How to disable IPv6?
I have disabled IPv6 in the kernel (via top-level GENERIC) but I can't see what other places it needs to be disabled for other applications. Is it enabled per-application or is there some magic in a top-level Makefile somewhere? This IPv6 is like Whak-A-Mole. Or is it just so pervasive now that it cannot be disabled? I don't have a need to partake in the IPv6 research right now. For all you IPv6 cheerleaders, please just resist the temptation to cheer this time. I promise I'll re-enable the shit when my toaster does IPv6.
Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv
On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 13:33:22 -0200 Rodrigo Amorim Bahiense wrote: On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 08:20:16AM +, Matthieu Herrb wrote: On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 1:35 AM, Peter Miller feu...@gmail.com wrote: I have 4.6 amd64 installed and can't get X to work at 1280x800. --snip-- Stay away from nVidia graphics cards, especially on laptops if you want to run an open source system on it. -- Matthieu Herrb Can you point some good manufacturers, please? Yes, I'd like to see some pointers also. I recall that there was discussion (might've been on linux kernel) a while ago about a partially-open video card. Why doesn't the community support that? I recall that price was a factor in lack of uptake. Seems to me that opensource is farsical if it runs on closesource hardware. So where's the opensource hardware? Seems like the new world order isn't going to allow that. The trend in hardware looks like a race to keep control. Seems like we are going to be paying for the hardware but not owning; instead leasing. Or am I behind the times and there's salvation from some beneficent hardware maker in Taiwan?
Re: How to disable IPv6?
On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 14:39:39 -0500 STeve Andre' wrote: You are free of course to make mods, but please understand that you are on your own for them. I suppose it could also be said that if Ha, yeah, I feel so alone. you need help in turning ipv6 off, you shouldn't--learn first how So you don't know, but couldn't resist the reply (^:
Re: How to disable IPv6?
On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 15:28:09 -0500 STeve Andre' wrote: mostly a waste of time, except for the educational aspects of what not to do. Thanks for the nice story. I get a kick out of how far folks here go out of their way not to help people out. Instead offering up non-sequitars, etc. Come on admit it, you don't know how to disable IPv6. Why does everyone place so much trust in OpenBSD when the kernel seems to be a mystery to most here with constant warnings about not fiddling with it Curiouser and curiouser.
Re: How to disable IPv6?
On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 12:57:58 -0800 Johan Beisser wrote: You could also do more digging around yourself. I'd say that applies to you, not me. (^:
Re: How to disable IPv6?
On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 17:01:34 -0500 Ted Unangst wrote: Other than adding rhubbell to the list of people who probably broke it themselves, not really. Nothing's broken here. Hope you didn't strain a muscle jumping to conclusions. (^: Well nothing other than the pervasiveness of IPv6 into every nook and cranny with no apparent way to shut it off by pulling one switch. Also looking back I see the question was ignored before. I can figure it out with enough time. But guess I thought there was a community here that would share the secret incantations. Apparently there's unity with out the comm.
Re: How to disable IPv6?
On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 22:52:35 +0200 Jussi Peltola wrote: ipv6. The question is: do they care? Not sure how care plays into this. A simple question that the folks here would rather not answer but instead would rather meander about.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 17:08:36 -0500 Ted Unangst wrote: More than I've ever spent on all the computers I've ever written software with. How much would that be? Ballpark. Doesn't seem like it would be very much. Seems like you're just hand-waving without real numbers. Wikipedia has a money-raised thermometer on their site from time-to-time and they're raising millions.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 21:30:28 +0100 Matthieu Herrb wrote: On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 9:02 PM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: Yes, I'd like to see some pointers also. I recall that there was discussion (might've been on linux kernel) a while ago about a partially-open video card. Why doesn't the community support that? You mean http://www.opengraphics.org ? What makes you say that? How did *you* contribute? Why did I say that? Let's take a poll on this list of how many people are using one of those cards? Or any list, anywhere. I have not contributed to it in anyway. But why is that relevant? Can you explain? And how did you contribute? I recall that price was a factor in lack of uptake. Seems to me that opensource is farsical if it runs on closesource hardware. So where's the opensource hardware? Seems like the new world order isn't going to allow that. The trend in hardware looks like a race to keep control. Seems like we are going to be paying for the hardware but not owning; instead leasing. Or am I behind the times and there's salvation from some beneficent hardware maker in Taiwan? Making hardware is a lot more difficult than writing software. So it takes more resources and more skills. This is probably why there aren't so many of them. You're saying the barrier to entry is too high? I'm not expert but I don't believe that is why. There are other barriers. I'd recommend you read the wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_hardware_and_FOSS I think I may have read that a while ago...I'll look.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 18:14:00 -0500 bofh wrote: Come back and talk when you've bought one for yourself, and donated another to the project. Gee, ok. What have you contributed to it? You don't want to converse. Fine by me.
