Re: Web Browsers
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 2:47 AM, Theo de Raadt dera...@cvs.openbsd.org wrote: Firefox: might slow down on some sort of sites (heavy javascript, etc). If on tab crashes, the whole thing goes down. Privacy a bit more trustworthy than google Why? Because Google's stated mission is to collect all the world's information and make it useful, whereas Mozilla's is to promote an open web.
Re: differences in reported disk size (starring bioctl, fdisk, disklabel also starring Hewlett-Packard Smart Array)
On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 06:16:35PM +0200, Denis Doroshenko wrote: hi, this message may be a little too long, the most intriguing part is the difference between sizes reported by the kernel (in dmesg) and bioctl. any idea, why bioctl reports size 1 TB smaller? i've got HP proliant dl140 with Hewlett-Packard Smart Array card in it. put a couple of 1.5 TB disks put to RAID0 for testing. i think i saw it reporting logical drive 2.9 TB or something, which was expected. the kernel (29 dec i386 snapshot) reports: ciss0 at pci7 dev 8 function 0 Hewlett-Packard Smart Array rev 0x00: apic 8 int 16 (irq 7) ciss0: 1 LD, HW rev 0, FW 1.66/1.66 scsibus0 at ciss0: 1 targets sd0 at scsibus0 targ 0 lun 0: HP, LOGICAL VOLUME, 1.66 SCSI3 0/direct fixed sd0: 2861534MB, 512 bytes/sec, 5860422960 sec total 5'860'422'960 sectors sounds very like it. bioctl says: # bioctl ciss0 Volume Status Size Device ciss0 0 Online 2199023255040 sd0 RAID0 0 Online 1500301910016 0:0.0 noencl ATA ST31500341AS 1 Online 1500301910016 0:1.0 noencl ATA ST31500341AS # well, while sizes of physical disks are reported correctly, size of sd0 is smaller: about 2 TB. No idea what's going on here. fdisk says: # fdisk sd0 Disk: sd0 geometry: 718189/255/32 [1565455664 Sectors] Offset: 0 Signature: 0xAA55 Starting Ending LBA Info: #: id C H S - C H S [ start:size ] --- 0: 00 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 [ 0: 0 ] unused 1: 00 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 [ 0: 0 ] unused 2: 00 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 [ 0: 0 ] unused *3: A6 0 1 32 - 191844 39 26 [ 63: 1565448251 ] OpenBSD # so it is about 750 GB here. i wouldn't care about fdisk that much. let alone LBA48 and possibly other stuff, apparently the MBR still uses 32 bit fields to hold the start sector and the size (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_boot_record). And the number the fdisk gives looks very like 5860422960 - 2^32. so perhaps the size the fdisk gives is an overflown value (it could be better equal to 3^32-1, closer to reality). disklable seems to have the right number, however for OpenBSD area boudaries it still believes to what fdisk says: # disklabel sd0 # /dev/rsd0c: type: SCSI disk: SCSI disk label: LOGICAL VOLUME flags: bytes/sector: 512 sectors/track: 255 tracks/cylinder: 511 sectors/cylinder: 130305 cylinders: 44974 total sectors: 5860422960 rpm: 3600 interleave: 1 boundstart: 63 boundend: 1565448314 drivedata: 0 16 partitions: #size offset fstype [fsize bsize cpg] a: 651525 12639585 4.2BSD 2048 163841 # / b: 12639522 63swap c: 58604229600 unused d: 2215185 13291110 4.2BSD 2048 163841 # /usr e: 2215185 15506295 4.2BSD 2048 163841 # /var # That is correct, initially, disklabel believes fdisk, which just isn't capable of handling more than 2^32 sectors. luckily enough, it allows us to say we want to use the whole disk (* for size rocks!), and there i have it: f: 5842701480 17721480 4.2BSD 8192 655361 newfs needs to be instructed to use Enhanced Fast File System (FFS2), otherwise it gives somewhat funny message: # newfs /dev/rsd0f newfs: preposterous size 5842701480, max is 2147483647 # it could just say the size is bigger than 