable house is very nice but it either means a lot of 
work or a lot of money. It's also quite difficult to upgrade an old 
house because all the walls and floors would have to be ripped open in 
order to install cabling.

P.S. (to the list in general) Why do all of the questions about FBSD
performance, especially 4.x vs 5.x, come from people posting from
Windows boxes? Theories?
In my case i'm using windows because it's pre-installed on the laptop
i use and i never had luck with *bsd/linux on the desktop (and
especially laptops). 
This was meant as a humorous question because of certain Windows users'
not well-reasoned or -argued posts on this very topic in the last few
days.
Trolls are really a plague but i think it's quite calm on this list in 
regard to some Internet panels. Anyway i hope nobody thought that i'm 
trolling. :)

Different tools for different jobs. Although, in the thread you
referenced, you said you were having major SMP problems with NBSD. I
hope you get those sorted. Those, I would think, are worse than any
network and vinum performance problems. In any event you may wish to
check back when 5.4 is released. (No release schedule yet.)
There are some more points that made me stick with NetBSD and maybe i'll 
want to come back to FreeBSD when 5.4 is out. However i think that 
development for NetBSD will make advances too. What SMP, NetBSD and 
FreeBSD concerns i have to say that i know much more now than when i 
wrote to the NetBSD mailing list.
I made some assumptions back then which proved to be wrong. Somebody 
gave me the hint to have a look at sysstat vmstat and i saw that the 
interrupts grew to an high number on disk i/o. It went a little bit 
smoother without SMP. I couldn't remember that FreeBSD did so, thus i 
assumed that it performed better. Checking it again exposed that there 
was almost the same interrupt behaviour. My apologies for writing emails 
with unevaluated statements.

You're welcome and see you on the 'net.
stheg
Best Wishes,
Jochen Keil
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: different behaviour between 4.x and 5.x (ping response/disk io) [was Re: ]

2005-01-19 Thread Jochen Keil
stheg olloydson wrote:
(Sorry about the multiple posts. I somehow sent this without a subject
line before.)
Never mind. Nobody's perfect. ;)
To sum up your problem, you tested FreeBSD 5.3, NetBSD 2.0, FreeBSD
4.11 and an elder version of the Knoppix (Linux 2.4) CD and found that
FreeBSD 4.11RC2 had the best ping responses from that group. What you
want to know is why FBSD 5.3 doesn't respond as well as 4.11RC2. Is
this correct?
You got me right.
Assuming that it is, the answer is that 5.3 is the first stable release
of the 5.x branch. One of the 5.x branch's main purposes is to make
FBSD much more scalable in terms SMP support. Doing this requires
removing the Giant lock. It had been hoped that the removal process
would be finished in time for 5.3. Unfortunately, as often happens in a
volunteer project delays occurred for various reasons, that was not the
case. The incomplete removal meant that not all subsystems could be
optimized properly. One of those subsystems is networking.
This is not as bad as it sounds because while 5.3's network performance
is not as good as 4.11RC2, it is no worse that of NBSD 2.0 or any Linux
distro. Also, the optimization has already begun on networking and 5.4
should be _at least_ as good as 4.x.
Also, as you saw yourself, using an SMP kernel in FBSD 5.3 doesn't
cause a performance hit in networking but it does in NBSD 2.0.
So your choices seem to be use 4.11RC2 (full release due shortly) to
get the best network response, 5.3 to get as good performance as NBSD
2.0 but with SMP, or use NBSD 2.0 to get as good perfomance as 5.3 but
without SMP. Of course, you can wait until NBSD (your prefered OS)
performs as well as FBSD, but that may be a lnng time.:)
Just a few day ago i installed NetBSD 2.0 to make a final stroke to my 
decision as i got this computer on the 16. of november. Main advantage 
in my opinion is that raidframe performs better than vinum (at least 
with my setup and with the tests i performed). There are some other 
topics but mainly subjective and not the matter of this email. I guess 
i'm going to stick with it, developers and time will do the rest for me. :)
But what's most important is that your mail gave me the confidence that 
my hardware isn't faulty. It's also very nice that you shed some light 
on the that whole network subject.

