Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
In message 3851080.jqjobqx...@x220.ovitrap.com, Erich writes: yes, you miss a very simple thing. Updated this morning your ports tree. Your client asks for something for Monday morning for which you need now a program which needs some kind of PNG but you did not install it. It seems to me that you are missing a number of aspects and options of how you do configuration control on a system, if you think the ports collection is your only tool. Take a peek at src/tools/tools/sysbuild for instance. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
smtpd +spamd
Hi all, I wonder if there is someone who managed to install Opensmtpd + Spamd + Pf + Imap + SquirrelMail. I have already installed Opensmtpd as demon sending emails because i dont have domain yet i will buy it in two days and i will try to install it and write about it ( howto ) on my page but earlier i need to know if there is someone who already do that and can give me some support. Is it possible to do such a combination under FreeBSD 8.3 with newest ports collection. OpenSMTPD port is dated 22.05.2012. Best Regards Tomasz Marszal ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On 04/06/2012 00:30, Mark Andrews wrote: The ports system defaults are to use a common build/runtime tree but at the cost of a little more disk space each major application could have its own build/runtime tree. This is a tradeoff. Most of the time having a shared set of libraries is a win, but just occasionally, it is a big pain. That's PC-BSD .pbi format in a nutshell. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Installworld and /usr/include/*.h modification times
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Kimmo Paasiala kpaas...@gmail.com wrote: Hello list, Why are /usr/include files installed with install -C during make installworld when almost everything else is installed without the -C flag? This makes it harder to track which files were actually installed during the last make installworld. One can easily find obsolete files (that are not covered with make delete-old(-libs)) with find -x / -type f -mtime +suitable_time but this doesn't work for /usr/include files because the modification times are not bumped on make installworld. If you want, you can do this /after/ a buildworld # mv /usr/include /usr/include.old # cd /usr/src # make hierarchy # make installincludes -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Installworld and /usr/include/*.h modification times
On 06/04/2012 00:10, Christer Solskogen wrote: On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Kimmo Paasiala kpaas...@gmail.com wrote: Hello list, Why are /usr/include files installed with install -C during make installworld when almost everything else is installed without the -C flag? This makes it harder to track which files were actually installed during the last make installworld. One can easily find obsolete files (that are not covered with make delete-old(-libs)) with find -x / -type f -mtime +suitable_time but this doesn't work for /usr/include files because the modification times are not bumped on make installworld. If you want, you can do this /after/ a buildworld # mv /usr/include /usr/include.old # cd /usr/src You don't need to do those last 2 steps below if you mv /usr/include right before you do 'make installworld', FYI. # make hierarchy # make installincludes -- This .signature sanitized for your protection ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Installworld and /usr/include/*.h modification times
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote: You don't need to do those last 2 steps below if you mv /usr/include right before you do 'make installworld', FYI. You are completely right. -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com writes: On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 07:24:11PM -0700, Dave Hayes wrote: I see features and pkgng and things being offered up as solutions... these are all well and good, but in my opinion more comprehensive documentation and support in these areas would do more good than pkgng. IMHO pkgng and optionsng are necessary, but not sufficient, to solve our current problems. Optionsng is nice, but lacking in documentation. Is it too much to ask port maintainers to write a bit more documentation on the options they are providing? -- Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - d...@jetcafe.org The opinions expressed above are entirely my own Sunshine proves it's own existence. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
cvsup{,d} woes after upgrading to RELENG_9 on amd64 this weekend
Hi, After upgrading to RELENG_9 as of yesterday on my amd64 system, cvsup bombs out with Bus error: 10. Example: # /usr/local/bin/cvsup -g -L 2 /usr/src/stable-supfile Parsing supfile /usr/src/stable-supfile Connecting to localhost Connected to localhost Server software version: SNAP_16_1h Negotiating file attribute support Exchanging collection information Establishing multiplexed-mode data connection Running Updating collection src-all/cvs Bus error: 10 The only recent change I can think of is switching to clang for building the kernel and base. Made I should rebuild world and kernel using gcc. Today, I used portupgrade -fprv lang/ezm3 net/cvsup-without-gui, but cvsup gives me the same result as in the example above. This bug also affects cvsupd for those of us who are running a local FreeBSD CVSup mirror (http://motoyuki.bsdclub.org/BSD/cvsup.html) on amd64/RELENG_9. I know csup is generally preferred over cvsup, and in the meantime I'm able to use csup with another local FreeBSD CVSup mirror running on i386/RELENG_8. cvsup on the amd64 box crashes with Bus error even when accessing the CVSup mirror on the i386 box, thus indicating a problem local to the amd64 box. I welcome any clues to solve this problem. -- +---++ | Vennlig hilsen, | Best regards, | | Trond Endrestøl, | Trond Endrestøl, | | IT-ansvarlig, | System administrator, | | Fagskolen Innlandet, | Gjøvik Technical College, Norway, | | tlf. dir. 61 14 54 39, | Office.: +47 61 14 54 39, | | tlf. mob. 952 62 567, | Cellular...: +47 952 62 567, | | sentralbord 61 14 54 00. | Switchboard: +47 61 14 54 00. | +---++___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: cvsup{, d} woes after upgrading to RELENG_9 on amd64 this weekend