2147483647, switching to FFS2 and go further. a little chage to parameters (freed 0.2 TB for me) and there it is shining brightly: I don't think an automatic switch is a good solution, imo people should make a conscious decision to use ffs2. See below. # df -h /mnt Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/sd0f 2.7T8.0K2.7T 0%/mnt # this the first time i mounted somthing bigger than 300 GB, so it is wow for me :-) thanks for your time! There is a big caveat to using filesystems this large, see the faq: http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq14.html#LargeDrive There's one inaccuracy here, amd64 systems should be able to allocate up to 8G to a process, but you are entering untested territory here. It's better to stay on the safe side, and not create filesystems that are too large. I have some code to estimate the amount of memory needed to run a fsck, which I could use during newfs time to warn against creating filesystems we know you cannot fsck. But I didn't have the time to actually verify the guesses are correct so far. -Otto
Re: Web Browsers
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 2:47 AM, Theo de Raadt dera...@cvs.openbsd.org wrote: Firefox: might slow down on some sort of sites (heavy javascript, etc). If on tab crashes, the whole thing goes down. Privacy a bit more trustworthy than google Why? Because Google's stated mission is to collect all the world's information and make it useful, whereas Mozilla's is to promote an open web. Oh sorry, I forgot to think like an American for a second there. (Change you can believe in, penny on the dollar)
OpenBSD's Songs
Hello list, I just would like to thank once the work around the songs and arts for the project, it really is kind of awesome every-time, and is I believe, an important part in the project. Regards
Hostap status no network
Hello all, i am trying to configure a hostap access point with an OpenBSD 4.6 machine, everything *seems* fine (i can ping the address) but my status says no network. I have tried this on 2 different machines with 3 different network adaptors, I have also tried with/out WPA and many different mode options all with the same no network status. All 3 network adaptors are working and in use daily. # uname -a OpenBSD megalos.inet.net 4.6 GENERIC#0 i386 $ more /etc/hostname.iwi0 inet 192.168.10.254 255.255.255.0 NONE media autoselect mediaopt hostap mode 11g nwid wifi nwkey wifipass chan 11 $ sh /etc/netstart iwi0 (have also tried restart all of networking AND rebooting) $ ifconfig iwi0 iwi0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 lladdr 00:12:f0:bf:a6:00 priority: 4 groups: wlan media: IEEE802.11 autoselect ibss (autoselect adhoc) status: no network - MY IS PROBLEM HERE ieee80211: nwid wifi chan 11 nwkey 0x776966697061737300 100dBm inet6 fe80::212:f0ff:febf:a600%iwi0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2 inet 192.168.10.254 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.10.255 $ dmesg |grep iwi iwi0 at pci3 dev 4 function 0 Intel PRO/Wireless 2200BG rev 0x05: apic 1 int 21 (irq 11), address 0x:0x:0x:0x:0x:0x -=(E)=-
Re: Hostap status no network
evangelos tsiaplas evange...@shaw.ca writes: inet 192.168.10.254 255.255.255.0 NONE media autoselect mediaopt hostap mode 11g nwid wifi nwkey wifipass chan 11 unfortunately iwi does not support hostap. The drivers that do have a paragraph similar to this in their man pages: Host APIn this mode the driver acts as an access point (base sta- tion) for other cards. - Peter -- Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team http://bsdly.blogspot.com/ http://www.bsdly.net/ http://www.nuug.no/ Remember to set the evil bit on all malicious network traffic delilah spamd[29949]: 85.152.224.147: disconnected after 42673 seconds.
