Re: ipfw nat inbound keep-state with net.inet.ip.fw.one_pass=0
On Thu, 23 Jun 2011, umage wrote: Some points: 1) I did use the handbook as reference, and my ruleset mimics the layout used there. Excuse the late response, I've been away. The best reference, apart from ipfw(8), is /etc/rc.firewall. 'Nuff said. 2) Handbook uses divert natd, which I used until I switched to the kernel nat approach. Assuming that was working, is changing to ipfw nat the only difference? Or is that when you added fwd to the mix? Is 192.168.0.55 another box on the LAN, or an IP alias on this box? What says 'netstat -finet -rn'? Is this on FreeBSD 8.x? 3) I did not find any concrete examples of ipfw nat rule usage, so I'm using them the old natd way. Apart from the 'NAT, REDIRECT AND LSNAT' section in ipfw(8), natd(8) is still useful as fuller reference, given a few less, renamed parameters. As mentioned in that section, libalias(3) gives detail of all functions. I did some more experiments, and noticed that for example, an inbound connection can still communicate both ways after the initial state table rule expires (20 seconds for some reason). ipfw(8) 'SYSCTL VARIABLES' covers timeouts (sysctl net.inet.ip.fw.dyn_*) 20 seconds suggests a SYN timeout, so a TCP connection - but see below. Perhaps that 'works' because you're not denying established connections and using only 'setup' on keep-state rules, again assuming TCP protocol? If they communicate while the state entry is alive, the timeout resets, but it seems like it doesn't matter at all. This leads me to believe that 'ipfw nat' keeps an internal state table, which cannot be viewed, but is checked when doing check-state. Or something... which I have no way of knowing. NAT aliasing tables are entirely distinct from ipfw dynamic rule state tables. Try adding 'log' (and maybe same_ports) to ipfw nat parameters at least while debugging connections. That log, 'ipfw -ted show' and a tcpdump on each interface should show exactly what's going on. 'ipfw nat 1 show config'. Here's a pruned version of the ruleset I used. Rule 600 is the one that adds that remote -- local state table entry that messes everything up. If I omit keep-state on it, then traffic from the local side will be the one creating the states when replying, with a 5-second timeout. sysctl net.inet.ip.fw.dyn_udp_lifetime is 5 seconds by default. So now we're talking UDP? Please be more specific, or best, cutpaste results. $fw add 100 allow all from any to any via $lan_if This passes all packets coming in from the LAN, bound for anywhere - ie this box OR the outside - but before/without performing NAT - as well as passing packets being transmitted to the LAN, whether locally generated or routed after having been NAT'd on inbound pass. Not what you wanted. You mentioned packets mistakenly reaching the outside with 192.168.* source addresses, that'll be this rule. Try specifying 'in recv $if' and 'out xmit $if' avoiding 'via' when it's ambiguous, especially on outbound packets where 'via $if' is also true when they've come _in_ on that specified interface. You need to do outbound NAT first anyway. $fw nat 1 config if $wan_if redirect_port 192.168.0.55:12345 12345 $fw add 200 nat 1 ip4 from any to any in via $wan_if Ok, you're doing inbound NAT before checking state, however you've not specified protocol (tcp or udp) with redirect_port. I can't find any example in ipfw(8), natd(8) or libalias(3) where proto is optional, but I haven't read the code or tried this myself. We can't tell from this (or rule 600) whether your port '12345' is TCP or UDP. $fw add 300 check-state At this point any packet, in or out, matching dynamic state tables will execute the action of the matching keep-state rule. For packets going out to the WAN the action is a skipto, so all ip4 packets matching that flow will execute the 'skipto 800', where you NAT the outbound packets, and allow the corresponding return packets. $fw add 400 skipto 800 ip4 from any to any out via $wan_if keep-state Again, 'out via $wan_if' is ambiguous, and includes packets _received_ on $wan_if and now being transmitted to the inside, again before NAT. Specify 'out xmit' if you only want to apply