Re: laptop PS2 External Mouse in X

2013-09-06 Thread Riccardo Mottola

Hi,

Riccardo Mottola wrote:

Hi,

an apparently trivial question. On my ThinkPad 600x, I can only use 
the internal track-point with X11. If I attach an external PS/2 mouse, 
it does not get used. I don't have xorg.conf, I am accustomed that 
with other OS's it just works. I also tried plugging it in earlier, 
even at boot time. The light of the optical mouse works, thus it gets 
powered up.


let me clarify. If I stick in the external mouse at boot time, it will 
be recognized and only the external mouse will work (it actually stopped 
working with a some error messages I will report below) and the internal 
trackpoint si inactive, even if i remove the external mouse.
If I start with no mouse, the internal trackpoint works, but not the 
external mouse.


With both setups, dmesg spits out the same:

pms0 at pckbc0 (aux slot)
pckbc0: using irq 12 for aux slot
wsmouse0 at pms0 mux 0


I'm accustomed from other OS's (not just windows, but also Linux, 
FreeBSD.. I will check NetBSD) that I can just plug-in/plug-out an 
external mouse, This is very convenient in laptop usage. I know it 
doesn't work with desktops, but with laptops yes.


Or could this be a limitation not of the OS but of this particular laptop?

On a forum I found this (referred to a guy tryin gto attach a keyboard 
and not a mouse)


The problem is that the port on the 600 series is a mouse port and not 
internally wired as a true PS2 port.
You can overcome the problem by either using a PS2 splitter or a USB 
keyboard.


Is this bogus or could this be a problem?

Riccardo



Re: laptop PS2 External Mouse in X

2013-09-06 Thread Jan Stary
On Sep 06 09:23:56, riccardo.mott...@libero.it wrote:
 an apparently trivial question. On my ThinkPad 600x, I can only
 use the internal track-point with X11. If I attach an external
 PS/2 mouse, it does not get used. I don't have xorg.conf, I am
 accustomed that with other OS's it just works. I also tried
 plugging it in earlier, even at boot time. The light of the
 optical mouse works, thus it gets powered up.
 
 let me clarify. If I stick in the external mouse at boot time, it
 will be recognized and only the external mouse will work (it
 actually stopped working with a some error messages I will report
 below) and the internal trackpoint si inactive, even if i remove the
 external mouse.
 If I start with no mouse, the internal trackpoint works, but not the
 external mouse.

This is how it's supposed to work, right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PS/2_connector#Hotplugging

 With both setups, dmesg spits out the same:
 pms0 at pckbc0 (aux slot)
 pckbc0: using irq 12 for aux slot
 wsmouse0 at pms0 mux 0

Looks fine.

 
 I'm accustomed from other OS's (not just windows, but also Linux,
 FreeBSD.. I will check NetBSD) that I can just plug-in/plug-out an
 external mouse,

You mean, these OSes on this very same laptop?
With this mouse (not an USB mouse)?

 This is very convenient in laptop usage. I know it
 doesn't work with desktops, but with laptops yes.

It's not a matter of a desktop vs a laptop.

 Or could this be a limitation not of the OS but of this particular laptop?

Try the other OSes where it works
on this laptop with this mouse and find out.

 On a forum I found this (referred to a guy tryin gto attach a
 keyboard and not a mouse)
 
 The problem is that the port on the 600 series is a mouse port and
 not internally wired as a true PS2 port.

Could you please describe the difference bwtween
a mouse port and a true PS2 port?

 You can overcome the problem by either using a PS2 splitter or a USB
 keyboard.
 Is this bogus or could this be a problem?

USB mouses and keyboards you sholud be able
to plug in and out as you wish.



A suggestion for snapshots

2013-09-06 Thread Lars Engblom
Quite often the snapshot of the packages and the base system are out of 
sync, because naturally, the base has to be built before packages.


For example in this moment, as I write this, Firefox can not be 
installed in a new system installed from snapshots, as the packages are 
compiled against an older snapshot (amd64)


If there are just space on the ftp servers, I would suggest keeping two 
snapshots: one complete with both base and packages (always in sync) and 
one with just the newest base. This would make life easier for people 
following snapshots.


