Antigen forwarded attachment
The entire message freebsd-questions Digest, Vol 133, Issue 7, originally sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), has been forwarded to you from the Antigen Quarantine area. This message may have been re-scanned by Antigen and handled according to the appropriate scan job's settings. Entire Message.eml ---BeginMessage--- Send freebsd-questions mailing list submissions to freebsd-questions@freebsd.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of freebsd-questions digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: Firefox: ugh. ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 2. Re: Horrible: Apache corrupting files? (Ben Paley) 3. Re: Firefox: ugh. (Gary Kline) 4. Re: Strange visual artifacts in upper left corner of screen which respond to mouse activity. (Miguel Ramos) 5. Re: Help needed compiling printer source code (P.U.Kruppa) 6. RE: No Buffer Space Available (fbsd) 7. Re: help me (Bastian Kummer) 8. AWT (Per Dahlstr?m) 9. Re: Firefox: ugh. (Gary Kline) 10. Re: Can't login via SSH (Kris Anderson) 11. Re: Can't login via SSH (Daniel Bye) 12. Re: Strange visual artifacts in upper left corner of screen which respond to mouse activity. (Eric Schuele) 13. Re: Strange visual artifacts in upper left corner of screen which respond to mouse activity. (Miguel Ramos) 14. Re: Help needed compiling printer source code (Robert Huff) 15. ipfilter rule will not load (Aaron Siegel) 16. Re: AWT (John Nielsen) 17. Re: ipfilter rule will not load (Ron Wilhoite) 18. Screen Size (C M) 19. Re: PXE boot jumpstarting (Erik N?rgaard) 20. Re: Screen Size (Kris Anderson) 21. Re: Screen Size (Mike Hunter) 22. Re: PXE boot jumpstarting (Heliocentric) 23. New Release on Cooking Basics from Maran Illustrated! (Thomson Course Technology) 24. New Logo Font (Energist) (Matthew Holder) 25. Re: Screen Size (Bob Goodman) 26. top on freebsd and wired memory (kapil jain) 27. Re: Purchasing the correct hardware: dual-core intel? Big cache? (Michal Mertl) 28. Security Run Output (Bryan Curl) 29. Re: top on freebsd and wired memory (Erik Trulsson) 30. Cloning boot drive - more details ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 31. Perl: sort string alphabetically, or remove dupe chars? (Nikolas Britton) 32. Bind as a chaching nameserver (Richard Collyer) 33. Re: Horrible: Apache corrupting files? (Ben Paley) 34. Re: Bind as a chaching nameserver (Derek Ragona) 35. Re: Help needed compiling printer source code (Malcolm Fitzgerald) -- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 10:19:31 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Firefox: ugh. To: FreeBSD Mailing List freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed On 4/24/06, Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] snickered: If firefox is supposedly superior Low and pretty was set the bar. /usr/X11R6/bin/firefox not excellent is, Pierce Brosnan thou artn't, Lawnmower Man also is this not. -- -- -- Message: 2 Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:41:18 + From: Ben Paley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Horrible: Apache corrupting files? To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 On Friday 21 April 2006 00:31, Alex de Kruijff wrote: On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 10:17:47AM +, Ben Paley wrote: Hello, I have Apache 2 running on FreeBSD 6.1-PRERELEASE on a laptop on a small office lan. Whenever one of the other machines (mostly Macs) makes a request for a certain page on my machine, it is delivered succesfully but the file itself is absolutely scrambled beyond recognition into a binary file. Subsequent requests rescramble it into a different but equally nonsense binary. I've looked with a binary editor and it really is completely messed up. I can restore the file from a good archive copy, but every time the same thing happens. The file was originally created on a mac by Flash (it's a 1.1k html file which just embeds a flash movie). Recently I copied it to and from a Solaris box via ftp from an Windows NT machine (although it wasn't opened afaik - a long story, clearly, which also involves a usb flash drive...). Anyone have any ideas? The file itself is inconsequential, but the fact of such blatant and relentless data corruption is very worrying to me! I don't know if it's the file or my system or some combination... I'd really appreciate some advice, I've
Antigen forwarded attachment
The entire message RE: ifconfig alias: File Exists, originally sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), has been forwarded to you from the Antigen Quarantine area. This message may have been re-scanned by Antigen and handled according to the appropriate scan job's settings. Entire Message.eml ---BeginMessage--- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 4:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ifconfig alias: File Exists In a message dated 10/24/04 11:18:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Is that new? You are right, that fixed it, but didn't think I had to do that before :( You get it because the guy who maintains ifconfig didn't have the foresight to realize the alias should imply a host mask, and also that the guy who coded the kernel code didn't think that assuming a host mask was reasonable. Welcome to open source. Love it and live with it. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To assume makes an ass out of u and me. Ok, that out of the way, the config you assume should be coded into ifconfig and kernel is not 100% going to be used all the time. In fact I have multiple nets and have multiple netmask assigned on the one machine. If you actually READ man ifconfig it states that this should be set to what you assume it should be. It helps when people don't attack things they don't fully understand cause for many it might be a person's first view at what you are bashing. Unfortunately also, many people aren't smart enough to get a second opinion or to try beyond there first try or someone person's like yourselfs comments. As for the assume thing, speak for yourself. Your implication that there should be no defaults is quite asinine. If it doesn't work with no netmask specified, then its broken. Its not unreasonable to assume that if no netmask is provided, then a host mask (for an alias) is intended. In the absence of a netmask, the only assumption thats