this to packets being sent out to $wan_if, as I think you do; these are the only ones you want to perform NAT on anyway. $fw add 500 allow all from any to any out keep-state Ok, only inbound packets get to here, and they've already been NAT'd .. $fw add 600 allow all from any to any dst-port 12345 in keep-state $fw add 700 deny all from any to any in While 'all | ip' will work for tcp or udp packets, better to specify the protocol targetted. Ok, not only outbound packets get here, but also the return packets coming in with matching state, from the skipto. $fw add 800 nat 1 ip4 from any to any out $fw add 900 allow all from any to any Bottom line is you need to do NAT on packets outbound
Re: gpu support for modern systems
On Thu Jun 23 11, Christopher Bergström wrote: On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 6:43 AM, Alexander Best arun...@freebsd.org wrote: hi there, modern systems with their suffisticated gpus provide quite a potential for moving some of the workload from cpu to gpu. for certain stuff gpus are much faster than cpus, like number crunching or encoding/decoding multimedia contents. anybody who is using mplayer(1) in combination with nvidia cards and vdpau has probably experienced how much faster and less cpu intensive things can work out when decoding HD video stuff e.g. since opencl/cuda isn't available under freebsd, it doesn't seem possible to somehow hook the nvidia gpu into the every day freebsd workload that easily. PathScale has HMPP and partial CUDA support on FreeBSD now. Some caveats to this 1) Non-free (We could possibly make the tools free for FreeBSD community, but I'd have to get approval for it) 2) CUDA support isn't complete (Basic core is there and HMPP C/Fortran works) 3) Tesla 20xx series only We offer real support for FreeBSD and it's not using any linux emulator hacks. Let me know if anyone is interested. (If we get enough positive feedback I'll pursue some resolution to #1) i'd really love to see this stuff being made available to the community. i think this could pose a huge advantage to all kinds of audiences: home users, servers people, etc. basically every modern computer comes with a gpu that performs much better at certain tasks than the installed CPU. not making use of the gpu is a huge waste of ressources. i think microsoft had a video on their channel 9 platform demonstrating the huge advantages that one can get when offloading certain tasks onto the gpu. just think of gimp being able to perform 10 times faster! ..or being able to compile world 10 times faster...or...or... ;) cheers. alex ./C ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: gpu support for modern systems
On 06/25/11 05:45 PM, Alexander Best wrote: On Thu Jun 23 11, Christopher Bergström wrote: On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 6:43 AM, Alexander Bestarun...@freebsd.org wrote: hi there, modern systems with their suffisticated gpus provide quite a potential for moving some of the workload from cpu to gpu. for certain stuff gpus are much faster than cpus, like number crunching or encoding/decoding multimedia contents. anybody who is using mplayer(1) in combination with nvidia cards and vdpau has probably experienced how much faster and less cpu intensive things can work out when decoding HD video stuff e.g. since opencl/cuda isn't available under freebsd, it doesn't seem possible to somehow hook the nvidia gpu into the every day freebsd workload that easily. PathScale has HMPP and partial CUDA support on FreeBSD now. Some caveats to this 1) Non-free (We could possibly make the tools free for FreeBSD community, but I'd have to get approval for it) 2) CUDA support isn't complete (Basic core is there and HMPP C/Fortran works) 3) Tesla 20xx series only We offer real support for FreeBSD and it's not using any linux emulator hacks. Let me know if anyone is interested. (If we get enough positive feedback I'll pursue some resolution to #1) i'd really love to see this stuff being made available to the community. i think this could pose a huge advantage to all kinds of audiences: home users, servers people, etc. basically every modern computer comes with a gpu that performs much better at certain tasks than the installed CPU. not making use of the gpu is a huge waste of ressources. i think microsoft had a video on their channel 9 platform demonstrating the huge advantages that one can get when offloading certain tasks onto the gpu. just think of gimp being able to perform 10 times faster! ..or being able to compile world 10 times faster...or...or... ;) You missed the part where I said it's *Tesla* only. This is really only useful for HPC/life sciences/financial/server market. This isn't to say we're not excited about it, but I'm still unsure who if anyone is using FreeBSD in those areas. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: gpu support for modern systems
On Sat Jun 25 11, C. Bergström wrote: On 06/25/11 05:45 PM, Alexander Best wrote: On Thu Jun 23 11, Christopher Bergström wrote: On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 6:43 AM, Alexander Bestarun...@freebsd.org wrote: hi there, modern systems with their suffisticated gpus provide quite a potential for moving some of the workload from cpu to gpu. for certain stuff gpus are much faster than cpus, like number crunching or encoding/decoding multimedia contents. anybody who is using mplayer(1) in combination with nvidia cards and vdpau has probably experienced how much faster and less cpu intensive things can work out when decoding HD video stuff e.g. since opencl/cuda isn't available under freebsd, it doesn't seem possible to somehow hook the nvidia gpu into the every day freebsd workload that easily. PathScale has HMPP and partial CUDA support on FreeBSD now. Some caveats to this 1) Non-free (We could possibly make the tools free for FreeBSD community, but I'd have to get approval for it) 2) CUDA support isn't complete (Basic core is there and HMPP C/Fortran works) 3) Tesla 20xx series only We offer real support for FreeBSD and it's not using any linux emulator hacks. Let me know if anyone is interested. (If we get enough positive feedback I'll pursue some resolution to #1) i'd really love to see this stuff being made available to the community. i think this could pose a huge advantage to all kinds of audiences: home users, servers people, etc. basically every modern computer comes with a gpu that performs much better at certain tasks than the installed CPU. not making use of the gpu is a huge waste of ressources. i think microsoft had a video on their channel 9 platform demonstrating the huge advantages that one can get when offloading certain tasks onto the gpu. just think of gimp being able to perform 10 times faster! ..or being able to compile world 10 times faster...or...or... ;) You missed the part where I said it's *Tesla* only. This is really only useful for HPC/life sciences/financial/server market. This isn't to say we're not excited about it, but I'm still unsure who if anyone is using FreeBSD in those areas. ...but is the CUDA api for tesla so much different than the CUDA geforce api? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: NFS zfs serveur (hardware question)
On 06/24/11 10:17, David Brodbeck wrote: On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Damien Fleuriot m...@my.gd wrote: As a rule of thumb and for a serious server, I would recommend 1 SSD as dedicated cache and 2 SSD for a mirrored ZIL (you don't want to lose this data). However I think ppl posted about running intro trouble when using both ZIL and cache disks, so I suggest you only get the ZIL. Definitely get the ZIL device. NFS performance will be almost intolerable without it. It used to be you could work around this, at cost of an increased risk of data loss if the server crashed, by turning off the ZIL; but as of 9.0 this is no longer allowed, so a ZIL device is pretty much mandatory. I'm looking at ways to add one to one of my machines for this reason. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org There is still a way to increase NFS performance in 9.0 (without a ZIL SSD) by setting zfs property sync=disabled, which will disable synchronous writes - comes with some risks, research it before switching it off. Also, this will only disable sync for the ZFS filesystem not for the whole pool. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
