Re: [pfSense] pfsense upgrade problems?
On 22/02/17 15:23, Eero Volotinen wrote: > The process will require 14 MiB more space. > > 73 MiB to be downloaded. > > Fetching php56-5.6.30.txz: .. done > > pkg: php56-5.6.30 failed checksum from repository This kind of error can happen for 2 reasons: 1. Metadata is out of date. In this case simplest solution is to run 'pkg update -f' on console just to be sure it's updated 2. File is corrupting during download -- Renato Botelho ___ pfSense mailing list https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
Re: [pfSense] pfsense 2.3.x 32bit?
> On 2 Nov 2016, at 15:40, Eero Volotinen <eero.voloti...@iki.fi> wrote: > > Well, it just don't find any updates. (from console or from webgui) What is your platform? full install or nanobsd? If it’s nanobsd, which size? -- Renato Botelho ___ pfSense mailing list https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
Re: [pfSense] Switching from 2.3.1 DEV to 2.3.1 REL ?
> On May 18, 2016, at 20:39, Olivier Mascia <o...@integral.be> wrote: > > I had switched through the GUI to Branch development snapshots experimental > while I was initially in 2.3-REL on some boxes. It helped a lot in the > interim. > Following announcement of 2.3.1-REL I just switched the GUI settings back to > Stable branch. > But upon checking for new update, it offers me some 2.3.2 snapshot, and not > 2.3.1-REL. > > I guess the steps to do should be more or less similar to those I had to do > to switch from 2.3 beta to 2.3 REL. > But could you please remind these steps (or link) here to help? > > Could you also log the wish to have the GUI obey the instruction of switching > back to Stable branch and indeed offer an 'upgrade' path from whatever > snapshot it was on back or toward the latest REL version? I'm sure it would > help some people, too. > > Many thanks for this 2.3.1 bug fix release! When you use stable repo configuration, as you did, you will show on GUI 2.3.2 as the next available version and it happens because your current repository config still have information about devel branch, since stable didn’t exist yet when you updated last time. You can go ahead and upgrade and you will end up on 2.3.1-RELEASE, but if you want to be really sure about it, go to console and run option 13, when it asks for confirmation just say No. At this point all repo information will be updated and you will see 2.3.1-RELEASE even on GUI -- Renato Botelho ___ pfSense mailing list https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
Re: [pfSense] 32 or 64?
On Jan 6, 2015, at 16:11, Jim Pingle li...@pingle.org wrote: On 01/06/2015 12:57 PM, Márcio Merlone wrote: I am planning to replace some Linksys boxes on remote offices with a virtual pfSense in the next months and was wondering what's recommended for a new install today: 32 or 64 bits? I ask considering what's best for the mid-long term, are there any 64bit-only features now or planned? Will I loose something running a 32 bit version now or a few years from now? What are the advantages/disadvantages of each now and what is expected for a near future? I am not asking for an in-depth analysis, but rather a general overview and opinion of the main diffs. If the hardware can run 64-bit, use 64-bit. If the hardware can't run 64-bit, don't buy it. :-) +1 -- Renato Botelho ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Re: [pfSense] FQDN alias update failure
On Dec 19, 2014, at 18:07, Volker Kuhlmann list0...@paradise.net.nz wrote: pf tables can be populated from FQDNs through pfsense aliases. However the FQDNs are not re-evaluated and pf tables are not updated after applying changes to the aliases or filter rules, creating confusion when setting up rules. The update only happens eventually when the filterdns background process gets around to it. Every time alias is changed, a HUP signal is sent do filterdns [1], and it triggers it to read config again and update aliases. Is there a way to run a command that does an update immediately, while the problem is being fixed? filterdns is run as /usr/local/sbin/filterdns -p /var/run/filterdns.pid -i 300 -c /var/etc/filterdns.conf -d 1 and expects a config file as minimum argument. However it always starts up a new instance that keeps running. Is it possible to tell it to terminate after one update iteration, or do I need to write a script that kills it after 10 seconds? Thanks. Could you let me know the steps to have multiple filterdns instances running? I couldn’t reproduce it here. [1] https://github.com/pfsense/pfsense/blob/RELENG_2_2/etc/inc/filter.inc#L394 -- Renato Botelho ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Re: [pfSense] Upgrading from 2.2RC to 2.2 final
On Dec 17, 2014, at 08:57, Carlos L. Martinez carlopm...@protonmail.ch wrote: Hi all, I will install two pfsense fws using 2.2RC next week. When 2.2 final will be released, upgrading from 2.2RC to 2.2 final will be supported or will I have to do a clean install? You will be able to upgrade it to RELEASE when it’s available. But it’s good to remember 2.2 is not recommended to be used in production until RELEASE is done. -- Renato Botelho ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Re: [pfSense] Restore older version backup
On Dec 15, 2014, at 12:59, Kostas Backas kos...@i-system.gr wrote: Hello! I have an Alix with the latest 2.1.5 version. Can I restore a backup from this hardware (Alix), but older version (2.0.x)? Yes. -- Renato Botelho ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Re: [pfSense] Use 2.0.3 config on 2.1.5, does it work ?