On 2012-06-04 10:53, Trond Endrestøl wrote: After upgrading to RELENG_9 as of yesterday on my amd64 system, cvsup bombs out with Bus error: 10. ... The only recent change I can think of is switching to clang for building the kernel and base. Made I should rebuild world and kernel using gcc. Currently, the ezm3 port is broken for a world compiled with clang (or more specifically, for a world that uses SSE), see: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=162588 The problem is that ezm3 doesn't correctly align the stack, causing certain routines in libz to crash, because clang emits SSE instructions in them, whilst assuming the stack is 16-byte aligned. This could also occur with any other compiler that uses SSE. Basically, ezm3 doesn't seem to respect the amd64 ABI. I haven't been able to fix ezm3's stack alignment; it is based on a very old branch of gcc, and I am not familiar with Modula-3 in general. Any assistance in this area will be greatly appreciated. That said, since the ezm3 software is essentially unmaintained, the only practical solutions to your problem currently are: - Compile libz without SSE - Compile libz with gcc - Use csup instead of cvsup - Fix ezm3 to respect the amd64 ABI - Rewrite cvsupd in C (this is left as an exercise for the reader ;) ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: cvsup{, d} woes after upgrading to RELENG_9 on amd64 this weekend
On 06/04/2012 10:53, Trond Endrestøl wrote: Hi, After upgrading to RELENG_9 as of yesterday on my amd64 system, cvsup bombs out with Bus error: 10. Example: # /usr/local/bin/cvsup -g -L 2 /usr/src/stable-supfile Parsing supfile /usr/src/stable-supfile Connecting to localhost Connected to localhost Server software version: SNAP_16_1h Negotiating file attribute support Exchanging collection information Establishing multiplexed-mode data connection Running Updating collection src-all/cvs Bus error: 10 The only recent change I can think of is switching to clang for building the kernel and base. Made I should rebuild world and kernel using gcc. This is the culprit, you must compile libc and libz with gcc. See http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=162588 Henri Today, I used portupgrade -fprv lang/ezm3 net/cvsup-without-gui, but cvsup gives me the same result as in the example above. This bug also affects cvsupd for those of us who are running a local FreeBSD CVSup mirror (http://motoyuki.bsdclub.org/BSD/cvsup.html) on amd64/RELENG_9. I know csup is generally preferred over cvsup, and in the meantime I'm able to use csup with another local FreeBSD CVSup mirror running on i386/RELENG_8. cvsup on the amd64 box crashes with Bus error even when accessing the CVSup mirror on the i386 box, thus indicating a problem local to the amd64 box. I welcome any clues to solve this problem. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: cvsup{,d} woes after upgrading to RELENG_9 on amd64 this weekend
[I forgot to reply to the list, my bad] On Mon, 4 Jun 2012 11:42+0200, Trond Endrestøl wrote: On Mon, 4 Jun 2012 11:28+0200, Henri Hennebert wrote: On 06/04/2012 10:53, Trond Endrestøl wrote: The only recent change I can think of is switching to clang for building the kernel and base. Made I should rebuild world and kernel using gcc. This is the culprit, you must compile libc and libz with gcc. See http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=162588 Henri Ah, that explains it. By disabling compression (-Z) I'm able to run cvsup on the amd64 box using the CVSup mirror on the i386 box. I can live with that. Hopefully the people working on clang will figure out the details. Thanks. -- +---++ | Vennlig hilsen, | Best regards, | | Trond Endrestøl, | Trond Endrestøl, | | IT-ansvarlig, | System administrator, | | Fagskolen Innlandet, | Gjøvik Technical College, Norway, | | tlf. dir. 61 14 54 39, | Office.: +47 61 14 54 39, | | tlf. mob. 952 62 567, | Cellular...: +47 952 62 567, | | sentralbord 61 14 54 00. | Switchboard: +47 61 14 54 00. | +---++___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: cvsup{, d} woes after upgrading to RELENG_9 on amd64 this weekend
Dimitry Andric d...@freebsd.org wrote in 4fcc80c7.8060...@freebsd.org: di That said, since the ezm3 software is essentially unmaintained, the di only practical solutions to your problem currently are: di di - Compile libz without SSE di - Compile libz with gcc di - Use csup instead of cvsup di - Fix ezm3 to respect the amd64 ABI di - Rewrite cvsupd in C (this is left as an exercise for the reader ;) I have the same problem on my mirror server and currenly using a cvsup package for i386 on FreeBSD/amd64. -- Hiroki pgpEvSTVjMeKL.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On 03.06.12 07:24, Erich wrote: isn't this what I just suggested to be done by the team? Give the ports tree a new version number and people can fall back to this then. Isn't this solution too simple to be done? As was mentioned earlier in this discussion, by virtue of the ports tree being hosted on CVS, you are able to get a version of the ports there at any date you chose. Just set PORTS_DATE=date=2012.06.01.00.00.00 to get the ports tree as it was on midnight 1st of June 2012. You can specify hours, minutes, seconds if you need. Way more powerful than any version number thing. As you can see, this is already available with FreeBSD. A lot more hidden gems are available with FreeBSD. People are just lazy and for the most part, refuse to learn. This is one aspect FreeBSD could benefit greatly from more education of the 'users' -- just because it has way more hidden gems than anything else around. Daniel ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Daniel Kalchev dan...@digsys.bg wrote: On 03.06.12 07:24, Erich wrote: isn't this what I just suggested to be done by the team? Give the ports tree a new version number and people can fall back to this then. Isn't this solution too simple to be done? As was mentioned earlier in this discussion, by virtue of the ports tree being hosted on CVS, you are able to get a version of the ports there at any date you chose. Just set PORTS_DATE=date=2012.06.01.00.00.00 to get the ports tree as it was on midnight 1st of June 2012. You can specify hours, minutes, seconds if you need. Way more powerful than any version number thing. As you can see, this is already available with FreeBSD. A lot more hidden gems are available with FreeBSD. People are just lazy and for the most part, refuse to learn. This is one aspect FreeBSD could benefit greatly from more education of the 'users' -- just because it has way more hidden gems than anything else around. Indeed. And educating users means providing them with appropriate documentation. So how about adding a section to the Handbook with a list of hidden gems? Something like Dru Lavigne's BSD Hacks perhaps? Daniel Regards, -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Jun 4, 2012 9:50 AM, Dave Hayes d...