Re: How to disable IPv6?
On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 15:01:06 -0800 Johan Beisser wrote: Feeding the troll, sorry. Hi, fresh from high school? I gave you the file where GENERIC for all kernels is configured. Apparently you don't care enough to even read the thread. But it's ok, I don't care if you care or not. But thanks at least for trying to help.
Re: How to disable IPv6?
On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 17:26:36 -0600 Marco Peereboom wrote: You are a sphincter of epic proportions. Sphincter's pretty important. So thanks! Le me turn on my care meter, oh look at that -10 on the 0 to 1 scale. Also looking back I see the question was ignored before. I can figure it out with enough time. But guess I thought there was a community here that would share the secret incantations. Apparently there's unity with out the comm. No this community isn't about helping beggars and other dogshit. This community is about developing code that doesn't suck. Fuck off troll. Jeez, go get some fresh air or something. And please just ignore my posts if you care that much.
Re: How to disable IPv6?
On Sat, 05 Dec 2009 13:10:27 -0800 Allie Daneman wrote: man ifconfig...is a quick and easy way to disable inet6 on any interface. Beyond that I'm thinking sysctl, did you peruse around before posting ? It's not that simple. Applications still try IPv6 even when it's disabled in the kernel and there's no vestige of it for ifconfig to even find. So the problem is that there are apps I need to rebuild but I presumed that there might be a simple way to disable from a top-level makefile or the like.
Re: How to disable IPv6?
On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 14:59:53 -0800 Philip Guenther wrote: On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 11:25 AM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: I have disabled IPv6 in the kernel (via top-level GENERIC) but I can't see what other places it needs to be disabled for other applications. Needs to be disabled ...to accomplish what goal? Saving of disk space? Elimination of code complexity? Ignoring of IPv6 packets that are received? Something else? I presumed that applications would be written so that if there's no support for a protocol family in the kernel that the app would be smart enough to avoid using that family. Doesn't seem unreasonable. Depending on what you're trying to accomplish, putting up -inet6 in your /etc/hostname.* files may be sufficient. It seems that may help some but some apps are still not aware enough. Is it enabled per-application or is there some magic in a top-level Makefile somewhere? This IPv6 is like Whak-A-Mole. Or is it just so pervasive now that it cannot be disabled? I don't have a need to partake in the IPv6 research right now. Sounds like you would prefer if the presence of IPv6 wasn't making the code more complex. If so, the answer is no, it cannot be disabled in that way. Thanks for the assist. To me it's simply I don't need IPv6, I don't use IPv6. I don't want to see any errors from applications that want IPv6. Why isn't IPX in the kernel and everywhere else? Or AppleTalk or Yes I know IPv6 is the future. But I can wait. I've yet to see a good answer of why it's on by default in a lot of places. Is it to shake it out to find the issues? That's fine but to force it is not fine. It should be opt-in not opt-out just like most everything.
Re: How to disable IPv6?