gpart
OK, I follow the manual but still... I have a disk fo 20Gb I create a GPT table for the whole disk on it: # gpart create -s gpt /dev/md0 - md0 created # gpart show md0 34 8573 md0 GPT (4.2M) Only 4 Mb?? Not really what I wanted. Anyone an idea of why the whole disk is nog used? What am I doning wrong? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: gpart
Op 25-6-2011 15:14 schreef Dick Hoogendijk: OK, I follow the manual but still... I have a disk fo 20Gb I create a GPT table for the whole disk on it: # gpart create -s gpt /dev/md0 - md0 created # gpart show md0 34 8573 md0 GPT (4.2M) Only 4 Mb?? Not really what I wanted. Anyone an idea of why the whole disk is nog used? What am I doning wrong? Never mind. Problem solved. Wrong device. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: FreeBSD ZFS system
Op 23-6-2011 9:35 schreef Valentin Bud: On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:01 PM, Dick Hoogendijk d...@nagual.nl mailto:d...@nagual.nl wrote: OK, it works very well. Installing a ZFS FreeBSD system with an ufs /boot is very very easy using the PC-BSD DVD. However, I have one question: I'd like to install FreeBSD (pcbsd) on a (zfs) mirror In OpenSolaris you can install directly to the zfs mirror, but how's this in this situation After all, an UFS partitin is also created. How can I get the equivalent of an OpenSolaris mirrored install for a FreeBSD system? Hope I phrased the question clearly enough. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org mailto:freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org Hello Community, Like others said in their answer to your question, you don't have to put /boot on UFS, just go with root on ZFS. If you would like speed when installing the system I recommend mfsBSD - http://mfsbsd.vx.sk/. As pointed out in the web page there is a script (zfsinstall) that does all the work for you. It does all the steps described in the wiki - http://wiki.freebsd.org/RootOnZFS/GPTZFSBoot/Mirror. If you want to gain knowledge about the process of installing FreeBSD with root on ZFS then go with the wiki article. Using mfsBSD I install a 8.2-STABLE custom system in under 5 seconds. That's pretty neat :). OK, I tried mfsbsd. I had the iso loaded at ata1 master and freebsd-8.2-dvd as ata1 slave. I booted my VM; mfsbsd came up fine. I mounted my fbsd dvd drive on /cdrom and tried to run the zfsinstall script. Alas, it refuses.. It can't find the (needed!) 8.2-RELEASE.???tgz file It does not exist. There is only a directory 8.2-RELEASE (on DVD as well as on CDROM ). Question: is this a bug in zfsinstall script? How do I work around it? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: SAS controller for FreeBSD
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 06:51:37PM -0400, Daniel Feenberg wrote: We have been using ZFS under FreeBSD for a while, and are very pleased, but are considering building a system with SAS drives, in the hope that they will be faster (any truth to that?). I am assuming that I should look for a non-RAID controller, but I can't find any SAS controllers that don't claim to do RAID and are on the FreeBSD compatibility list. I have always thought that using a RAID controller for a non-raid partition was a bad idea, since it limited ones ability to swap controllersm, and presumably if we are using ZFS for our RAID we don't need another level of RAID provided by the controller. Is that prejudice justified? There are some SAS RAID controllers that claim to support FreeBSD but I can't tell if their JBOD mode is a true pass-through, or leaves some undesirable junk on the disk. So does anyone have a recomendation for a reasonably priced SAS controller? We aren't looking for anything fancy at this point. We are using two of the LSI SAS2008 based cards here and have no problems with them. Be sure to run a recent STABLE as the mps driver is relatively new. Speed and reliability are very nice. The only thing we are missing is IR-Firmware support but if you only want a HBA this won't bother you. cherio, Leon ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: FreeBSD ZFS system