@jetcafe.org wrote: Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com writes: On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 07:24:11PM -0700, Dave Hayes wrote: I see features and pkgng and things being offered up as solutions... these are all well and good, but in my opinion more comprehensive documentation and support in these areas would do more good than pkgng. IMHO pkgng and optionsng are necessary, but not sufficient, to solve our current problems. Optionsng is nice, but lacking in documentation. Is it too much to ask port maintainers to write a bit more documentation on the options they are providing? Where are you looking? I updated the Porter's Handbook- is there something missing? Chris ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On 04.06.12 05:24, Dave Hayes wrote: Anyway, given my workload, it will probably take me a man week to get two virtualized test servers. Someone I know with a vmware gui and windows is doing this in 15 minutes (and that's being careful). Just my $0.02. You are unfortunately comparing apples with oranges here. If you want true comparison, compare how fast you will have VirtualBox OSE up and running on both FreeBSD and Windows. Both of you start with a system where it has to be compiled and installed. I guess your Windows friend will stop at compiler? what?. You can't get the source code of vmware and compile it yourself, of course.. that's just another little detail. Not the same? They get the thing pre-compiled? So could you. Thing is, once you go trough the trouble to install VirtualBox on FreeBSD you get a lot more usable vrtualization platform, with things like ZFS that aren't going to be available on Windows. It was mentioned a number of times already, that if you want to run binary only you would be better with PC-BSD -- and system based on FreeBSD (so it has most, but not all of the goodies), and someone else pre-compiles and pre-packages software for you. Just one click install. So, if you used PC-BSD, you could have had VirtualBox running perhaps for the same time an Windows user would. There is place for binary-only systems and systems where you are able to rebuild everything from source. FreeBSD tends to focus on the later while various folk (like PC-BSD) use the great FreeBSD platform to offer easier to use binary only systems. Of course, you could use the FreeBSD ports tree and build from source on PC-BSD too. Daniel ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 05:03:26AM -0700, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote: Dear All , There is a thread Why Are You Using FreeBSD ? Hello, I'm using FreeBSD for most of my tasks and servers and i think it's great, but this things could be improved: - Good FUSE support. On the desktop side, you can't use NTFS for write access. On the server side, you miss things like Gluster. You can't run things like truecrypt because they need it and things like geli/gbde doesn't work on anything but FreeBSD. Ie: FUSE is needed for interoperability. - Easier way to replicate FreeBSD infrastructure. I've found that maintain 1 server on FreeBSD is great. Requires lower maintenance that any other operating system. Once you start managing 20 or 30 things change. Suddenly you find yourself needing automated package building because ports are not versioned, so you must copy the repo, maintain local patches and build a tinderbox. If you find problems on a FreeBSD version and need patches you need to build a freebsd-update server to still use it, or start maintaining servers on two different ways: source and binary, which just adds testing time. Would be better if you could switch from source to binary and back in a easier way. - Hardware support. If you want to build a server on new atom boards, you will have problems, eg: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=amd64/166639 Same with laptop and other kind of hardware. Not just on computers, but also on peripherals. AFAIK no single all-in-one printer works fully with FreeBSD, so it's hard to configure as print/scan server. - I/O performance: If you do heavy I/O, the system becomes unresponsive. I've read a few days ago on the lists that it was a problem related to priorizing writes over reads and the recommendation was to use gsched, but haven't had time to check. Regards. Victor. -- La prueba más fehaciente de que existe vida inteligente en otros planetas, es que no han intentado contactar con nosotros. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: smtpd +spamd
On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 08:12:51 +0200, Tomasz Marszal kap...@toya.net.pl wrote: Hi all, I wonder if there is someone who managed to install Opensmtpd + Spamd + Pf + Imap + SquirrelMail. I have already installed Opensmtpd as demon sending emails because i dont have domain yet i will buy it in two days and i will try to install it and write about it ( howto ) on my page but earlier i need to know if there is someone who already do that and can give me some support. Is it possible to do such a combination under FreeBSD 8.3 with newest ports collection. OpenSMTPD port is dated 22.05.2012. Best Regards Tomasz Marszal I didn't do this precise combination, but the setup seems quite standard. I advise you to just go ahead and ask more specific questions on a mailinglist when you encounter a concrete problem. One tip: read about open-relay mailservers and avoid that situation on yours. ;-) Ronald. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
RE: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
-Original Message- From: owner-freebsd-sta...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- sta...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Kalchev Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2012 12:42 AM I really see no reason why your 'mail or calendaring server' should be able to wipe your devices.. This is the sort of bloat that keeps me away. From Microsoft products. I don't think that's fair to say. Email/calendaring seems to be the only connection point between a smartphone and an organization for at least the current crop of devices (although I'm sure that at some point soon, you'll be able to include organizational file servers as well). Even if you're just a SOHO or SMB, you should want to be able to locate or remotely wipe a device that's stolen, if only to ensure that someone doesn't have access to potentially sensitive personal information. Oh and by the way, not only do the Windows phones feature this, but so do the iPhones and the Android handsets - so this isn't just Microsoft. In this regard I rather prefer the way Apple handles things. Shiny wrapper interface to pretty much generic technology. No reinvention of the wheel and experiments to see if it can be made square. You can't damn Microsoft for being too proprietary in one paragraph and then praise Apple for its openness in the next. Does not compute. Best wishes, Matthew -- I FIGHT FOR THE USERS ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On 3 June 2012 21:55, O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: On 06/03/12 15:29, Erich wrote: Hi, On 03 June 2012 PM 5:14:10 Adam Strohl wrote: On 6/3/2012 11:14, Erich wrote: What I really do not understand in this whole discussion is very simple. Is it just a few people who run into problems like this or is this simply ignored by the people who set the strategy for FreeBSD? I mention since yeares here that putting version numbers onto the port tree would solve many of these problems. All I get as an