On Sat, 05 Dec 2009 18:08:30 -0500 Brynet wrote: Not sure how care plays into this. A simple question that the folks here would rather not answer but instead would rather meander about. Well you're especially chipper, now instead of whining on mailing lists.. how about you try helping yourself? A little sensitive? Whining? http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvsm=124414310527723w=2 http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.c#rev1.216 http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=ifconfigmanpath=OpenBSD+Currentarch=i386format=html The issue is that many apps aren't aware enough to notice that the kernel has no support for a protocol family and they continue to try to use it anyway. It would be nice if those things above took care of all that. Thanks for the links I had seen them. Feeling better now? next time.. for a successful troll.. at least pretend to do some research. Troll? That what you call someone that asks a question you can't answer? (^: Who's the whiner? But at least you care. Sniff, sniff. Here's a tissue, everybody gets one. And here I thought OpenBSDers were a hardy bunch, sure doesn't take much to get some of you into a tizzy. (^: Thanks for the tissue, I'll use it on my sphincter of epic proportions.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 19:10:19 -0500 bofh wrote: On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:54 PM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 18:14:00 -0500 bofh wrote: Come back and talk when you've bought one for yourself, and donated another to the project. Gee, ok. What have you contributed to it? You don't want to converse. Fine by me. You're a moron right? Since when I did I say I contributed to it? You're the one claiming it doesn't cost much. And yet, you didn't contribute. And you want to see it succeed. Seems that you like others to do the hard work, and you can just armchair quarterback right? The sensitive type, eh?
Re: How to disable IPv6?
Yeah you said that already. On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 19:17:28 -0600 Marco Peereboom wrote: fuck off troll On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 04:24:42PM -0800, rhubbell wrote: On Sat, 05 Dec 2009 18:08:30 -0500 Brynet wrote: Not sure how care plays into this. A simple question that the folks here would rather not answer but instead would rather meander about. Well you're especially chipper, now instead of whining on mailing lists.. how about you try helping yourself? A little sensitive? Whining? http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvsm=124414310527723w=2 http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.c#rev1.216 http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=ifconfigmanpath=OpenBSD+Currentarch=i386format=html The issue is that many apps aren't aware enough to notice that the kernel has no support for a protocol family and they continue to try to use it anyway. It would be nice if those things above took care of all that. Thanks for the links I had seen them. Feeling better now? next time.. for a successful troll.. at least pretend to do some research. Troll? That what you call someone that asks a question you can't answer? (^: Who's the whiner? But at least you care. Sniff, sniff. Here's a tissue, everybody gets one. And here I thought OpenBSDers were a hardy bunch, sure doesn't take much to get some of you into a tizzy. (^: Thanks for the tissue, I'll use it on my sphincter of epic proportions.
Re: Open Source hardware (Re: can't get vesa @ 1280x800 or nv)
Another sensitive type. Guess there are always a few on every list. On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 19:17:14 -0600 Marco Peereboom wrote: fuck off troll On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 04:26:49PM -0800, rhubbell wrote: On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 19:10:19 -0500 bofh wrote: On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:54 PM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 18:14:00 -0500 bofh wrote: Come back and talk when you've bought one for yourself, and donated another to the project. Gee, ok. What have you contributed to it? You don't want to converse. Fine by me. You're a moron right? Since when I did I say I contributed to it? You're the one claiming it doesn't cost much. And yet, you didn't contribute. And you want to see it succeed. Seems that you like others to do the hard work, and you can just armchair quarterback right? The sensitive type, eh?
Re: How to disable IPv6?
On Sun, 6 Dec 2009 03:07:03 +0100 Michiel van Baak wrote: Did you even bother to look at a tcpdump when you are running on a kernel without ipv6 support? Is there any ipv6 traffic when running on a kernel without ipv6 ? Again re-read the thread if you need to. Can read the reply to P. Geunther You blame us for a lot of stuff while you did not do anything to show us where the problem is. Funny, no, not blaming anyone for anything. Never play blame game. What's the point? But go ahead if you want. The question seemed simple enough to me, if you can't give an answer, no problem.
Re: How to disable IPv6?
On Sun, 6 Dec 2009 02:07:00 + Jacob Meuser wrote: finally you say something that I can relate to. But couldn't resist, eh? (^:
Re: Security via the NSA?
On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 14:45:32 + (UTC) Christian Weisgerber wrote: Marco Peereboom sl...@peereboom.us wrote: Never mind no one verifying any of the keys or anything else that SSL spits out. I am talking to you firefox! That's pretty strange coming from the guy who complained the loudest about recent Firefox releases that actually try to enforce the chain of trust for certificates. The chain of trust, as-in ball and chain? Maybe it should be called the chicane of trust.
