Re: Failing to get [EMAIL PROTECTED] in X
This works for me on a 2007WFP Dell at 1680x1050: Section Monitor Identifier DELL 2007WFP ModeLine 1680x1050 146.2 1680 1784 1968 2256 1050 1051 1054 1087 -hsync -vsync HorizSync 30.0 - 83.0 VertRefresh 56.0 - 75.0 Option dpms EndSection Section Screen Identifier Default Screen Device ATI Technologies, Inc. RV370 5B62 [Radeon X600 (PCIE)] Monitor DELL 2007WFP DefaultDepth24 SubSection Display Depth 24 Modes 1680x1050 1152x864 1024x768 800x600 720x400 640x480 EndSubSection EndSection On 5/10/07, Alex Holst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting Nick Holland ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): [..] I tried tweaking xorg.conf like you suggested and some other things: http://a.mongers.org/x/xorg.conf http://a.mongers.org/x/Xorg.0.log Now X outputs [EMAIL PROTECTED] Uh. Xorg.log mentions CRT as an active display on pipe A with no active displays on pipe B. I have no idea what it means but wonder if that's related to my problem. The display on my laptop is blank. Any other hints? -- I prefer the dark of the night, after midnight and before four-thirty, when it's more bare, more hollow.http://a.mongers.org
Re: SSHJail patch for OpenBSD
That is the most ignorant statement I have ever seen. I guess we can assume there will be no future versions of openssh because openssh developers have already thought of everything. Good luck with that attitude. On 4/27/07, Marco Peereboom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 08:17:16PM +0200, Rico Secada wrote: On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 10:30:03 -0700 Ted Unangst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 4/27/07, Rico Secada [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 22:34:52 -0500 Marco Peereboom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's the point again? What part didn't you understand? why are you asking this list about somebody else's patch? Because I was looking for people using OpenBSD who might have issues with this patch. If this was a good idea don't you think someone who is actually involved in OpenSSH code would have done this already? ask the somebody else if their patch works. If I could benefit from that, I would.
Re: ssh hangs from Ubunty Feisty 7.04 to OpenBSD
I can verify that ssh between Ubuntu 7.04 and openbsd is completely working. Your issue is with your /etc/ssh_config. [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 4/24/07, Radu-Cristian FOTESCU [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: just to eliminate the obvious: you have checked that name resolution (forwards and backwards) is working? I once had a problem with ssh, and it was because of wrong permissions: too large (writable by group and/or others). Just for eliminating another obvious, you could try: chmod 700 ~/.ssh (755 should work too) R-C Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail at http://mrd.mail.yahoo.com/try_beta?.intl=ca
Re: ssh hangs from Ubunty Feisty 7.04 to OpenBSD
Your default config may be incorrect. Without posting your config, its just a guessing game. On 4/24/07, thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have the same problem with the new debian 4.0. Default sshd_config/ssh_config. I am not able to ssh into openbsd-3.9. authlog on openbsd-server: ... sshd[21822]: fatal: Timeout before authentication ... Joaquin Herrero schrieb: Hi, it seems that the new Ubuntu Feisty 7.04 has some broken things in ssh. Some people experienced delays in connecting to other Linux systems and it seems that the problem was solved commenting the GSSAPIAuthentication option in ssh_config. But I have a different problem from a Ubuntu machine when connecting to my OpenBSD 3.8 or 4.0 machines. It is not a delay, it's just that it doesn't connect. I don't understand the ssh protocol, so I post this problem in case someone can help. # ssh -vvv some.openbsd.host OpenSSH_4.3p2 Debian-8ubuntu1, OpenSSL 0.9.8c 05 Sep 2006 debug1: Reading configuration data /etc/ssh/ssh_config debug1: Applying options for * debug2: ssh_connect: needpriv 0 debug1: Connecting to 192.168.0.9 [192.168.0.9] port 22. debug1: Connection established. debug1: identity file /home/jherrero/.ssh/identity type -1 debug3: Not a RSA1 key file /home/jherrero/.ssh/id_rsa. debug2: key_type_from_name: unknown key type '-BEGIN' debug3: key_read: missing keytype debug2: key_type_from_name: unknown key type 'Proc-Type:' debug3: key_read: missing keytype debug2: key_type_from_name: unknown key type 'DEK-Info:' debug3: key_read: missing keytype debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug3: key_read: missing whitespace debug2: key_type_from_name: unknown key type '-END' debug3: key_read: missing keytype debug1: identity file /home/jherrero/.ssh/id_rsa type 1 debug1: identity file /home/jherrero/.ssh/id_dsa type -1 debug1: Remote