Regards,
 Lasse



ISAKMPD NAT/Traversal

2013-09-06 Thread Christoph Leser
Hello, list,

from a remark by Stuart Henderson on an older thread
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-miscm=134849 788026722w=2 back in September
2012,I understood that NAT-T support in openBSD was not complete at that time,
especially the handling of the 'ENCAPSULATION_MODE' attribute in the phase 2
'TRANSFORM'. Sometimes this gets set to a value incompatible with other
equipment ( cisco ).

Can someone please point me to where I can find more information on this
matter. Has anything changed in openBSD with regard to this, will openBSD
follow RFC3947 with regard to the encapsulation modes ( or is RFC3947 deas, it
seems to be a standard proposal since 2005 ).

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Christoph Leser

SP Computersysteme GmbH
Zettachring 4
70567 Stuttgart Fasanenhof

EMail: le...@sup-logistik.de



Re: A suggestion for snapshots

2013-09-06 Thread Marc Espie
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 03:14:44PM +0300, Lars Engblom wrote:
 For example in this moment, as I write this, Firefox can not be
 installed in a new system installed from snapshots, as the packages
 are compiled against an older snapshot (amd64)
Known issue.

 If there are just space on the ftp servers, I would suggest keeping
 two snapshots: 
That's the problem.  Requiring that would put a lot of mirrors out of the
game.

There are also bottlenecks in fanning out from the actual build machines.
Ports bulk builders are aware of the issues.  These take time to solve.



Re: A suggestion for snapshots

2013-09-06 Thread Bryan Vyhmeister
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 06:59:29PM +0200, Marc Espie wrote:
 There are also bottlenecks in fanning out from the actual build machines.
 Ports bulk builders are aware of the issues.  These take time to solve.

Would additional fast build machines help? Is that a large part of the
problem?

Bryan



Re: A suggestion for snapshots

2013-09-06 Thread Marc Espie
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 01:19:02PM -0700, Bryan Vyhmeister wrote:
 On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 06:59:29PM +0200, Marc Espie wrote:
  There are also bottlenecks in fanning out from the actual build machines.
  Ports bulk builders are aware of the issues.  These take time to solve.
 
 Would additional fast build machines help? Is that a large part of the
 problem?
 
 Bryan

Nope, I think that network bandwidth and topology is part of the current 
problem, and lack of time from some of the people involved to fix it.



Re: ISAKMPD NAT/Traversal

2013-09-06 Thread Stuart Henderson
On 2013-09-06, Christoph Leser le...@sup-logistik.de wrote:
 Hello, list,

 from a remark by Stuart Henderson on an older thread
 http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-miscm=134849 788026722w=2 back in September
 2012,I understood that NAT-T support in openBSD was not complete at that time,
 especially the handling of the 'ENCAPSULATION_MODE' attribute in the phase 2
 'TRANSFORM'. Sometimes this gets set to a value incompatible with other
 equipment ( cisco ).

 Can someone please point me to where I can find more information on this
 matter. Has anything changed in openBSD with regard to this, will openBSD
 follow RFC3947 with regard to the encapsulation modes ( or is RFC3947 deas, it
 seems to be a standard proposal since 2005 ).

 Mit freundlichen Gr��en

 Christoph Leser

 SP Computersysteme GmbH
 Zettachring 4
 70567 Stuttgart Fasanenhof

 EMail: le...@sup-logistik.de



You misunderstand. OpenBSD uses the proper assigned encapsulation mode
values from the newer internet-drafts and the published RFC:

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-04#section-5.1
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3947#section-5.1

It is Cisco who use the old encapsulation mode values from the early
versions of the internet-draft (marked XXX CHANGE here):

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-03#section-5.1



Re: A suggestion for snapshots

2013-09-06 Thread Amit Kulkarni
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Lars Engblom
lars.engb...@kimitotelefon.fiwrote:

 Quite often the snapshot of the packages and the base system are out of
 sync, because naturally, the base has to be built before packages.

 For example in this moment, as I write this, Firefox can not be installed
 in a new system installed from snapshots, as the packages are compiled
 against an older snapshot (amd64)

 If there are just space on the ftp servers, I would suggest keeping two
 snapshots: one complete with both base and packages (always in sync) and
 one with just the newest base. This would make life easier for people
 following snapshots.