Re: OT: Have you hugged your local OpenBSD dev lately?
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:37:36 +1100 Aaron Mason wrote: On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 2:06 PM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:02:51 +1100 Definitely not missing the point. Maybe you missed mine. Not worrying because you trust everything about OpenBSD and everyone that's worked on it and every package you've installed and every piece of hardware you've installed, etc., etc. It's naive to point elsewhere and say see, they're not secure. For example should I trust you and the other tooters just because you insist OpenBSD's secure? That's a good point. However a story told on the testimonials page is a good reason not to take our word for it, because it's been demonstrated. A redhat server rooted but OpenBSD servers left after Maybe an OpenBSD tooter was the rooter? being probed is quite a feat. A P133 w/ 64mb of RAM being floodpinged by 900 hosts that only got a little slower from it is also a considerable achievement. Agreed. How would you know if you've been compromised? If it's the crown jewels it may be worth it to remain undetected, right? Saying it's not possible to avoid detection is naive. Usually when a machine is compromised, it is then used to attack other How much is an exploit worth? If you're going to reveal the fact you've compromised a system, it's not worth that much. sites - that would be detected. A large sudden data transfer from a machine with the company's crown jewels on it would be a pretty good indicator as well. If the log files are sent offsite - a very wise move I believe - they could contain traces of the attack as well. I'm not naive though - you would actually have to be watching these, and if you're not, today's a good day to start. Hope this helps. -- Aaron Mason - Programmer, open source addict I've taken my software vows - for beta or for worse
Re: OT: Have you hugged your local OpenBSD dev lately?
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:31:47 +1100 Rod Whitworth wrote: On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 19:06:53 -0800, rhubbell wrote: 8 snipped for brevity. You miss the point - the reason we toot that particular horn is that you don't have to worry about those sorts of things (well, apart from Definitely not missing the point. Maybe you missed mine. Not worrying because you trust everything about OpenBSD and everyone that's worked on it and every package you've installed and every piece of hardware you've installed, etc., etc. It's naive to point elsewhere and say see, they're not secure. For example should I trust you and the other tooters just because you insist OpenBSD's secure? No. That isn't the point really. It's very rare for OpenBSD to have exploits against it but I don't hear any of the developers saying that How would you know though? Your argument has been compromised because it's presuming the exploit's detectable. it is impregnable, just that it's as good as they can make it for their own peace of mind. They are continually re-reading the source and using various tools to do audits to help make the code correct. Correct code is a foundation of security. As you are new here, you may not yet know that OpenBSD doesn't give a stuff about market share and is developed by the devs for their own use and if someone else likes it, it's a case of Here's the ftp server or you can buy a CD and if it suits your purpose, that's fine. If it doesn't then we won't cry when you leave. I'm finding it amusing that when folks on the list ask a question answered in the docs it's always RTFM. But when not asking for documented info it comes flwoing out. (^: That has suited me for about 8 years and it has guarded quite a few crown jewels for my clients in that time. Guarded by which definition? Meaning as far as you know it was never compromised? Oh, and I'm a retired IBM Linux instructor so I have a pretty good insight into the relative merits of this community vs that one. Too vague for me. The point of most chuckling about others (distros,versions, dev teams) silly actions is that the OpenBSD community doesn't suffer the stupidity du jour. Recent sightings elsewhere are binary blobs, proprietary drivers and the really stupid Debian key messup. Just a bit of Schaudenfreude really when you consider that their woe is self-inflicted. Right so my point is that I still find it interesting that these threads about look at them are just some hand-waving. Look over there, look how they are, hahaha. That to me is a red flag to be more vigilant and to not look over there, but they seem to be trying to distract from vigilance.
Re: OT: Have you hugged your local OpenBSD dev lately?
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 08:22:45 -0500 Brad Tilley wrote: On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 10:06 PM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: It's naive to point elsewhere and say see, they're not secure. Other similar systems are not as secure and that has been objectively demonstrated. Here's one example. See the chart at the top of page Ok, since you say it's objective it must be.
Re: OT: Have you hugged your local OpenBSD dev lately?