P.S. (to the list in general) Why do all of the questions about FBSD
performance, especially 4.x vs 5.x, come from people posting from
Windows boxes? Theories?
In my case i'm using windows because it's pre-installed on the laptop i 
use and i never had luck with *bsd/linux on the desktop (and especially 
laptops). Did you ever recognize the difference between Firefox/Mozilla 
Browser for Windows and the versions für FreeBSD? Even only compiled 
with GTK1 Firefox/Mozilla will load the cpu up to 100% when there are 
some tabs (10-20) opened. I know that this is a matter of unsupported 
graphic cards with X.org (that whole proprietary stuff annoys me a 
lot..) but i don't want to suffer for my beliefs. If there only would be 
ratpoison or xfce for windows..
Well, enough said. (Maybe i'll make some space free for FreeBSD 5.3 to 
give a try but i'm not to optimistic that it will suffice my needs)

Thanks for your kind assistance and best regards,
Jochen Keil
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


different behaviour between 4.x and 5.x (ping response/disk io)

2005-01-16 Thread Jochen Keil
Hi all.
I got a dual Piii 800 box here with these specifications:
-Supermicro 370DL3 Mainboard
-Adaptec aic7892 Ultra160 SCSI adapter (onboard)
-2x 256MB Micron ECC RAM (tested with memtest)
-2x IBM IC35L036UWDY10-0 (SCSI Drives, only one connected for testing)
-LG GSA-4040B (connected via onboard IDE Controller)
(a few IDE drives which weren't connected für testing)
Full dmesg output is attached to the end of this email.
Now to the description of my problem.
I tested various Operating systems on this box, FreeBSD 5.3, NetBSD 2.0, 
FreeBSD 4.11 and an elder version of the Knoppix (Linux 2.4) CD.

Every installation except FreeBSD 4.11 showed almost the same behaviour 
when doing the following test. First i ran iozone on the SCSI drive. 
While the benchmark was performed i issued a ping to another host in the 
network. The result drove me insane. Wether with the onboard fxp0 either 
the em0 i was able to get a stable ping response time which looks like 
that: i get a bunch (~20-30, depends on disk io) of ping response times 
around 0.2ms and then there are some really long response times above 
1ms (the longest took about 90ms).
However FreeBSD 4.x seems to be the only exception to this as it gives 
me over a complete iozone test only three pings with a response time 
around 1ms. The other ping times are mostly around 0.2ms with some 
seldom peaks at 0.5-0.6ms.
Due to this behaviour i figured out that this cannot be the fault of the 
hardware, at least i hope so. A hint from a NetBSD Mailing List pointed 
me to have a look at the interrupts. On disk IO the interrupt rate on 
ahc0 is going up to around 300/s. But this is all the same for FreeBSD 
4.x and 5.x (i used vmstat -i for that). There also seems to be no 
difference between using SMP and a single CPU kernel (Information based 
on FreeBSD 5.3 and NetBSD 2.0 tests as i didn't test this with FreeBSD 
4.11 yet).
Now i am really puzzled because i cannot understand why 4.x behaves 
relatively good compared to 5.x on this specific issue. Is there a good 
explanation or does one have to investigate this further?
The NetBSD Mailing List i'm talking about can be found here: 
http://mail-index.netbsd.org/netbsd-users/2005/01/. (Discussion starts 
on 05.01.2005: High Load / bad response times).