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Dick Hoogendijk d...@nagual.nl wrote: ** Op 23-6-2011 9:35 schreef Valentin Bud: On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:01 PM, Dick Hoogendijk d...@nagual.nl wrote: OK, it works very well. Installing a ZFS FreeBSD system with an ufs /boot is very very easy using the PC-BSD DVD. However, I have one question: I'd like to install FreeBSD (pcbsd) on a (zfs) mirror In OpenSolaris you can install directly to the zfs mirror, but how's this in this situation After all, an UFS partitin is also created. How can I get the equivalent of an OpenSolaris mirrored install for a FreeBSD system? Hope I phrased the question clearly enough. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org Hello Community, Like others said in their answer to your question, you don't have to put /boot on UFS, just go with root on ZFS. If you would like speed when installing the system I recommend mfsBSD - http://mfsbsd.vx.sk/. As pointed out in the web page there is a script (zfsinstall) that does all the work for you. It does all the steps described in the wiki - http://wiki.freebsd.org/RootOnZFS/GPTZFSBoot/Mirror. If you want to gain knowledge about the process of installing FreeBSD with root on ZFS then go with the wiki article. Using mfsBSD I install a 8.2-STABLE custom system in under 5 seconds. That's pretty neat :). OK, I tried mfsbsd. I had the iso loaded at ata1 master and freebsd-8.2-dvd as ata1 slave. I booted my VM; mfsbsd came up fine. I mounted my fbsd dvd drive on /cdrom and tried to run the zfsinstall script. Alas, it refuses.. It can't find the (needed!) 8.2-RELEASE.???tgz file It does not exist. There is only a directory 8.2-RELEASE (on DVD as well as on CDROM ). Question: is this a bug in zfsinstall script? How do I work around it? Hello Community, You don't need any other CD/DVD to install from. The 8.2-RELEASE.tar.gz file is on the mfsBSD iso. You have to mount it to /cdrom and you can use zfsinstall script that comes with mfsBSD to do a root on ZFS install of FreeBSD. I outline the steps: 0. Download http://mfsbsd.vx.sk/iso/mfsbsd-se-8.2-amd64.iso. 1. Boot mfsBSD. No other disk needed to install FreeBSD on root. 2. # mount /dev/acd0 /cdrom (change acd0 with your local CD/DVD drive). 3. # *zfsinstall -d ad0 -t /cdrom/8.2-RELEASE-amd64.tar.xz* -s 4G - change the drive and swap partition size according to your needs. You might wanna check the options of zfsinstall script, it has quite some nice ones, see -h flag of the command. Have a great day, v -- network warrior ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
[dtrace] attaching to a PID
Does anyone else see the following crash?
$ sh -c 'sleep 60 dtrace -P syscall -p $!'
dtrace: description 'syscall' matched 2092 probes
Assertion failed: (dpr != NULL), file
.../cddl/contrib/opensolaris/lib/libdtrace/common/dt_proc.c, line 751.
Exit 134
Also triggers without specifying PID, e.g. by ustack()
$ dtrace -P 'syscall { @[probefunc,ustack()] = count(); }'
Not sure if I hosed my environment.
--
FreeBSD 9.0-CURRENT #0 r223522M amd64
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Performance of a USB ZIL for ZFS
I was wondering if anyone had tried using a decent USB flash drive for the ZIL. I know it'd be hard finding one fast enough, but some from patriot seem like they might be suitable for home use. Part of the idea is to just minimize hard drive thrashing and the wear and tear associated with it. If it helps prevent the drives from going bad, and doesn't hurt performance too bad all the better. But if it's going to hurt performance too much or not help prevent thrashing there isn't a point. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Enlightenment error after update some relative ports
Today I updated some relative ports with enlightenment like ecore-*. When starting X, the screen turn to console after enlightenment splash screen show. The error is Enlightenment cannot initialize the FDO desktop system. Perhaps you are out of memory? out of memory is impossible. I try to reboot the machine, but still get the same error. I install the other x11-wm like dwm; it's OK. Thanks! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: SAS controller for FreeBSD