protocol version 1.99, remote software version OpenSSH_4.2 debug1: match: OpenSSH_4.2 pat OpenSSH* debug1: Enabling compatibility mode for protocol 2.0 debug1: Local version string SSH-2.0-OpenSSH_4.3p2 Debian-8ubuntu1 debug2: fd 3 setting O_NONBLOCK debug1: SSH2_MSG_KEXINIT sent and here it hangs forever The /etc/ssh/ssh_config (there is no .ssh/config file) in the Ubuntu machine is: Host * # ForwardAgent no # ForwardX11 no # ForwardX11Trusted yes # RhostsRSAAuthentication no # RSAAuthentication yes # PasswordAuthentication yes # HostbasedAuthentication no # BatchMode no # CheckHostIP yes # AddressFamily any # ConnectTimeout 0 # StrictHostKeyChecking ask # IdentityFile ~/.ssh/identity # IdentityFile ~/.ssh/id_rsa # IdentityFile ~/.ssh/id_dsa # Port 22 # Protocol 2,1 # Cipher 3des # Ciphers aes128-cbc,3des-cbc,blowfish-cbc,cast128-cbc,arcfour,aes192-cbc,aes256-cbc # EscapeChar ~ # Tunnel no # TunnelDevice any:any # PermitLocalCommand no SendEnv LANG LC_* HashKnownHosts yes # GSSAPIAuthentication yes # GSSAPIDelegateCredentials no Any ideas will be appreciated. Thanks.
Re: Webservers with Terrabytes of Data in - recomended setups
This isn't an OpenBSD specific solution, but you should be able to use an EMC san to accomplish this (we use a fiber channel setup) On 4/19/07, Stuart Henderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2007/04/19 18:08, Daniel Ouellet wrote: Stuart Henderson wrote: I don't think NFS/AFS is that good an idea; you'll need very beefy fileservers and a fast network. NFS may actually be useful; if you really need the files in one directory space for management/updates that's a way to do it (i.e. mount all the various storage servers by NFS on a management station/ftp server/whatever). Good idea yes, but if I recall properly, unless major changes have been done, isn't it the use of NFS become a huge bottle neck compare to local drive? I think the archive is full of complain about the thought put of NFS not being so good. I meant using it the other way round: have the *webservers* export their filesystem, and ftp/management servers mount them to provide a single space for carrying out updates and backups, locating files, etc. Having a bunch of webservers serve data from a large NFS store seems less attractive for most of the cases I can think of. The main one I see where it may be attractive is where heavy CGI processing or similar is done (that's usually a different situation to having many TB of data, though). In the CGI case, there are some benefits to distributing files by another way (notably avoiding the NFS server as a point of failure), rsync as Joachim mentioned is one way to shift the files around, CVS is also suitable, it encourages keeping tighter control over changes too, and isn't difficult to learn.
Re: problem on setting up ntpd
His problem was not about ntpd not syncing. At any rate, Reza, do you have any firewalls that could be blocking the port? If you switch listen on 192.168.1.1 to listen on * does that change your situation? On 4/8/07, Mispunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It will take some time before ntpd begins with syncing. Don't ask me why, but it took a day for me before my ntpd was beginning with syncing. On 4/8/07, Reza Muhammad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, I was just trying to setup an ntpd server for my home network so it could sync with each other. So here's what I have in my /etc/ntpd.conf: # $OpenBSD: ntpd.conf,v 1.7 2004/07/20 17:38:35 henning Exp $ # sample ntpd configuration file, see ntpd.conf(5) # Addresses to listen on (ntpd does not listen by default) listen on 192.168.1.1 # sync to a single server #server ntp.example.org # use a random selection of 8 public stratum 2 servers # see http://twiki.ntp.org/bin/view/Servers/NTPPoolServers servers asia.pool.ntp.org and here's the log from /var/log/daemon after I run the service: Apr 8 21:09:32 blowfish ntpd[14921]: listening on 192.168.1.1 Apr 8 21:09:32 blowfish ntpd[14921]: ntp engine ready Apr 8 21:09:51 blowfish ntpd[14921]: peer 203.123.49.3 now valid Apr 8 21:09:51 blowfish ntpd[14921]: peer 202.155.248.218 now valid Apr 8 21:09:51 blowfish ntpd[14921]: peer 61.129.66.79 now valid Apr 8 21:09:53 blowfish ntpd[14921]: peer 202.71.97.92 now valid Apr 8 21:09:53 blowfish ntpd[14921]: peer 60.56.119.79 now valid Apr 8 21:09:55 blowfish ntpd[14921]: peer 218.75.4.130 now valid Apr 8 21:09:56 blowfish ntpd[14921]: peer 61.129.90.164 now valid Even though it seems to be working, I still can't get the date to sync from clients. When I try to telnet to 192.168.1.1 on port 123, it says Connection Refused. But the daemon is running on the server: % ps auxw | grep ntpd root 24933 0.0 0.2 428 600 ?? Is 9:09PM0:00.00 ntpd: [priv] (ntpd) _ntp 14921 0.0 0.2 388 648 ?? S 9:09PM0:00.02 ntpd: ntp engine (ntpd) Can anyone pleae help me out? Thanks in advance.
