Re: Should 80MB of RAM be enough for kernel relinking on i386?
On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 17:27:30 +0100
"Patrick Harper" wrote:
> If the situation isn't going to change anytime soon then I have some
> diffs for INSTALL.i386 and INSTALL.amd64. The latter has not specified
> disk requirements, I guess since anyone who owns an amd64 system will
> very likely be using a disk big enough for X, so I figured that the
> same would apply to any user of an i386 system that meets the proposed
> minimum RAM. These are based on the 2021-09-21 snapshot versions.
>
> --- INSTALL.i386.txtWed Sep 22 16:52:38 2021
> +++ INSTALL.i386_newWed Sep 22 16:51:17 2021
> @@ -201,10 +201,7 @@ OpenBSD/i386 7.0 supports most SMP (Symmetrical
> MultiP
> systems. To support SMP operation, a separate SMP kernel (bsd.mp)
> is included with the installation file sets.
>
> -The minimal configuration to install the system is 32MB of RAM and
> -at least 250MB of disk space to accommodate the `base' set.
> -To install the entire system, at least 600MB of disk are required,
> -and to run X or compile the system, more RAM is recommended.
> +The minimal configuration to install the system is 512MB of RAM.
>
> Please refer to the website for a full list of supported hardware:
> https://www.openbsd.org/i386.html
Hello.
I have Soekris net4801 gateway/firewall and it only has 128Mb of RAM.
I usually upgrade to -current by putting the CF card into a different
machine, since writing to CF card is slow on Soekris, but tonight I
upgraded to -current using the box itself and timed how long it took to
relink the kernel - 25 minutes.
It has 256Mb of swap. Eh, 259.9M apparently.
After-reboot relinking is currently disabled until I figure out
what to put in the new bsd.re-config to change flags for
wd to 0x0ff0 automatically, no luck yet.
Soekris dmesg:
OpenBSD 7.0 (GENERIC) #203: Wed Sep 22 19:24:38 MDT 2021
dera...@i386.openbsd.org:/usr/src/sys/arch/i386/compile/GENERIC
real mem = 133709824 (127MB)
avail mem = 114921472 (109MB)
random: good seed from bootblocks
mpath0 at root
scsibus0 at mpath0: 256 targets
mainbus0 at root
bios0 at mainbus0: date 20/80/03, BIOS32 rev. 0 @ 0xf7840
pcibios0 at bios0: rev 2.0 @ 0xf/0x1
pcibios0: pcibios_get_intr_routing - function not supported
pcibios0: PCI IRQ Routing information unavailable.
pcibios0: PCI bus #0 is the last bus
bios0: ROM list: 0xc8000/0x9000
cpu0 at mainbus0: (uniprocessor)
cpu0: Geode(TM) Integrated Processor by National Semi ("Geode by NSC"
586-class) 267 MHz, 05-04-00
cpu0: FPU,TSC,MSR,CX8,CMOV,MMX
cpu0: TSC disabled
pci0 at mainbus0 bus 0: configuration mode 1 (no bios)
pchb0 at pci0 dev 0 function 0 "Cyrix GXm PCI" rev 0x00
sis0 at pci0 dev 6 function 0 "NS DP83815" rev 0x00, DP83816A: irq 10, address
00:00:24:c3:54:68
nsphyter0 at sis0 phy 0: DP83815 10/100 PHY, rev. 1
sis1 at pci0 dev 7 function 0 "NS DP83815" rev 0x00, DP83816A: irq 10, address
00:00:24:c3:54:69
nsphyter1 at sis1 phy 0: DP83815 10/100 PHY, rev. 1
sis2 at pci0 dev 8 function 0 "NS DP83815" rev 0x00, DP83816A: irq 10, address
00:00:24:c3:54:6a
nsphyter2 at sis2 phy 0: DP83815 10/100 PHY, rev. 1