answer is that it is not possible. I think that this should be easily possible with the limitation that older versions do not have security fixes. Yes, but of what help is a security fix if there is no running port for the fix? I feel like I'm missing something. Why would you ever want to go back to an old version of the ports tree? You're ignoring tons of security issues! ... I think the PNG update isn't a security issue. And for not being a security issue, it triggered an inadequate mess! And if a port build is broken then the maintainer needs to fix it, that is the solution. Look at the comment of the maintainer of LibreOffice ... I must be missing something else here, it just seems like the underlying need for this is misguided (and dangerous from a security perspective). yes, you miss a very simple thing. Updated this morning your ports tree. Your client asks for something for Monday morning for which you need now a program which needs some kind of PNG but you did not install it. ... I spent now two complete days watching my boxes updating their ports. Several ports do not compile anymore (inkscape, libreoffice, libxul, to name some of the very hurting ones!). Do you have a machine that is fast enough to upgrade all your ports and still finish what your client needs Monday morning? Even my fastest box, a brand new 6 core Sandy-Bridge-E, wasn't capable of compiling all the ports in due time. Several ports requested attendance, several, as mentioned, didn't compile out of the blue. The ports tree is not broken as such. Only the installation gets broken in some sense. Have a version number there would allow people to go back to the last known working ports tree, install the software - or whatever has to be done - with a working system. Of course, the next step will be an upgrade. But only after the work which brings in the money is done. You do not face this problem on Windows. You can run a 10 year old 'kernel' and still install modern software. Erich I like having a very modern system with the most recent software. But in some cases, like these days with the PNG, FreeBSD's ports becomes again a problem. There is no convenient way to downgrade or allow the user/admin managing how to deal with the load of updates. You can't have both. As has been repeatedly explained to you, you should not expect an easy life with the very latest of software. Either stick to releases, or put up with lots of compiling etc-- you should not complain because of self-inflicted problems. Please remember that we do compile packages for release, or if more up to date packages are required you can use the stable package sets which are rarely over five days or so. Chris ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On 04.06.12 18:04, xenophon\+freebsd wrote: -Original Message- From: owner-freebsd-sta...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- sta...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Kalchev Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2012 12:42 AM I really see no reason why your 'mail or calendaring server' should be able to wipe your devices.. This is the sort of bloat that keeps me away. From Microsoft products. I don't think that's fair to say. Email/calendaring seems to be the only connection point between a smartphone and an organization for at least the current crop of devices (although I'm sure that at some point soon, you'll be able to include organizational file servers as well). Again, what does your e-mail or calendaring service have to do with wiping your device clean?? Wiping the device is task for your device management platform, which does not belong to the e-mail or calendaring platform. If you connect your desktop to Exchange, is it supposed to be wiped too? What if the Exchange account is just one of the many e-mail accounts you use, as typically is the case? Even if you're just a SOHO or SMB, you should want to be able to locate or remotely wipe a device that's stolen, if only to ensure that someone doesn't have access to potentially sensitive personal information. Oh and by the way, not only do the Windows phones feature this, but so do the iPhones and the Android handsets - so this isn't just Microsoft. I understand you don't like it, but apparently Apple got this right. They have device management tool that is in no way ties to your e-mail or calendaring server. Not only Apple, but any sane vendor too. It is not excuse that because some (censored) at Microsoft has designed things this way, there are no other proper ways. In this regard I rather prefer the way Apple handles things. Shiny wrapper interface to pretty much generic technology. No reinvention of the wheel and experiments to see if it can be made square. You can't damn Microsoft for being too proprietary in one paragraph and then praise Apple for its openness in the next. Does not compute. I don't care how proprietary an proprietary thing is. If it is correctly implemented, it is ok, if it is not correctly implemented, it is not ok. Microsoft's wipe trough Exchange is weird, to put it mildly. Apple too had a track record of doing many proprietary things, but in recent years their offerings are, as I mentioned earlier, pretty much generic standard and widespread protocols with a lot of sugar coating. Daniel ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Installworld and /usr/include/*.h modification times
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote: On 06/04/2012 00:10, Christer Solskogen wrote: On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Kimmo Paasiala kpaas...@gmail.com wrote: Hello list, Why are /usr/include files installed with install -C during make installworld when almost everything else is installed without the -C flag? This makes it harder to track which files were actually installed during the last make installworld. One can easily find obsolete files (that are not covered with make delete-old(-libs)) with find -x / -type f -mtime +suitable_time but this doesn't work for /usr/include files because the modification times are not bumped on make installworld. If you want, you can do this /after/ a buildworld # mv /usr/include /usr/include.old # cd /usr/src You don't need to do those last 2 steps below if you mv /usr/include right before you do 'make installworld', FYI. # make hierarchy # make installincludes -- This .signature sanitized for your protection Thanks! I should have thought of that myself... There are few bits under /usr/share that behave the same way but now I know how to deal with those as well. -Kimmo ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