On Nov 27, 2014, at 21:47, Nenhum_de_Nos math...@eternamente.info wrote: Hail, I am about to change a firewall hardware, and I see the possibility to update the pfSense version as well. Is it safe to do it out-of-the-box ? Hello, It’s ok to restore a 2.0.3 config into a 2.1.5 installation. pfSense has code to upgrade the config until the current version. -- Renato Botelho ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Re: [pfSense] Added ntopng.pbi via command line, how do I add to webui?
On Sep 17, 2014, at 20:48, Wade Blackwell wa...@bablam.com wrote: Good afternoon all, I added ntopng to my platform via command line and restarted the webconfigurator. I was expecting to see the package show up under diagnostics, as it did on my other platform that I installed the package via webui package installer, but it doesn't. Is there a way to add that? Searches on this topic have been inconslusive. Thanks, install looked like this; [2.1.5-RELEASE][r...@firewall.domain.com]/usr/local/pkg(21): pbi_add --no-checksig ntopng-1.1_1-amd64.pbi Verifying Checksum...OK Extracting to: /usr/pbi/ntopng-amd64 Adding group: redis Adding user: redis Installed: ntopng-1.1_1 Web interface components are not distributed inside PBI. You should install it using System - Packages menu. -- Renato Botelho ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Re: [pfSense] updating issues with signature on image
On Jul 13, 2014, at 21:43, Lyle Giese l...@lcrcomputer.net wrote: I have a Soekris net4801, running 2.0.2-release(i386) NanoBSD Size 512mb. It shows 2.1.2-release is available for auto-update. After downloading, I get an error message that the digital signature is invalid. I have to abort and the only options is to allow unsigned images. Is the right or is there something wrong with the update process? It’s probably pointing to a non-official URL to get updates. The latest released version is 2.1.4 and it’s signed. The correct URL to get firmware updates to i386 arch is: http://updates.pfsense.org/_updaters -- Renato Botelho http://people.freebsd.org/~garga/pubkey.asc ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Re: [pfSense] Dependencies on older packages?
On Jun 11, 2014, at 7:41, Brian Candler b.cand...@pobox.com wrote: I went to install wget on a pfsense ( 2.1-RELEASE) box, and I got this: # pkg_add -r wget Fetching ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/amd64/packages-8.3-release/Latest/wget.tbz... Done. Fetching ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/amd64/packages-8.3-release/All/pkg-config-0.25_1.tbz... Done. Fetching ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/amd64/packages-8.3-release/All/libidn-1.22.tbz... Done. pkg_add: warning: package 'libidn-1.22' requires 'libiconv-1.13.1_2', but 'libiconv-1.14_1' is installed pkg_add: warning: package 'libidn-1.22' requires 'gettext-0.18.1.1', but 'gettext-0.18.3' is installed pkg_add: warning: package 'wget-1.13.4_1' requires 'libiconv-1.13.1_2', but 'libiconv-1.14_1' is installed pkg_add: warning: package 'wget-1.13.4_1' requires 'gettext-0.18.1.1', but 'gettext-0.18.3' is installed It seems that the wget package is out of date, as it depends on older versions of packages than the ones already installed. Is this to be expected? The only other package I had installed was iperf (via the GUI). Yes, it’s expected. You are using a FreeBSD repo made when 8.3 was released, after that, ports tree received tons of updates. You can try to set PACKAGESITE env var pointing to 8.4-release packages or even to 8-stable and see if it helps. It’s just good to remember that it’s not an officially way to install things on pfSense. -- Renato Botelho http://people.freebsd.org/~garga/pubkey.asc ___ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