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:22:08 +0100 soko.tica wrote: On 11/20/09, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: Definitely not missing the point. Maybe you missed mine. Not worrying because you trust everything about OpenBSD and everyone that's worked on it and every package you've installed and every piece of hardware you've installed, etc., etc. It's naive to point elsewhere and say see, they're not secure. For example should I trust you and the other tooters just because you insist OpenBSD's secure? OpenBSD's security isn't affected at all if we, as users, insist on it. I insist on things all the time.
Re: OT: Have you hugged your local OpenBSD dev lately?
On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:00:08 +1100 SJP Lists wrote: 2009/11/20 rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com: Definitely not missing the point. Maybe you missed mine. Not worrying because you trust everything about OpenBSD and everyone that's worked on it and every package you've installed and every piece of hardware you've installed, etc., etc. It's naive to point elsewhere and say see, they're not secure. For example should I trust you and the other tooters just because you insist OpenBSD's secure? It's not about absolute trust, or faith, it's about playing the odds. You can choose a OS built with security as the primary focus at one extreme, or one that's insecure by default at the other. No OS will be absolutely secure, but at least one tries to be. I know.
Re: setpci problem writing
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:17:39 -0800 patrick keshishian wrote: On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 9:05 PM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: Forgot the version info: OpenBSD 4.6 Forgot to mention 4.6-stable setpci version 3.1.2 Is there a tool like strace or truss here? ktrace(1) And from ktrace I find that setpci is getting errno 19 from ioctl (Operation not supported by device) so I started to look into permissions but all seems fine. Maybe there's another device that setpci should be using to do writes. Looking back I see in a long-ago-post that someone used pcitweak but I couldn't get that to build in xenocara.
setpci problem writing
Can't sort out what the problem is here. setpci reads fine but is unable to write. /dev/pci is a link to /dev/pci0 pci0 is rw for root setpci -vG -s 2:04.0 3c.b Trying method 8..using /dev/pci...OK Decided to use obsd-device Scanning bus 00 for devices... Scanning bus 02 for devices... Scanning bus 00 for devices... pcilib: Bus 00 seen twice (firmware bug). Ignored. Scanning bus 00 for devices... pcilib: Bus 00 seen twice (firmware bug). Ignored. Scanning bus 01 for devices... :02:04.0 @3c = 0b setpci -vG -s 2:04.0 3c.b=0xf Trying method 8..using /dev/pci...OK Decided to use obsd-device Scanning bus 00 for devices... Scanning bus 02 for devices... Scanning bus 00 for devices... pcilib: Bus 00 seen twice (firmware bug). Ignored. Scanning bus 00 for devices... pcilib: Bus 00 seen twice (firmware bug). Ignored. Scanning bus 01 for devices... setpci: obsd_write: ioctl(PCIOCWRITE) failed :02:04.0 @3c 0f setpci -vG -s 2:04.0 3c.b Trying method 8..using /dev/pci...OK Decided to use obsd-device Scanning bus 00 for devices... Scanning bus 02 for devices... Scanning bus 00 for devices... pcilib: Bus 00 seen twice (firmware bug). Ignored. Scanning bus 00 for devices... pcilib: Bus 00 seen twice (firmware bug). Ignored. Scanning bus 01 for devices... :02:04.0 @3c = 0b
Re: setpci problem writing
Forgot the version info: OpenBSD 4.6 setpci version 3.1.2 Is there a tool like strace or truss here? On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 18:55:25 -0800 rhubbell wrote: Can't sort out what the problem is here. setpci reads fine but is unable to write. /dev/pci is a link to /dev/pci0 pci0 is rw for root setpci -vG -s 2:04.0 3c.b Trying method 8..using /dev/pci...OK Decided to use obsd-device Scanning bus 00 for devices... Scanning bus 02 for devices... Scanning bus 00 for devices... pcilib: Bus 00 seen twice (firmware bug). Ignored. Scanning bus 00 for devices... pcilib: Bus 00 seen twice (firmware bug). Ignored. Scanning bus 01 for devices... :02:04.0 @3c = 0b setpci -vG -s 2:04.0 3c.b=0xf Trying method 8..using /dev/pci...OK Decided to use obsd-device Scanning bus 00 for devices... Scanning bus 02 for devices... Scanning bus 00 for devices... pcilib: Bus 00 seen twice (firmware bug). Ignored. Scanning bus 00 for devices... pcilib: Bus 00 seen twice (firmware bug). Ignored. Scanning bus 01 for devices... setpci: obsd_write: ioctl(PCIOCWRITE) failed :02:04.0 @3c 0f setpci -vG -s 2:04.0 3c.b Trying method 8..using /dev/pci...OK Decided to use obsd-device Scanning bus 00 for devices... Scanning bus 02 for devices... Scanning bus 00 for devices... pcilib: Bus 00 seen twice (firmware bug). Ignored. Scanning bus 00 for devices... pcilib: Bus 00 seen twice (firmware bug). Ignored. Scanning bus 01 for devices... :02:04.0 @3c = 0b
Re: OT: Have you hugged your local OpenBSD dev lately?