Chris Rees utis...@gmail.com writes: On Jun 4, 2012 9:50 AM, Dave Hayes d...@jetcafe.org wrote: Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com writes: On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 07:24:11PM -0700, Dave Hayes wrote: I see features and pkgng and things being offered up as solutions... these are all well and good, but in my opinion more comprehensive documentation and support in these areas would do more good than pkgng. IMHO pkgng and optionsng are necessary, but not sufficient, to solve our current problems. Optionsng is nice, but lacking in documentation. Is it too much to ask port maintainers to write a bit more documentation on the options they are providing? Where are you looking? I updated the Porter's Handbook- is there something missing? Yes there is...my point. :) Perhaps I was unclear. Optionsng is likely a fine project. However, it does not include the idea of extra documentation on the user selectable options provided to a port. Often when building a port I am presented with a list of build options. For example, virtualbox has this: OPTIONS= QT4 Build with QT4 Frontend on \ DEBUG Build with debugging symbols off \ GUESTADDITIONS Build with Guest Additions off \ DBUS Build with D-Bus and HAL support on \ PULSEAUDIO Build with PulseAudio off \ X11 Build with X11 support on \ UDPTUNNEL Build with UDP tunnel support on \ VDE Build with VDE support off \ VNC Build with VNC support off \ WEBSERVICE Build Webservice off \ NLS Native language support on What I feel is missing from ports is the information that would allow me to make intelligent decisions about each option. To see what's missing, consider the following questions: - Why would I want pulseaudio in a hypervisor? - What, exactly, are guestadditions and why would I want them? - Why does this need dbus and hal? - What is VDE? - What webservice? etc. The porter's handbook is fine if you are writing ports. It's using them that can get opaque. There's meta topics also, these would be great to know about without having to read 200 mail messages: - Some people do not like pulseaudio for good technical reasons. What are those? What are the non-technical opinion based reasons? - What are the common objections to HAL and DBUS? It's this kind of attention to communication that I think FreeBSD, in any attempt to reach more users, needs to strongly consider. -- Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - d...@jetcafe.org The opinions expressed above are entirely my own Treat people as if they are what they ought to be, and you help them to become what they are capable of being. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 11:41:30 -0700 , Dave Hayes wrote: Yes there is...my point. :) Perhaps I was unclear. Optionsng is likely a fine project. However, it does not include the idea of extra documentation on the user selectable options provided to a port. Often when building a port I am presented with a list of build options. For example, virtualbox has this: OPTIONS= QT4 Build with QT4 Frontend on \ DEBUG Build with debugging symbols off \ GUESTADDITIONS Build with Guest Additions off \ DBUS Build with D-Bus and HAL support on \ PULSEAUDIO Build with PulseAudio off \ X11 Build with X11 support on \ UDPTUNNEL Build with UDP tunnel support on \ VDE Build with VDE support off \ VNC Build with VNC support off \ WEBSERVICE Build Webservice off \ NLS Native language support on What I feel is missing from ports is the information that would allow me to make intelligent decisions about each option. To see what's missing, consider the following questions: - Why would I want pulseaudio in a hypervisor? - What, exactly, are guestadditions and why would I want them? - Why does this need dbus and hal? - What is VDE? - What webservice? etc. The descriptions of the options assume the admin is familiar with the software they're installing. I do not think it is the FreeBSD Project's purview to document every option for every port. At the very least it'd take quite a lot of time and effort to document all of that. Beyond this, such explanations would duplicate each port's own documentation. If you're not familiar with something, you very probably shouldn't be installing it. Show me one other similar packaging system that does this level of handholding. The only comparable ones I can think of are portage and macports, and they certainly don't, either. -- Thanks and best regards, Chris Nehren pgpj0ijQG7gRP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
Chris Nehren apeiron+freebsd-sta...@isuckatdomains.net writes: The descriptions of the options assume the admin is familiar with the software they're installing. I do not think it is the FreeBSD Project's purview to document every option for every port. At the very least it'd take quite a lot of time and effort to document all of that. That's a fair position. Perhaps it would not be too much trouble to add this one idea to optionsng: a more info field on each option knob which may be filled in by a port maintainer. Beyond this, such explanations would duplicate each port's own documentation. Not necessarily. I don't have an example offhand, but I suspect there are a number of FreeBSD specific option knobs applied to ports. If you're not familiar with something, you very probably shouldn't be installing it. Basing my argument here on assumptions that FreeBSD wants more users, I would argue that the better policy is to be liberal in who you help and conservative in who you call unfamiliar. In this spirit, I can guarantee you that there are plenty of people who will install despite your requirement above, set some option that they shouldn't (or fail to set one that they should), and then come away with a bad experience. Instead, if the person familiar with the software (who is ostensibly writing the port) could spend just 5 more minutes writing a simple this option is documented at url://... or dont set this if you have port foo installed that would help a lot of people. Show me one other similar packaging system that does this level of handholding. The only comparable ones I can think of are portage and macports, and they certainly don't, either. The absence of such a system isn't really relevant to the idea of improving the current one is it? :) -- Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - d...@jetcafe.org The opinions expressed above are entirely my own Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music. -- Kristian Wilson, Nintendo, Inc, 1989 ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: cvsup{, d} woes after upgrading to RELENG_9 on amd64 this weekend