Re: Web Browsers
El vie, 01-01-2010 a las 02:13 -0700, Theo de Raadt escribiC3: On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 2:47 AM, Theo de Raadt dera...@cvs.openbsd.org wrote: Firefox: might slow down on some sort of sites (heavy javascript, etc). If on tab crashes, the whole thing goes down. Privacy a bit more trustworthy than google Why? Because Google's stated mission is to collect all the world's information and make it useful, whereas Mozilla's is to promote an open web. Oh sorry, I forgot to think like an American for a second there. A USian you mean! (Change you can believe in, penny on the dollar)
adquiera sus productos al mejor precio en este fin de temporada!
ADQUIERA Y APROVECHE NUESTROS PRECIOS DE FIN DE TEMPORADA. BENQ ULTRAPORTATIL $336 USD. Si usted no desea seguir recibiendo nuestra informacisn, por favor mande un mensaje con titulo Eliminar de lista al correo adoming...@vission.com.mx Este mensaje fue enviado para informacisn de nuestras promociones. No pretendemos saturar su correo ni causarle molestias. Este mensaje de correo electrsnico no se considera SPAM, ya que cumple con lo establecido en el capitulo VIII BIS de los lineamientos sobre comercio electrsnico publicados por la PROFECO. asm como la complacencia de la nueva legislacisn sobre correo electrsnico: Seccisn 301, parrafo (a)(2)(C) de S.1618 bajo el decreto S.1618 titulo 3ro. Aprobado por el 105 Congreso Base de las Normativas Internacionales sobre SPAM, este correo electrsnico no podra ser considerado SPAM mientras incluya una forma de ser removido. [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type image/jpeg which had a name of image001.jpg]
Re: OpenBSD's Songs
On 1/1/10, Jean-Francois jfsimon1...@gmail.com wrote: Hello list, I just would like to thank once the work around the songs and arts for the project, it really is kind of awesome every-time, and is I believe, an important part in the project. Regards The evolution of the fish was my favorite 4.6 sticker. Good times.
Re: testing a drive with dd -- odd results
not positive. I meant not positive. On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 10:08:07AM -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote: try a -current kernel. I fixed an issue where that would happen; although I am positive it is the same. On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 03:34:39PM +, Matthew Szudzik wrote: On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 09:03:30AM -0500, Scott McEachern wrote: dd: /dev/rwd0c: Input/output error 268435455+0 records in 268435455+0 records out 137438952960 bytes transferred in 23740.766 secs (5789154 bytes/sec) Note that 137438952960 + 512 = 2^37. So, dd is failing while reading byte number 2^37.
Re: How to remove Operation timed out messages from queue with smtpctl?
On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 08:47:28AM +0100, Tomas Bodzar wrote: Hi all, how can I remove Operation timed out messages from mail queue with smtpctl(8)? I have default setup for local delivery and I tested if it's possible to send emails to outside world as with default sendmail(8) configuration in OpenBSD. Now I have two messages in queue. I read man pages for smtpd(8), smtpctl(8) and smtpd.conf(5) and there is nothing about that. Is it safe to remove those files directly from /var/spool/smtpd/queue ? It would be interesting to see the exact smtpctl output, and the exact smtpd.conf that was used.
Re: Sparc u5
On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 03:48:21PM +, Sevan / Venture37 wrote: On 31/12/2009 12:08, Edd Barrett wrote: PS. The solaris installer is dumb and will probably fail to detect a disk with a BSD disk label on it. There is another step you will need to do in the 'format' utility in solaris related to the partition table. I forget the exact details. Go googling. http://www.geeklan.co.uk/?p=61 That's the one! -- Best Regards Edd Barrett http://www.theunixzoo.co.uk
Re: Web Browsers
what's about srware iron?
Re: Web Browsers
Who pays for the majority of firefox's development? On Jan 1, 2010, at 4:02 AM, Nick Guenther kou...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 2:47 AM, Theo de Raadt dera...@cvs.openbsd.org wrote: Firefox: might slow down on some sort of sites (heavy javascript, etc). If on tab crashes, the whole thing goes down. Privacy a bit more trustworthy than google Why? Because Google's stated mission is to collect all the world's information and make it useful, whereas Mozilla's is to promote an open web.