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:02:51 +1100 Aaron Mason wrote: On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 5:40 PM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:05:04 -0800 Bryan wrote: So glad we don't have these kinds of issues... New around here, but I'm noticing a lot of tooting of our own horn...so to speak. With all the possible vectors for compromising a system that are available it just sounds naive to keep touting how secure this or that is. Do you own the physical network that your bits traverse? Do you guard your computer 24-7? And on and on. You miss the point - the reason we toot that particular horn is that you don't have to worry about those sorts of things (well, apart from Definitely not missing the point. Maybe you missed mine. Not worrying because you trust everything about OpenBSD and everyone that's worked on it and every package you've installed and every piece of hardware you've installed, etc., etc. It's naive to point elsewhere and say see, they're not secure. For example should I trust you and the other tooters just because you insist OpenBSD's secure? 24-7 guarding, that's an entirely separate problem that has nothing to do with OpenBSD or any OS for that matter). People report that they can get a novice colleague to set up an OpenBSD box using just the CD, copy the company's crown jewels to it and leave it for a year, knowing that it has never been compromised. How would you know if you've been compromised? If it's the crown jewels it may be worth it to remain undetected, right? Saying it's not possible to avoid detection is naive. I will say the Fedora has bigger issues than allowing users to install pkgs. I just went through trying out Fedora 11 and it was a nightmare to me. Doing simple things with the network has been made so painful that clawing out my eyes started to seem like relief. But maybe all flavors are going this way. Part of the never ending bloat. OpenBSD is one of a few OSes that aren't taking this path. If you want the bloat, you add it yourself - it isn't included out of the box. Right, it's why I am trying it out. I used to run Ubuntu on my firewall - I found it easier to edit /etc/network/interfaces manually than to use GNOME's retarded GUI network config tool. I fired up OpenBSD 4.5 and haven't looked back. Yep, been there, used ubuntu for a while, recently tried Fedora11 and now here I am.
Re: OT: Have you hugged your local OpenBSD dev lately?
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:05:04 -0800 Bryan wrote: So glad we don't have these kinds of issues... New around here, but I'm noticing a lot of tooting of our own horn...so to speak. With all the possible vectors for compromising a system that are available it just sounds naive to keep touting how secure this or that is. Do you own the physical network that your bits traverse? Do you guard your computer 24-7? And on and on. I will say the Fedora has bigger issues than allowing users to install pkgs. I just went through trying out Fedora 11 and it was a nightmare to me. Doing simple things with the network has been made so painful that clawing out my eyes started to seem like relief. But maybe all flavors are going this way. Part of the never ending bloat.