reasonable is a host mask. There are lots of assumptions made by ifconfig. It assumes that you only want the interface to have one address (as if you submit an address to an interface that already has one it explicitly deletes the other). Its not unreasonable to assume that, nor would it be unreasonable to assume that the intention was to add an alias. It would certainly be safer. And I understand it a lot better than you do. In today's world, assuming the natural mask (which is what ifconfig has done since the beginning of time) is wrong most of the time. Just because someone back in the 1970s decided to do it that way doesn't make it correct. One of the basic properties of a default setting is that it should work I find it very wrong to assume anything on a network interface. Assumptions on anything that could open up a security hole are very dangerous. ifconfig has a far greater ability than many things to open up security wholes that may get around an improperly setup firewall. I agree that some assumptions can easily be made and should be but not here. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-que ---End Message--- ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Antigen forwarded attachment
The entire message Re: Serious investigations into UNIX and Windows, originally sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), has been forwarded to you from the Antigen Quarantine area. This message may have been re-scanned by Antigen and handled according to the appropriate scan job's settings. Entire Message.eml ---BeginMessage--- - Original Message - From: Ted Mittelstaedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 4:54 AM Subject: RE: Serious investigations into UNIX and Windows snip There are more people around that can administer MS systems than unix, Yes, and it can be done with a lower level of talent. . Having seen and dealing with the aftermath of networks owned by people that thought that, I have to state your out of your gourd. Windows today is just as complex as any UNIX system. Sure, maybe a decade ago a peer-to-peer network of Windows systems your statement might have been true, but not today. This type of discussion has been going around the world since Windows and *Nix first clashed. Windows has a gui, *Nix by default on most OS's, doesn't. To configure Windows, you point here, click there, right click and check properties here, add this information in the line provided. Click apply and the program runs and yet there are those that feel it is more complex than *Nix. I'll tell you what. You take any MS certified, high end admin, that's never seen a *Nix OS and see how far he gets. Just tell him to setup ftp with chroot environment, or bind, or heaven forbid Sendmail with rbl, access, virtual aliasing, etc. If he's never seen it, it'll take him forever. To those that live in the *Nix world, we can generally walk up to a Windows DC and make it do what we want. Do you really think that MS was the first to come up with MS Shares? What about AD User propogation to other DC's? DNS? Or even Mail? Where do you think they got those ideas from? Honestly, what makes you think that Windows is more complex in it's administration than a *Nix system? It's common knowledge that Windows is easier to manage. That's one of it's selling points and it always has been. Windows is now easier than ever, just point and click. Tell me how many times have you heard someone say that about any *Nix OS currently available? The human race as a whole, is always looking for something to make doing something easier for them. That's what drives our desire to contstantly design new technology. o Man walked everywhere then he realized, riding a horse was faster and easier than walking 3 hours. o They designed a saddle for the horse because it was easier on the ass than barebacking it. o They designed a car because it was easier than riding a horse and thought to be faster in it's infancy. o Cars were made faster as the years went along because we wanted to get there faster. o The airplane was designed because people wanted to leave the ground and fly to wherever they wanted to go. o Helicopters were made because it's easier to land in a field with no landing strip than to build the runway for a plane. o Computers were made because people got headaches doing complex calculations and wanted something that could do it for them and do it faster as well. and so on and so forth. The human race, as a whole, is lazy and always looking for something to make their lives easier. In this day and age of computer technology, MS provides that to us better than *Nix does. Yet, there are those that are adamant that Windows is more complex than *Nix is. How ironic. Ted -- Micheal Patterson Senior Communications Systems Engineer 405-917-0600 Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-que ---End Message--- ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Antigen forwarded attachment
The entire message Re: ifconfig alias: File Exists, originally sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), has been forwarded to you from the Antigen Quarantine area. This message may have been re-scanned by Antigen and handled according to the appropriate scan job's settings. Entire Message.eml ---BeginMessage--- In a message dated 10/24/04 11:18:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Is that new? You are right, that fixed it, but didn't think I had to do that before :( You get it because the guy who maintains ifconfig didn't have the foresight to realize the alias should imply a host mask, and also that the guy who coded the kernel code didn't think that assuming a host mask was reasonable. Welcome to open source. Love it and live with it. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To assume makes an ass out of u and me. Ok, that out of the way, the config you assume should be coded into ifconfig and kernel is not 100% going to be used all the time. In fact I have multiple nets and have multiple netmask assigned on the one machine. If you actually READ man ifconfig it states that this should be set to what you assume it should be. It helps when people don't attack things they don't fully understand cause for many it might be a person's first view at what you are bashing. Unfortunately also, many people aren't smart enough to get a second opinion or to try beyond there first try or someone person's like yourselfs comments. As for the assume thing, speak for yourself. Your implication that there should be no defaults is quite asinine. If it doesn't work with no netmask specified, then its broken. Its not unreasonable to assume that if no netmask is provided, then a host mask (for an alias) is intended. In the absence of a netmask, the only assumption thats reasonable is a host mask. There are lots of assumptions made by ifconfig. It assumes that you only want the interface to have one address (as if you submit an address to an interface that already has one it explicitly deletes the other). Its not unreasonable to assume that, nor would it be unreasonable to assume that the intention was to add an alias. It would certainly be safer. And I understand it a lot better than you do. In today's world, assuming the natural mask (which is what ifconfig has done since the beginning of time) is wrong most of the time. Just because someone back in the 1970s decided to do it that way doesn't make it correct. One of the basic properties of a default setting is that it should work. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-que ---End Message--- ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Antigen forwarded attachment
The entire message RE: ifconfig alias: File Exists, originally sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), has been forwarded to you from the Antigen Quarantine area. This message may have been re-scanned by Antigen and handled according to the appropriate scan job's settings. Entire Message.eml ---BeginMessage--- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 5:13 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ifconfig alias: File Exists In a message dated 10/19/04 3:51:33 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: # ifconfig fxp0 alias 200.46.204.9 ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCAIFADDR): File exists when I know for a fact that it hasn't been configured? you should use a netmask of 255.255.255.255 for ipv4 aliases. ifconfig fxp0 alias 200.46.204.9 netmask 255.255.255.255 Is that new? You are right, that fixed it, but didn't think I had to do that before :( You get it because the guy who maintains ifconfig didn't have the foresight to realize the alias should imply a host mask, and also that the guy who coded the kernel code didn't think that assuming a host mask was reasonable. Welcome to open source. Love it and live with it. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To assume makes an ass out of u and me. Ok, that out of the way, the config you assume should be coded into ifconfig and kernel is not 100% going to be used all the time. In fact I have multiple nets and have multiple netmask assigned on the one machine. If you actually READ man ifconfig it states that this should be set to what you assume it should be. It helps when people don't attack things they don't fully understand cause for many it might be a person's first view at what you are bashing. Unfortunately also, many people aren't smart enough to get a second opinion or to try beyond there first try or someone person's like yourselfs comments. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-que ---End Message--- ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Antigen forwarded attachment
The entire message Sil680 RAID Support while installing 5.1-Release, originally sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), has been forwarded to you from the Antigen Quarantine area. This message may have been re-scanned by Antigen and handled according to the appropriate scan job's settings. ---BeginMessage--- I just purchased a Sil680 IDE RAID controller, and have setup a striped RAID array. When I boot from the 5.1 installation CD-ROM, FreeBSD does not recognize them as one disk. I checked the hardware notes, and Sil680 UDMA6 is listed. Seeing Sil680 listed, I assumed that the RAID capabilities would also be supported. I read something posted awhile back referring to the Sil680 controller, saying it was supported, but dangerous unless using 5.1-Current. Does anybody know anything about the current status of this? Is there anyway to get the FreeBSD installation to recognize my RAID array, or should I just buy another controller? Thanks, Travis Troyer ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hardware To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---End Message--- ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Antigen forwarded attachment
The entire message Need help with sendmail, smart host and genericstable, originally sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), has been forwarded to you from the Antigen Quarantine area. This message may have been re-scanned by Antigen and handled according to the appropriate scan job's settings. ---BeginMessage--- Hi, I have been playing a few hours with sendmail settings, but I failed to configure it correctly. I want to explain what I want to do. Perhaps sendmail is the wrong tool for this. I want to send mail from /usr/bin/mail, emacs, vi etc and forward it to my provider. That means, the local From: address and other headers need to be mapped to my external mail address. It is not enough to just rewrite the host name. The user name is also different. I have read several documents now. The FreeBSD handbook (contains errors with dialup configurations btw), the freebsddiary, an explanation directly from sendmail.org and few from some universities. I have been searching on google, but the combination of smart host and genericstable seems very unusual. Nothing works so far. I can see that SMART_HOST setting works, because sendmail is always giving me MAILER-DAEMON-mails containing chat-logs with the external SMTP server. But the From-Line was not translated according to my settings in /etc/mail/genericstable (yes, it contains tabs and not spaces). GENERICS_DOMAIN_FILE is correct, too, in my opinion. When I remove the SMART_HOST setting. The From-lines are translated correctly, but the mail will get bounced of course, because I'm dialup. The FreeBSD handbook does not mention genericstable and how it works and if it works. I cannot see what is wrong and sendmail -bt shows that it does not translate addresses. Martin ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---End Message--- ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