 Regards,
  Lasse


The problem with ports is that even with a build farm, the ports guy has to
make sure dpb runs to the end. In the best case, a dpb run WITHOUT problems
to the end takes atleast a day with a fast quad core machine. gcc4, JDK 1.6
+ 1.7, GTK+2, GTK+3, Qt4, Webkit, Firefox are some of the worst ports in
terms of build time and the largest offender Libreoffice which alone takes
4-6 hrs of all quad cores (Xeon E3-1230v2 3.3GHz). I might have missed some
offenders, I just built a subset, experienced porters who handle the whole
tree know better than me which ones are also worthy candidates.

Finding and fixing port problems takes a minimum of 2 and I am guessing
typically 4 days to pump out a wholly built ports tree, on a extremely fast
arch like amd64. By which time the userland, kernel and xenocara have
changed a lot underneath. Hence, you get these mismatches from time to
time. It is not catastrophic, solution is to wait for the next snap. Even
if the ports build machine untars userland, kernel, xenocara, running dpb
again may force rebuilds or sometimes not.



Re: php sending mail via sendmail

2013-09-06 Thread Tony Berth
I did the tcpdump and I think the following should be the reason?

---
500 5.5.1 Command unrecognized: AUTH LOGIN..
---

it tries to open the session with:

---
250-mydomain Hello www@mydomain [x.x.x.x], pleased to meet
you..250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES..250-PIPELINING..250-8BITMIME..250-SIZE..250-DSN..250-ETRN..250-DELIVERBY..250HELP..
---


On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Stuart Henderson s...@spacehopper.orgwrote:

 On 2013-09-02, Tony Berth tonybe...@googlemail.com wrote:
  well the script does talk to google mail correctly so somehow it should
  work.

 If the script is talking to google mail, it is going to be making
 SMTP connections directly itself. Given the log entry you showed, I would
 probably try sniffing the TCP connection (maybe something like
 tcpdump -A -s 1500 -i lo0 port 25 will do).

  I think all these open source php based solutions use the same way to

  send e-mails.

 No, they don't.

 Sending mail from PHP is a right mess, there is the mail() function
 but it's rather limited (on unix, it just pipes to a program and can't
 do smtp-auth), also some server hosts disable it, so in practice most
 larger PHP apps have another way of sending mail where they either
 execute sendmail, or handle the socket connections themselves, or use a
 library (phpmailer etc).
 @owner ${DRUPAL_OWNER}



Re: A suggestion for snapshots

2013-09-06 Thread Theo de Raadt
 On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Lars Engblom
 lars.engb...@kimitotelefon.fiwrote:
 
  Quite often the snapshot of the packages and the base system are out of
  sync, because naturally, the base has to be built before packages.
 
  For example in this moment, as I write this, Firefox can not be installed
  in a new system installed from snapshots, as the packages are compiled
  against an older snapshot (amd64)
 
  If there are just space on the ftp servers, I would suggest keeping two
  snapshots: one complete with both base and packages (always in sync) and
  one with just the newest base. This would make life easier for people
  following snapshots.
 
  Regards,
   Lasse
 
 
 The problem with ports is that even with a build farm, the ports guy has to
 make sure dpb runs to the end. In the best case, a dpb run WITHOUT problems
 to the end takes atleast a day with a fast quad core machine. gcc4, JDK 1.6
 + 1.7, GTK+2, GTK+3, Qt4, Webkit, Firefox are some of the worst ports in
 terms of build time and the largest offender Libreoffice which alone takes
 4-6 hrs of all quad cores (Xeon E3-1230v2 3.3GHz). I might have missed some
 offenders, I just built a subset, experienced porters who handle the whole
 tree know better than me which ones are also worthy candidates.
 
 Finding and fixing port problems takes a minimum of 2 and I am guessing
 typically 4 days to pump out a wholly built ports tree, on a extremely fast
 arch like amd64. By which time the userland, kernel and xenocara have
 changed a lot underneath. Hence, you get these mismatches from time to
 time. It is not catastrophic, solution is to wait for the next snap. Even
 if the ports build machine untars userland, kernel, xenocara, running dpb
 again may force rebuilds or sometimes not.

Anyone want to pay for a faster network link?

Step up -- then we can solve this problem easily.



BSD Podcast

2013-09-06 Thread Andrew
There's a new BSD podcast that's just started. First episode was really good, 
thought I'd share with the list.
Interviews, tutorials, news, lots of fun stuff. 

http://www.bsdnow.tv/about

Our very own phessler@ is the first guest.