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011, Leon Meßner wrote: On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 06:51:37PM -0400, Daniel Feenberg wrote: ... There are some SAS RAID controllers that claim to support FreeBSD but I can't tell if their JBOD mode is a true pass-through, or leaves some undesirable junk on the disk. So does anyone have a recomendation for a reasonably priced SAS controller? We aren't looking for anything fancy at this point. We are using two of the LSI SAS2008 based cards here and have no problems with them. Be sure to run a recent STABLE as the mps driver is relatively new. Speed and reliability are very nice. The only thing we February of this year: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-scsi/2011-February/004784.html are missing is IR-Firmware support but if you only want a HBA this won't bother you. If I search the LSI website for SAS2008 the first hit includes a description of the chipset features, including the bullet point * Integrated RAID All the cards on the LSI website that I can find using the SAS2008 chipset include the sentence Integrated RAID avoids additional host CPU overhead in their brief description, even the ones labeled HBA. Apparently the FreeBSD driver does not include an interface to the RAID capability, but it seems that the chipset still provides it. I suppose this still avoids controller lock in, so it should be satisfactory. Can I ask what model you have? Thanks Daniel Feenberg cherio, Leon ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: SAS controller for FreeBSD
On 6/25/11 3:47 PM, Daniel Feenberg feenb...@nber.org wrote: All the cards on the LSI website that I can find using the SAS2008 chipset include the sentence Integrated RAID avoids additional host CPU overhead in their brief description, even the ones labeled HBA. There are two different firmware options. The IT firmware disables the integrated RAID and makes them true HBAs; the IR firmware activates the integrated RAID. Buy the cards, flash 'em with the IT firmware and you're good to go. -- Dave Pooser Cat-Herder-in-Chief, Pooserville.com There are two novels that can change a bookish 14-year-old's life: _The Lord of the Rings_ and _Atlas Shrugged_. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. --John Rogers ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Where to download latest FreeBSD snapshots
Hiroki Sato h...@freebsd.org writes: Hello, dave jones s.dave.jo...@gmail.com wrote in BANLkTikR-GL9LFkTL6f=pm5vcazaftk...@mail.gmail.com: s. It seems that allbsd.org is up, but I can't find the HEAD snapshots, s. only RELENG. s. Would you like to build HEAD snapshots? Thank you very much. Building snapshots of HEAD and RELENG_[67] are temporarily disabled because a maintenance work is now in progress. They will be back on the page in the next week. Are there more places for *daily* HEAD snapshots? I used them a few times to report regressions with a clean environment. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: pkg-config --cflags glib-2.0 gives wrong -I dir
In the last episode (Jun 25), Matthias Apitz said:
Why gives
$ pkg-config --cflags glib-2.0
-I/usr/local/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/local/lib/glib-2.0/include
$ ls -ld /usr/local/include/glib-2.0 /usr/local/lib/glib-2.0/include
ls: /usr/local/lib/glib-2.0/include: No such file or directory
drwxr-xr-x 5 root wheel 512 May 28 19:01 /usr/local/include/glib-2.0
a non existing -I directory? This concrete example is with a 9-CURRENT
and glib-2.0 from the ports as glib-2.26.1_1, but I see this as well in
some older 8.x systems;
Checking Solaris and SUSE Linux, I see a similar pair of directories:
solaris$ pkg-config --cflags glib-2.0
-I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include
linux$ pkg-config --cflags glib-2.0
-I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib64/glib-2.0/include
The /usr/lib* directory on each system contains a single file: glibconfig.h.
On FreeBSD, this file is in /usr/local/include/glib-2.0/ along with all the
other headers (headers don't belong in /lib/ anyway).
Try putting the attached patch into the files directory of the glib20 port.