Re: Adding 3Com CardBus card
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:39:56 -0500 Nick Guenther wrote: On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:11 PM, rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:52:48 -0800 J.C. Roberts wrote: On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 12:45:24 -0800 rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: I'm new to OpenBSD and so far so good. One thing I am floundering around on is that I cannot get my 3Com card working. You're new, so you might want to read the following: http://www.openbsd.org/mail.html [quote] Include important information Don't waste everyone's time with a hopelessly incomplete question. No one other than you has the information needed to resolve your problem, it is better to provide more information than needed than one detail too little. Any question should include at least the version of OpenBSD (i.e., 3.2-stable, 3.3-current as of July 20, 2003). Any hardware related questions should mention the platform (i.e., sparc, alpha, etc.), and provide a full dmesg(8). [/quote] Ok. I guess once I'm here for a while I can waste everyone's time with nasty analogies (see other thrd about platform of choice) (^: The reason for that last bit about providing a full dmesg is the full dmesg shows lots of important details. In a sense, you can think of the full demeg as showing a picture of your full environment. Yes, sure does. I guess I got lucky this time and picked the right lines to include from dmesg. Not really. It's really important to know what your processor is, and in some cases if you're running APM or ACPI. There can be a lot of variables involved in a hardware problem (think: IRQ conflicts) and and after years on this list I've seen plenty of cases where someone (more than once myself) has thought a problem simple when it was actually anything but. Before I have anyone else solve my issues I'd like to understand more about how the kernel build is deciding how to handle hardware. For example I see references to the TI 1620 in the src but the existence of something else seems to have made the kernel decide that this slot shouldn't be enabled. Also I thought that IRQ conflicts were an ISA, and old, problem. Is it still a problem? Welcome to OpenBSD, though! Do make yourself at home, only Theo bites. Thanks. -Nick
Re: Adding 3Com CardBus card
On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 04:26:44 -0800
J.C. Roberts wrote:
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 17:11:47 -0800 rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:52:48 -0800
J.C. Roberts wrote:
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 12:45:24 -0800 rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com
wrote:
I'm new to OpenBSD and so far so good.
One thing I am floundering around on is that I cannot get my 3Com
card working.
You're new, so you might want to read the following:
http://www.openbsd.org/mail.html
[quote]
Include important information
Don't waste everyone's time with a hopelessly incomplete
question. No one other than you has the information needed to
resolve your problem, it is better to provide more information than
needed than one detail too little. Any question should include at
least the version of OpenBSD (i.e., 3.2-stable, 3.3-current as
of July 20, 2003). Any hardware related questions should mention
the platform (i.e., sparc, alpha, etc.), and provide a full dmesg
(8). [/quote]
Ok. I guess once I'm here for a while I can waste everyone's time with
nasty analogies (see other thrd about platform of choice) (^:
Bob Beck{,se} is a comedic genius!
You might not realize it, but in said time wasting thread you actually
learned something memorable and valuable. Of course, the downside is
the next time you consider using non-x86 hardware in production, you'll
remember the long term relation prospects of having sex with someone in
a coma. But at least you remembered.
Remembered what?
(^;
The reason for that last bit about providing a full dmesg is the
full dmesg shows lots of important details. In a sense, you can
think of the full demeg as showing a picture of your full
environment.
Yes, sure does. I guess I got lucky this time and picked the right
lines to include from dmesg.
The only reason why you got lucky is because I got lucky. --You never
want to count on other people getting lucky... with corpses, coma
patients, or otherwise. Your long term relationship prospects of getting
help on misc@ depends on you remembering to post your full dmesg.
More seriously, most people will see the partial or missing dmesg in a
request for help, and just ignore the message. The *only* reason why I
didn't ignore you is, you said you were new.
Seems reasonable.
The device 3CCFE575CT exists already and I added the entries for
3CXFE575CT.
The product model number is not always indicative of the chips used
inside the product. But in your case, this is irrelevant.
Right. According to notes in the source they were same except by name
and how you physically connect the cable.
Though it's encouraging to see you digging into the source for your
own answers in your first week of using OpenBSD, it's a bummer that you
needed to do it. Typically, if you are using supported hardware,
OpenBSD just works. Of course, the conundrum is, for hardware to be
supported in OpenBSD three things need to happen; (1) hardware
documentation must be available, (2) a developer needs access to the
hardware, and (3) a developer needs to find the time/inclination to do
the work.
Right. This hardware combo has worked on windows and linux. So my
guess is that it might just need some sorting out.
cbb1 at pci1 dev 4 function 0 TI PCI1620 CardBus rev 0x01: apic
2 int 16 (irq 11), CardBus support disabled
cbb2 at pci1 dev 4 function 1 TI PCI1620 CardBus rev 0x01: apic
2 int 16 (irq 11), CardBus support disabled
Take a look inside /usr/src/sys/dev/pci/pccbvar.h
HINT: The TI PCI1620 is not listed.