Re: Web Browsers
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 14:27, Ted Unangst ted.unan...@gmail.com wrote: Who pays for the majority of firefox's development? Wait, wait... don't tell me...
Re: differences in reported disk size (starring bioctl, fdisk, disklabel also starring Hewlett-Packard Smart Array)
On 1/1/10, Otto Moerbeek o...@drijf.net wrote: On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 06:16:35PM +0200, Denis Doroshenko wrote: hi, this message may be a little too long, the most intriguing part is the difference between sizes reported by the kernel (in dmesg) and bioctl. any idea, why bioctl reports size 1 TB smaller? i've got HP proliant dl140 with Hewlett-Packard Smart Array card in it. put a couple of 1.5 TB disks put to RAID0 for testing. i think i saw it reporting logical drive 2.9 TB or something, which was expected. the kernel (29 dec i386 snapshot) reports: ciss0 at pci7 dev 8 function 0 Hewlett-Packard Smart Array rev 0x00: apic 8 int 16 (irq 7) ciss0: 1 LD, HW rev 0, FW 1.66/1.66 scsibus0 at ciss0: 1 targets sd0 at scsibus0 targ 0 lun 0: HP, LOGICAL VOLUME, 1.66 SCSI3 0/direct fixed sd0: 2861534MB, 512 bytes/sec, 5860422960 sec total 5'860'422'960 sectors sounds very like it. bioctl says: # bioctl ciss0 Volume Status Size Device ciss0 0 Online 2199023255040 sd0 RAID0 0 Online 1500301910016 0:0.0 noencl ATA ST31500341AS 1 Online 1500301910016 0:1.0 noencl ATA ST31500341AS # well, while sizes of physical disks are reported correctly, size of sd0 is smaller: about 2 TB. No idea what's going on here. perhaps the same thing as the FAQ mentions: Note that not all controllers and drivers support large disks. For example, ami(4) has a limit of 2TB per logical volume. Many have just not been tested yet, for example, as of this writing, there are no 1TB IDE or SATA drives available for testing, so we can't say for sure everything works perfectly yet. It is just a pity, that the man page does not contain this information. still makes me wonder that disklabel displays correct number of sectors and newfs seems to be able to address them. may be it is better no to rely on this and just use smaller disks or RAID setups that give smaller resulting logical disks? fdisk says: # fdisk sd0 Disk: sd0 geometry: 718189/255/32 [1565455664 Sectors] Offset: 0 Signature: 0xAA55 Starting Ending LBA Info: #: id C H S - C H S [ start:size ] --- 0: 00 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 [ 0: 0 ] unused 1: 00 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 [ 0: 0 ] unused 2: 00 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 [ 0: 0 ] unused *3: A6 0 1 32 - 191844 39 26 [ 63: 1565448251 ] OpenBSD # so it is about 750 GB here. i wouldn't care about fdisk that much. let alone LBA48 and possibly other stuff, apparently the MBR still uses 32 bit fields to hold the start sector and the size (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_boot_record). And the number the fdisk gives looks very like 5860422960 - 2^32. so perhaps the size the fdisk gives is an overflown value (it could be better equal to 3^32-1, closer to reality). still, what is better thing to store into 32-bit field, 2^32-1 or (size mod (2^32-1)), which seems to be what's stored there now? disklable seems to have the right number, however for OpenBSD area boudaries it still believes to what fdisk says: # disklabel sd0 # /dev/rsd0c: type: SCSI disk: SCSI disk label: LOGICAL VOLUME flags: bytes/sector: 512 sectors/track: 255 tracks/cylinder: 511 sectors/cylinder: 130305 cylinders: 44974 total sectors: 5860422960 rpm: 3600 interleave: 1 boundstart: 63 boundend: 1565448314 drivedata: 0 16 partitions: #size offset fstype [fsize bsize cpg] a: 651525 12639585 4.2BSD 2048 163841 # / b: 12639522 63swap c: 58604229600 unused d: 2215185 