Re: bcw(4) is gone
I think it is sad, and a horrible representation of GPL coders. Michael doesn't speak for all of us, and it is clear to anyone with common sense that the first thing you do is contact in private. On 4/5/07, Bret Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 13:16 -0600, Diana Eichert wrote: and info why here, http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/1558/ With apologies to everyone for off-color language... What a bunch of douches.
Re: bcw(4) is gone
This isnt a question of him being wrong, its a question of HOW IT WAS HANDLED. Get it? The simple courtesy of privately emailing someone would have taken 30 seconds and would have saved everyone a bunch of time, energy, and embarrassment. On 4/5/07, Andris Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 4/5/07, Daniel Ouellet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andris Delfino wrote: What's wrong? They protect their license. Period. Did you read the full tread first before you wrote this? Did you look at the code in CVS, did you even see Marcus reply and why? http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/1573 I don't think you did! He sure did a hell of a huge amount of work that was his, and original for your own benefit, and the only mistakes he may have done was to try to work on it faster then he may should have and wrongly include temporary files to help in the process! Should he had finish his work in a later time and not try to make this available sooner to us, then nothing would have been said on this. In any case a simple private email to him directly would have been the decent human being things to do, but I guess you don't even get that do you? Just like I said before. Where the hell is the open community is going these days, I have no clue... Look to me it sure enjoy destroy itself for sure. I am lost for words! Yes, and he was wrong. He shouldn't base his work in copylefted software (if he intend to release the result as non-copylefted). Licenses are licenses.
Re: bcw(4) is gone
There are two roads, the high and the low road. I am not sure why an adult (assuming) needs to be educated on this. The guy took code and relicensed it. That sucks. We know. But instead of trying to work with him, and educated him (since he does do a ton of work on free software), Michael effectively destroys him. Thats fair. Whether code is GPL or BSD, we all are in the same sea, and our boats are pretty damn close. On 4/5/07, Andris Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: He should realized that he couldn't do that... get it?
Prism54 card - any developers that can make use of it?
I am sick of messing with my XG-600 PRISM54 based wireless card. It does have Linux support (in Ubuntu), and I haven't tried it in OpenBSD but I know FreeBSD doesn't have a driver by default for it. If there is a developer out there who likes fidling with wireless drivers, I would be more than happy to mail the card out, free of charge, yours to keep. It is a mini-pci card. I am also posting this offer on planet.ubuntu.com but I would much rather see it go to use in OpenBSD. Steve
Re: Not getting much bandwidth through the firewall
I would check your testing methodologies, there is no way a system from the
last 10 years can't handle 1Mbps. Maybe you can tell us which tests you are
running?
On 3/30/07, Ted Unangst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/29/07, Siju George [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have an Internet Connection 1Mbps.
If I connect a Windows XP tp it I get about 800Kbps Speed but on
OpenBSD it never Goes beyond 380Kbps.
I have another ISP with 1 Mbps Speed Connection.
Both Windows XP and OpenBSD shows aroungd 800 Kbps Speed when
Connected Directly to it.
So was just wondering what the cause is :-)
Just wondering if
Increasing net.inet.tcp.{send,recv}space.
would solve the problem.
possibly. all i know is my computers work plenty fast without
fiddling with the knobs. you know you could have increased the sysctl
and tested it a lot faster than waiting for an email back?