In short, there might not be anything wrong with your 3com card,
but instead, the PCMCIA/CardBus controller (i.e. slot) is not
supported.
Ah, ok, so looks like I am tsol, thanks for the help.
FWIW, am on 4.6-stable, have been using OpenBSD for one week.
You may, or may not, be TSOL... --You've got two options.
(1) The driver(s) for the other TI PCI1xxx CardBus chipsets *might*
actually work with your PCI1620. But since no one has ever tried it,
there's no way to claim it is supported. You would need to add the
PCI device ID so it is recognized.
Okay I hadn't done that. I will do that and see what happens.
Adding support for the PCI1620 might be dead simple, or it might be
somewhat more involved. Either way, if you make the effort, you will
most likely get help.
This is good to know.
NOTE: Finding the documentation for the device is always a good start.
(2) Offer to provide one of these PCMCIA/CardBus devices to one of the
developers so support can be added. OpenBSD has a long history of great
human beings sending gifts of hardware to each other, because without
hardware, code doesn't happen.
Right, but I only have one of these.
Alternatively, if you find an interested developer and can set up
remote access to the machine
Adding 3Com CardBus card
I'm new to OpenBSD and so far so good. One thing I am floundering around on is that I cannot get my 3Com card working. cbb1 at pci1 dev 4 function 0 TI PCI1620 CardBus rev 0x01: apic 2 int 16 (irq 11), CardBus support disabled cbb2 at pci1 dev 4 function 1 TI PCI1620 CardBus rev 0x01: apic 2 int 16 (irq 11), CardBus support disabled I tried adding xl0 using config -e /bsd but that didn't help I tried adding cbb0 but concluded that I'm floundering on this. I even modified the kernel files for this device since there's already one there that's different only by name. The device 3CCFE575CT exists already and I added the entries for 3CXFE575CT. (they differ only in the connector, the X = xjack, C = cable dongle) What am I missing? All the searches turned up threads on this that never showed a resolution. Maybe I am tsol with this card, laptop combo?
Re: Adding 3Com CardBus card
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:52:48 -0800 J.C. Roberts wrote: On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 12:45:24 -0800 rhubbell rhubb...@ihubbell.com wrote: I'm new to OpenBSD and so far so good. One thing I am floundering around on is that I cannot get my 3Com card working. You're new, so you might want to read the following: http://www.openbsd.org/mail.html [quote] Include important information Don't waste everyone's time with a hopelessly incomplete question. No one other than you has the information needed to resolve your problem, it is better to provide more information than needed than one detail too little. Any question should include at least the version of OpenBSD (i.e., 3.2-stable, 3.3-current as of July 20, 2003). Any hardware related questions should mention the platform (i.e., sparc, alpha, etc.), and provide a full dmesg(8). [/quote] Ok. I guess once I'm here for a while I can waste everyone's time with nasty analogies (see other thrd about platform of choice) (^: The reason for that last bit about providing a full dmesg is the full dmesg shows lots of important details. In a sense, you can think of the full demeg as showing a picture of your full environment. Yes, sure does. I guess I got lucky this time and picked the right lines to include from dmesg. The device 3CCFE575CT exists already and I added the entries for 3CXFE575CT. The product model number is not always indicative of the chips used inside the product. But in your case, this is irrelevant. Right. According to notes in the source they were same except by name and how you physically connect the cable. cbb1 at pci1 dev 4 function 0 TI PCI1620 CardBus rev 0x01: apic 2 int 16 (irq 11), CardBus support disabled cbb2 at pci1 dev 4 function 1 TI PCI1620 CardBus rev 0x01: apic 2 int 16 (irq 11), CardBus support disabled Take a look inside /usr/src/sys/dev/pci/pccbvar.h HINT: The TI PCI1620 is not listed. In short, there might not be anything wrong with your 3com card, but instead, the PCMCIA/CardBus controller (i.e. slot) is not supported. Ah, ok, so looks like I am tsol, thanks for the help. FWIW, am on 4.6-stable, have been using OpenBSD for one week.