On 4/6/2012 10:53 AM, Trond Endrestøl wrote: Hi, After upgrading to RELENG_9 as of yesterday on my amd64 system, cvsup bombs out with Bus error: 10. Why use cvsup, when you've got csup? :-) -- chs ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On 06/04/12 17:24, Chris Rees wrote: On 3 June 2012 21:55, O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: On 06/03/12 15:29, Erich wrote: Hi, On 03 June 2012 PM 5:14:10 Adam Strohl wrote: On 6/3/2012 11:14, Erich wrote: What I really do not understand in this whole discussion is very simple. Is it just a few people who run into problems like this or is this simply ignored by the people who set the strategy for FreeBSD? I mention since yeares here that putting version numbers onto the port tree would solve many of these problems. All I get as an answer is that it is not possible. I think that this should be easily possible with the limitation that older versions do not have security fixes. Yes, but of what help is a security fix if there is no running port for the fix? I feel like I'm missing something. Why would you ever want to go back to an old version of the ports tree? You're ignoring tons of security issues! ... I think the PNG update isn't a security issue. And for not being a security issue, it triggered an inadequate mess! And if a port build is broken then the maintainer needs to fix it, that is the solution. Look at the comment of the maintainer of LibreOffice ... I must be missing something else here, it just seems like the underlying need for this is misguided (and dangerous from a security perspective). yes, you miss a very simple thing. Updated this morning your ports tree. Your client asks for something for Monday morning for which you need now a program which needs some kind of PNG but you did not install it. ... I spent now two complete days watching my boxes updating their ports. Several ports do not compile anymore (inkscape, libreoffice, libxul, to name some of the very hurting ones!). Do you have a machine that is fast enough to upgrade all your ports and still finish what your client needs Monday morning? Even my fastest box, a brand new 6 core Sandy-Bridge-E, wasn't capable of compiling all the ports in due time. Several ports requested attendance, several, as mentioned, didn't compile out of the blue. The ports tree is not broken as such. Only the installation gets broken in some sense. Have a version number there would allow people to go back to the last known working ports tree, install the software - or whatever has to be done - with a working system. Of course, the next step will be an upgrade. But only after the work which brings in the money is done. You do not face this problem on Windows. You can run a 10 year old 'kernel' and still install modern software. Erich I like having a very modern system with the most recent software. But in some cases, like these days with the PNG, FreeBSD's ports becomes again a problem. There is no convenient way to downgrade or allow the user/admin managing how to deal with the load of updates. You can't have both. As has been repeatedly explained to you, you should not expect an easy life with the very latest of software. Well, and repeatedly (no offense!) I will point out in this case, that I was FORCED having the latest software by the ports system! That it a difference in having running FreeBSD CURRENT on my own risk, or FreeBSD-STABLE due to new hardware and new drivers only supported by those and having a regular port update, which blows up the system because of the newest software! I take the burden of having not an easy life, but this, what is expected from so many users of FreeBSD, is simply beyond ... Either stick to releases, or put up with lots of compiling etc-- you should not complain because of self-inflicted problems. As I repeatedly have to point out in this case - the issue is not with STABLE and CURRENT, it is also with RELEASE. And as it has been pointed out herein so many times: FreeBSD ports lack in a version tagging. How would you suggest avoiding the problems we face with the ports by being sticky on RELEASE, if the problem is spread over all branches? Please remember that we do compile packages for release, or if more up to date packages are required you can use the stable package sets which are rarely over five days or so. If it is about the binary packages - then you're right. Stick with RELEASE and binary packages - if available (the mentioned office packages are often much delayed). In such a case one is better with a binary spread version of an OS and this would exactly hit the subject of the thread: Why NOT using ... blablabla Chris At the end, I'd like to see more care about the way ports get updated. There is no way to avoid messes like described at this very moment. And it is a kind of unedifying . oh signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Hi, On 04 June 2012 17:24:31 Baptiste Daroussin wrote: On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 10:55:37PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: On 06/03/12 15:29, Erich wrote: And if a port build is broken then the maintainer needs to fix it, that is the solution. Look at the comment of the maintainer of LibreOffice ... LibreOffice is not a small port, I managed to make 3.5.x work until the The work on it is not that complicated but it requires a huge amount of time which I currently don't have, and upstream is really nice to help porting. I hope that this is all just a misunderstanding. I read the tread as such that LibreOffice is just an example of what can go wrong. Of course, it is your time and your work and nobody has the right to criticise you for your efforts. I hope that it is ok for you to use 'your' port as an example here for what can go wrong. Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On 04 June 2012 16:24:56 Chris Rees wrote: On 3 June 2012 21:55, O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: On 06/03/12 15:29, Erich wrote: Hi, On 03 June 2012 PM 5:14:10 Adam Strohl wrote: On 6/3/2012 11:14, Erich wrote: What I really do not understand in this whole discussion is very simple. Is it just a few people who run into problems like this or is this simply ignored by the people who set the strategy for FreeBSD? I mention since yeares here that putting version numbers onto the port tree would solve many of these problems. All I get as an answer is that it is not possible. I think that this should be easily possible with the limitation that older versions do not have security fixes. Yes, but of what help is a security fix if there is no running port for the fix? I feel like I'm missing something. Why would you ever want to go back to an old version of the ports tree? You're ignoring tons of security issues! ... I think the PNG update isn't a security issue. And for not being a security issue, it triggered an inadequate mess! And if a port build is broken then the maintainer needs to fix it, that is the solution. Look at the comment of the maintainer of LibreOffice ... I must be missing something else here, it just seems like the underlying need for this is misguided (and dangerous from a security perspective). yes, you miss a very simple thing. Updated this morning your ports tree. Your client asks for something for Monday morning for which you need now a program which needs some kind of PNG but you did not install it. ... I spent now two complete days watching my boxes updating their ports. Several ports do not compile anymore (inkscape, libreoffice, libxul, to name some of the very hurting ones!). Do you have a machine that is