I'm looking forward to your answers and with kind regards,
Jochen Keil
Dmesg from 4.11:
FreeBSD 4.11-RC2 #0: Sun Jan  2 09:47:04 GMT 2005
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC
Timecounter i8254  frequency 1193182 Hz
CPU: Intel Pentium III (799.62-MHz 686-class CPU)
  Origin = GenuineIntel  Id = 0x683  Stepping = 3
Features=0x383fbffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,MMX,FXSR,SSE
real memory  = 536805376 (524224K bytes)
config di pcic0
config di psm0
config di sio1
config di sio0
config di ppc0
config di fdc0
config di bt0
config di ata1
config di aic0
config di aha0
config di adv0
config q
avail memory = 516833280 (504720K bytes)
Preloaded elf kernel kernel at 0xc0556000.
Preloaded userconfig_script /boot/kernel.conf at 0xc055609c.
Pentium Pro MTRR support enabled
md0: Malloc disk
Using $PIR table, 9 entries at 0xc00f5230
npx0: math processor on motherboard
npx0: INT 16 interface
pcib0: ServerWorks NB6635 3.0LE host to PCI bridge on motherboard
pci0: PCI bus on pcib0
pci0: S3 968 graphics accelerator at 3.0 irq 11
fxp0: Intel 82559 Pro/100 Ethernet port 0xd800-0xd83f mem 
0xfe80-0xfe8f,0xfe9ef000-0xfe9e irq 9 at device 6.0 on pci0
fxp0: Ethernet address 00:30:48:21:74:63
inphy0: i82555 10/100 media interface on miibus0
inphy0:  10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto
isab0: ServerWorks IB6566 PCI to ISA bridge at device 15.0 on pci0
isa0: ISA bus on isab0
atapci0: ServerWorks ROSB4 ATA33 controller port 0xffa0-0xffaf at 
device 15.1 on pci0
ata0: at 0x1f0 irq 14 on atapci0
ata1: at 0x170 irq 15 on atapci0
ohci0: OHCI (generic) USB controller mem 0xfeaff000-0xfeaf irq 10 
at device 15.2 on pci0
usb0: OHCI version 1.0, legacy support
usb0: OHCI (generic) USB controller on ohci0
usb0: USB revision 1.0
uhub0: (0x1166) OHCI root hub, class 9/0, rev 1.00/1.00, addr 1
uhub0: 4 ports with 4 removable, self powered
pcib1: ServerWorks NB6635 3.0LE host to PCI bridge on motherboard
pci1: PCI bus on pcib1
ahc0: Adaptec aic7892 Ultra160 SCSI adapter port 0xe800-0xe8ff mem 
0xfebff000-0xfebf irq 11 at device 3.0 on pci1
aic7892: Ultra160 Wide Channel A, SCSI Id=7, 32/253 SCBs
orm0: Option ROM at iomem 0xc-0xc7fff on isa0
pmtimer0 on isa0
atkbdc0: Keyboard controller (i8042) at port 0x60,0x64 on isa0
atkbd0: AT Keyboard flags 0x1 irq 1 on atkbdc0
kbd0 at atkbd0
vga0: Generic ISA VGA at port 0x3c0-0x3df iomem 0xa-0xb on isa0
sc0: System console at flags 0x100 on isa0
sc0: VGA 16 virtual consoles, flags=0x300
acd0: DVD-R HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GSA-4040B at ata0-master PIO4
Waiting 15 seconds for SCSI devices to settle
Mounting root from ufs:/dev/da0s1a
da0 at ahc0 bus 0 target 1 lun 0
da0: IBM

5.3-Release/Stable Problems with ichsmb

2004-11-28 Thread Jochen Keil
Hi all.
Recently i've got a dual Mainboard and one of the first things i tried 
was the smbus stuff.
I knew that i had to put device smb and device smbus in my kernel 
configuration file plus a specific driver.
After some googl'ing i figured out that i need the ichsmb driver in 
order to access the chip.

So i compiled a kernel with the smb and smp stuff and after rebooting i 
wondered why i didn't have /dev/smb?.
Loading the modules wasn't possible because they were already compiled 
into the kernel except the ichsmb module which gave me an error that 
there was no file called ichsmb.ko available.
Checking /boot/kernel i realized that this was true.
After compiling a second time (i updated to 5.3-release meanwhile) the 
error was still there an no /dev/smb? for me.
Looking into the make.conf manpage showed me that i could try with 
MODULES_OVERRIDE.
Trying make MODULES_OVERRIDE=ichsmb buildkernel KERNCONF=FOO ended 
with an error in ichsmb which isn't in /usr/src/sys/modules.
Playing around in the sources (trying to copy sys/dev/ichsmb to 
sys/modules, editing some Makefiles and so on) didn't give me better 
results.

I'm currently compiling a GENERIC Kernel (without SMP) with device 
smb/smbus/ichsmb but i don't expect to much from it because the module 
isn't available in a plain GENERIC.

You guys are my last hope is there a chance of getting ichsmb somehow 
compiled or am i doing something wrong?

Hope to hear from you real soon,
greetings,
Jochen Keil
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]