--
Dan Nelson
dnel...@allantgroup.com
No headers are installed into ${libdir}/glib-2.0/include, so remove it from
CFLAGS
--- glib-2.26.1/glib-2.0.pc.in 2009-03-31 18:04:20.0 -0500
+++ glib-2.26.1/glib-2.0.pc.in 2011-06-25 19:14:23.580424986 -0500
@@ -12,4 +12,4 @@
Version: @VERSION@
Libs: -L${libdir} -lglib-2.0 @INTLLIBS@
Libs.private: @ICONV_LIBS@
-Cflags: -I${includedir}/glib-2.0 -I${libdir}/glib-2.0/include
@GLIB_EXTRA_CFLAGS@
+Cflags: -I${includedir}/glib-2.0 @GLIB_EXTRA_CFLAGS@
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: FreeBSD ZFS system
On 25 Jun 2011, at 16:39, Dick Hoogendijk d...@nagual.nl wrote: Op 23-6-2011 9:35 schreef Valentin Bud: On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:01 PM, Dick Hoogendijk d...@nagual.nl mailto:d...@nagual.nl wrote: OK, it works very well. Installing a ZFS FreeBSD system with an ufs /boot is very very easy using the PC-BSD DVD. However, I have one question: I'd like to install FreeBSD (pcbsd) on a (zfs) mirror In OpenSolaris you can install directly to the zfs mirror, but how's this in this situation After all, an UFS partitin is also created. How can I get the equivalent of an OpenSolaris mirrored install for a FreeBSD system? Hope I phrased the question clearly enough. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org mailto:freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org Hello Community, Like others said in their answer to your question, you don't have to put /boot on UFS, just go with root on ZFS. If you would like speed when installing the system I recommend mfsBSD - http://mfsbsd.vx.sk/. As pointed out in the web page there is a script (zfsinstall) that does all the work for you. It does all the steps described in the wiki - http://wiki.freebsd.org/RootOnZFS/GPTZFSBoot/Mirror. If you want to gain knowledge about the process of installing FreeBSD with root on ZFS then go with the wiki article. Using mfsBSD I install a 8.2-STABLE custom system in under 5 seconds. That's pretty neat :). OK, I tried mfsbsd. I had the iso loaded at ata1 master and freebsd-8.2-dvd as ata1 slave. I booted my VM; mfsbsd came up fine. I mounted my fbsd dvd drive on /cdrom and tried to run the zfsinstall script. Alas, it refuses.. It can't find the (needed!) 8.2-RELEASE.???tgz file It does not exist. There is only a directory 8.2-RELEASE (on DVD as well as on CDROM ). Question: is this a bug in zfsinstall script? How do I work around it? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org Install your system by hand once you're logged under mfsbsd. Follow the procedure I really need to finish someday, here: http://my.gd/bsd.htm (or html ?)___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Performance of a USB ZIL for ZFS
On 25 Jun 2011, at 19:17, Joshua Isom jri...@gmail.com wrote: I was wondering if anyone had tried using a decent USB flash drive for the ZIL. I know it'd be hard finding one fast enough, but some from patriot seem like they might be suitable for home use. Part of the idea is to just minimize hard drive thrashing and the wear and tear associated with it. If it helps prevent the drives from going bad, and doesn't hurt performance too bad all the better. But if it's going to hurt performance too much or not help prevent thrashing there isn't a point. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org I stopped reading at the title. The answer is no. Grab a SSD for $80-120ish.___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Performance of a USB ZIL for ZFS
On 6/25/2011 9:32 PM, Damien Fleuriot wrote: On 25 Jun 2011, at 19:17, Joshua Isomjri...@gmail.com wrote: I was wondering if anyone had tried using a decent USB flash drive for the ZIL. I know it'd be hard finding one fast enough, but some from patriot seem like they might be suitable for home use. Part of the idea is to just minimize hard drive thrashing and the wear and tear associated with it. If it helps prevent the drives from going bad, and doesn't hurt performance too bad all the better. But if it's going to hurt performance too much or not help prevent thrashing there isn't a point. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org I stopped reading at the title. The answer is no. Grab a SSD for $80-120ish. Perhaps it would have helped to read the email. Part of the concern is making sure the drives don't fail and not just throughput. Given that Kingston sells an SATA SSD for $40 that only gets writes at 30mb/s write, and some USB drives might get up to 20mb/s. If I get two drives and put them on different controllers, mirrored, I might get acceptable performance. I may still loose performance, but if my drives last a year longer, I can probably accept it. I'm ok with loosing some performance, but I just don't want it dragging down the system. And if it won't help the drives last longer there's no point. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