fast enough to upgrade all your ports and still finish what your client needs Monday morning? Even my fastest box, a brand new 6 core Sandy-Bridge-E, wasn't capable of compiling all the ports in due time. Several ports requested attendance, several, as mentioned, didn't compile out of the blue. The ports tree is not broken as such. Only the installation gets broken in some sense. Have a version number there would allow people to go back to the last known working ports tree, install the software - or whatever has to be done - with a working system. Of course, the next step will be an upgrade. But only after the work which brings in the money is done. You do not face this problem on Windows. You can run a 10 year old 'kernel' and still install modern software. Erich I like having a very modern system with the most recent software. But in some cases, like these days with the PNG, FreeBSD's ports becomes again a problem. There is no convenient way to downgrade or allow the user/admin managing how to deal with the load of updates. You can't have both. As has been repeatedly explained to you, you should not expect an easy life with the very latest of software. but FreeBSD only offer bleeding edge. This is why I suggest to have version numbers on the ports tree. Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
In message 4fcd23fe.20...@zedat.fu-berlin.de, O. Hartmann writes: Well, and repeatedly (no offense!) I will point out in this case, that I was FORCED having the latest software by the ports system! That it a difference in having running FreeBSD CURRENT on my own risk, or FreeBSD-STABLE due to new hardware and new drivers only supported by those and having a regular port update, which blows up the system because of the newest software! You were not forced to use the latest. You can quite easily use years old ports trees if you want to. I just installed a port using a tree from October 2011. I could have upgraded the ports tree to the latest and greatest but I choose not to. I take the burden of having not an easy life, but this, what is expected from so many users of FreeBSD, is simply beyond ... There are also binary packages available. Either stick to releases, or put up with lots of compiling etc-- you should not complain because of self-inflicted problems. As I repeatedly have to point out in this case - the issue is not with STABLE and CURRENT, it is also with RELEASE. And as it has been pointed out herein so many times: FreeBSD ports lack in a version tagging. Version tagging is just a convient way to get a snapshot at a particular point in time unless you create branches that are them made stable by doing a release engineering process on the branch. This would require rules like don't make a change unless it is to fix something that is broken. It would also require a lot of man power. If you are willing to pay salaries for people to do this then I'm sure there are people who would do the job. The ports system has to ability to set the ports tree to any point in time in its existance. You can then build all the indexes as they were at that point in time. How would you suggest avoiding the problems we face with the ports by being sticky on RELEASE, if the problem is spread over all branches? Please remember that we do compile packages for release, or if more up to date packages are required you can use the stable package sets which are rarely over five days or so. If it is about the binary packages - then you're right. Stick with RELEASE and binary packages - if available (the mentioned office packages are often much delayed). In such a case one is better with a binary spread version of an OS and this would exactly hit the subject of the thread: Why NOT using ... blablabla Chris At the end, I'd like to see more care about the way ports get updated. There is no way to avoid messes like described at this very moment. And it is a kind of unedifying . And I'd like to be able to world hunger and to see FTL travel. One doesn't have to live at the bleeding edge with ports if one doesn't want to even when compiling. One can live a day, a week, a month behind the bleeding edge and allow other to hit problems and report them. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Hi, On 05 June 2012 11:24:25 Mark Andrews wrote: Version tagging is just a convient way to get a snapshot at a particular point in time unless you create branches that are them we do not ask for more. There should be only one difference to a snapshot. As snapshot has a date. No matter in what state the ports tree was, it is in that state in the ports tree. If user - especially the one not so fit in this aspect - want to use a snapshot, it will be difficult to impossible to figure out which one they need. If version numbers would be introduced, it would be ok to use the version number of the FreeBSD and have only version available which reflect the release version of the ports tree. People here want to make always a perfect system. People like me want to have some small things in there available with a click. As the ports trees are there anyway, only the direct link to the snapshot of that day or a version number in the ports tree would be needed to make this available for people who just want to use FreeBSD. Please note, I do not want any extra work spend here to make this perfect. I only want a simple way to fall back to a big net which is not that old from which the user can restart. You can add a huge note to the links stating the risks. This is all fine. There is another reason why I ask for this. I noticed a long time ago that the ports are in a better shape around the release date of a new version. So, I try to get it always around the release dates. But, some times - you know how life is - I miss this date. It does not kill me but it leads some times to extra work steps I can do but I see the problems people will face who know FreeBSD not that well. One doesn't have to live at the bleeding edge with ports if one doesn't want to even when compiling. One can live a day, a week, a month behind the bleeding edge and allow other to hit problems and report them. How is this done with the knowledge of a beginner? Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