13291110 4.2BSD 2048 163841 # /usr e: 2215185 15506295 4.2BSD 2048 163841 # /var # That is correct, initially, disklabel believes fdisk, which just isn't capable of handling more than 2^32 sectors. luckily enough, it allows us to say we want to use the whole disk (* for size rocks!), and there i have it: f: 5842701480 17721480 4.2BSD 8192 655361 newfs needs to be instructed to use Enhanced Fast File System (FFS2), otherwise it gives somewhat funny message: # newfs /dev/rsd0f newfs: preposterous size 5842701480, max is 2147483647 # it could just say the size is bigger than 2147483647, switching to FFS2 and go further. a little chage to parameters (freed 0.2 TB for me) and there it is shining brightly: I don't think an automatic switch is a good solution, imo people should make a conscious decision to use ffs2. See
Re: Web Browsers
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Ted Unangst ted.unan...@gmail.com wrote: On Jan 1, 2010, at 4:02 AM, Nick Guenther kou...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 2:47 AM, Theo de Raadt dera...@cvs.openbsd.org wrote: Firefox: might slow down on some sort of sites (heavy javascript, etc). If on tab crashes, the whole thing goes down. Privacy a bit more trustworthy than google Why? Because Google's stated mission is to collect all the world's information and make it useful, whereas Mozilla's is to promote an open web. Who pays for the majority of firefox's development? Ooooh right. Good point. Well, I wasn't meaning to make a fuss, just filling in the rhetorical answer. Hugo just said a bit after all.
802.11n cards for AP?
So... back in the 3.6ish days, I had a Prism-based 802.11b card that I used in my OpenBSD FW for a wireless access point. Worked like a charm until I relocated my FW, and could no longer get good RF coverage. Went with a consumer-based 802.11g AP configured as a bridge. That unit just died. I've found some cable/antenna assemblies that might allow me to remote an antenna to a good spot in the house for coverage, and I'm thus re-considering going with a FW based AP setup once again. According to the OpenBSD site, the following 802.11n devices are supported: athn iwn ral run However, it doesn't appear that they all support HostAP mode... Are there any favorites among the group for doing this? Better yet, any models of card known to use a particular chipset that will do HostAP? Thanks. -sc
Re: 802.11n cards for AP?
On Fri, Jan 01, 2010 at 07:16:22PM -0500, Steven M. Caesare said: Are there any favorites among the group for doing this? Better yet, any models of card known to use a particular chipset that will do HostAP? I have a ral (RT2860) that works well as an AP. Since 4.5 I've had to disable acpi though or it doesn't work at all. -- am9obkBzY2FyZm9uZS5uZXR8fGowQGNveC5uZXQ=
Re: 802.11n cards for AP?
On Fri, 01 Jan 2010 19:16 -0500, Steven M. Caesare scaes...@caesare.com wrote: So... back in the 3.6ish days, I had a Prism-based 802.11b card that I used in my OpenBSD FW for a wireless access point. Worked like a charm until I relocated my FW, and could no longer get good RF coverage. Went with a consumer-based 802.11g AP configured as a bridge. That unit just died. I've found some cable/antenna assemblies that might allow me to remote an antenna to a good spot in the house for coverage, and I'm thus re-considering going with a FW based AP setup once again. According to the OpenBSD site, the following 802.11n devices are supported: athn iwn ral run As of 4.6-release, 802.11n is not yet implemented. The devices you list work, but not in n. From the run man page: CAVEATS The run driver does not support any of the 802.11n capabilities offered by the RT2800 and RT3000 chipsets. Additional work is required in ieee80211(9) before those features can be supported.