In message 3506767.fvm2kmt...@x220.ovitrap.com, Erich writes: Hi, On 05 June 2012 11:24:25 Mark Andrews wrote: Version tagging is just a convient way to get a snapshot at a particular point in time unless you create branches that are them we do not ask for more. There should be only one difference to a snapshot. As snapshot has a date. No matter in what state the ports tree was, it is in th at state in the ports tree. If user - especially the one not so fit in this a spect - want to use a snapshot, it will be difficult to impossible to figure out which one they need. If version numbers would be introduced, it would be ok to use the version num ber of the FreeBSD and have only version available which reflect the release version of the ports tree. It's already there. If you want the ports as of FreeBSD 4.x EOL then the tag is RELEASE_4_EOL. If you want ports as of FreeBSD 9.0 then the tag is RELEASE_9_9_0. People here want to make always a perfect system. People like me want to have some small things in there available with a click. As the ports trees are there anyway, only the direct link to the snapshot of that day or a version number in the ports tree would be needed to make this a vailable for people who just want to use FreeBSD. Please note, I do not want any extra work spend here to make this perfect. I only want a simple way to fall back to a big net which is not that old from w hich the user can restart. You can add a huge note to the links stating the risks. This is all fine. There is another reason why I ask for this. I noticed a long time ago that th e ports are in a better shape around the release date of a new version. So, I try to get it always around the release dates. But, some times - you know ho w life is - I miss this date. It does not kill me but it leads some times to extra work steps I can do but I see the problems people will face who know Fr eeBSD not that well. One doesn't have to live at the bleeding edge with ports if one doesn't want to even when compiling. One can live a day, a week, a month behind the bleeding edge and allow other to hit problems and report them. How is this done with the knowledge of a beginner? One reads the documentation. Erich -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
One doesn't have to live at the bleeding edge with ports if one doesn't want to even when compiling. One can live a day, a week, a month behind the bleeding edge and allow other to hit problems and report them. To be pedantic, there's a lot of difference between reporting problems, and supplying fixes. Sometimes figuring out the fixes is beyond the capabilities of our maintainers, of course. People should feel free to ask for help on the mailing lists or forums in those cases. But our general problem won't be solved merely by tagging. There have to be people willing to test based only on whatever tree, or branch, or whatever, has been tagged. This is on reason why the tree at release time is _somewhat_ more stable: we are asking people to test, test, test. (The fact that we slow down the rate of major changes to the tree accounts for the rest.) mcl ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 18:49:45 +0300 Daniel Kalchev dan...@digsys.bg wrote: On 04.06.12 18:04, xenophon\+freebsd wrote: -Original Message- From: owner-freebsd-sta...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- sta...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Kalchev Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2012 12:42 AM I really see no reason why your 'mail or calendaring server' should be able to wipe your devices.. This is the sort of bloat that keeps me away. From Microsoft products. I don't think that's fair to say. Email/calendaring seems to be the only connection point between a smartphone and an organization for at least the current crop of devices (although I'm sure that at some point soon, you'll be able to include organizational file servers as well). Again, what does your e-mail or calendaring service have to do with wiping your device clean?? Wiping the device is task for your device management platform, which does not belong to the e-mail or calendaring platform. If you connect your desktop to Exchange, is it supposed to be wiped too? What if the Exchange account is just one of the many e-mail accounts you use, as typically is the case? It is part of the protocol, Exchanged ActiveSync, used by Exchange based mobile devices. In this regard I rather prefer the way Apple handles things. Shiny wrapper interface to pretty much generic technology. No reinvention of the wheel and experiments to see if it can be made square. You can't damn Microsoft for being too proprietary in one paragraph and then praise Apple for its openness in the next. Does not compute. I don't care how proprietary an proprietary thing is. If it is correctly implemented, it is ok, if it is not correctly implemented, it is not ok. Microsoft's wipe trough Exchange is weird, to put it mildly. Apple too had a track record of doing many proprietary things, but in recent years their offerings are, as I mentioned earlier, pretty much generic standard and widespread protocols with a lot of sugar coating. From a enterprise perspective, it makes sense. Lets say a device goes missing, it allows one to wipe it the next time it calls home. The usefulness of such a feature is better disconnected from the debate of proprietary v. non-proprietary though, given the different nature of both issues. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Hi, On 05 June 2012 12:48:20 Mark Andrews wrote: In message 3506767.fvm2kmt...@x220.ovitrap.com, Erich writes: On 05 June 2012 11:24:25 Mark Andrews wrote: It's already there. If you want the ports as of FreeBSD 4.x EOL then the tag is RELEASE_4_EOL. If you want ports as of FreeBSD 9.0 then the tag is RELEASE_9_9_0. I did not know this. Do you have a link for this? I never read about it. Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
In message 2490439.ec638ti...@x220.ovitrap.com, Erich writes: Hi, On 05 June 2012 12:48:20 Mark Andrews wrote: In message 3506767.fvm2kmt...@x220.ovitrap.com, Erich writes: On 05 June 2012 11:24:25 Mark Andrews wrote: It's already there. If you want the ports as of FreeBSD 4.x EOL then the tag is RELEASE_4_EOL. If you want ports as of FreeBSD 9.0 then the tag is RELEASE_9_9_0. I did not know this. Do you have a link for this? I never read about it. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cvs-tags.html If you wander around in http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ you can see all the possible tags. Erich -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: cvsup{, d} woes after upgrading to RELENG_9 on amd64 this weekend
On Mon, 4 Jun 2012 22:19+0200, Christer Solskogen wrote: On 4/6/2012 10:53 AM, Trond Endrestøl wrote: Hi, After upgrading to RELENG_9 as of yesterday on my amd64 system, cvsup bombs out with Bus error: 10. Why use cvsup, when you've got csup? :-) If you read the OP you'll see I prefer to run and use a local CVSup mirror. Thus, I need a working cvsupd on the amd64 box. Whether I use cvsup or csup doesn't really matter. Problem solved by continuing to use GCC instead of clang when building world kernel. -- +---++ | Vennlig hilsen, | Best regards, | | Trond Endrestøl, | Trond Endrestøl, | | IT-ansvarlig, | System administrator, | | Fagskolen Innlandet, | Gjøvik Technical College, Norway, | | tlf. dir. 61 14 54 39, | Office.: +47 61 14 54 39, | | tlf. mob. 952 62 567, | Cellular...: +47 952 62 567, | | sentralbord 61 14 54 00. | Switchboard: +47 61 14 54 00. | +---++___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