ral0 at pci0 dev 10 function 0 "Ralink RT2860" rev 0x00: irq 11, address
00:1d:6a:0e:80:cd
ral0: MAC/BBP RT2860 (rev 0x0101), RF RT2820 (MIMO 2T3R)
ral1 at pci0 dev 14 function 0 "Ralink RT2560" rev 0x01: irq 5, address
00:13:d3:00:9f:7a
ral1: MAC/BBP RT2560 (rev 0x04), RF RT2525
gscpcib0 at pci0 dev 18 function 0 "NS SC1100 ISA" rev 0x00
gpio0 at gscpcib0: 64 pins
"NS SC1100 SMI" rev 0x00 at pci0 dev 18 function 1 not configured
pciide0 at pci0 dev 18 function 2 "NS SCx200 IDE" rev 0x01: DMA, channel 0
wired to compatibility, channel 1 wired to compatibility
wd0 at pciide0 channel 0 drive 0:
wd0: 1-sector PIO, LBA48, 3811MB, 7806960 sectors
wd0(pciide0:0:0): using PIO mode 4
geodesc0 at pci0 dev 18 function 5 "NS SC1100 X-Bus" rev 0x00: iid 6 revision 3
wdstatus 0
ohci0 at pci0 dev 19 function 0 "Compaq USB OpenHost" rev 0x08: irq 9, version
1.0, legacy support
isa0 at gscpcib0
isadma0 at isa0
com0 at isa0 port 0x3f8/8 irq 4: ns16550a, 16 byte fifo
com0: console
com1 at isa0 port 0x2f8/8 irq 3: ns16550a, 16 byte fifo
pckbc0 at isa0 port 0x60/5 irq 1 irq 12
pckbd0 at pckbc0 (kbd slot)
wskbd0 at pckbd0: console keyboard
pcppi0 at isa0 port 0x61
spkr0 at pcppi0
nsclpcsio0 at isa0 port 0x2e/2: NSC PC87366 rev 9: GPIO VLM TMS
gpio1 at nsclpcsio0: 29 pins
gscsio0 at isa0 port 0x15c/2: SC1100 SIO rev 1:
npx0 at isa0 port 0xf0/16: reported by CPUID; using exception 16
usb0 at ohci0: USB revision 1.0
uhub0 at usb0 configuration 1 interface 0 "Compaq OHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00
addr 1
dt: 445 probes
vscsi0 at root
scsibus1 at vscsi0: 256 targets
softraid0 at root
scsibus2 at softraid0: 256 targets
root on wd0a (1f081011692bae0c.a) swap on wd0b dump on wd0b
Re: Should 80MB of RAM be enough for kernel relinking on i386?
If the situation isn't going to change anytime soon then I have some diffs for INSTALL.i386 and INSTALL.amd64. The latter has not specified disk requirements, I guess since anyone who owns an amd64 system will very likely be using a disk big enough for X, so I figured that the same would apply to any user of an i386 system that meets the proposed minimum RAM. These are based on the 2021-09-21 snapshot versions. --- INSTALL.i386.txtWed Sep 22 16:52:38 2021 +++ INSTALL.i386_newWed Sep 22 16:51:17 2021 @@ -201,10 +201,7 @@ OpenBSD/i386 7.0 supports most SMP (Symmetrical MultiP systems. To support SMP operation, a separate SMP kernel (bsd.mp) is included with the installation file sets. -The minimal configuration to install the system is 32MB of RAM and -at least 250MB of disk space to accommodate the `base' set. -To install the entire system, at least 600MB of disk are required, -and to run X or compile the system, more RAM is recommended. +The minimal configuration to install the system is 512MB of RAM. Please refer to the website for a full list of supported hardware: https://www.openbsd.org/i386.html --- INSTALL.amd64.txt Wed Sep 22 16:52:48 2021 +++ INSTALL.amd64_new Wed Sep 22 16:51:12 2021 @@ -202,6 +202,8 @@ is included with the installation file sets. OpenBSD/amd64 7.0 supports both UEFI/GPT booting and BIOS/MBR booting. +The minimal configuration to install the system is 512MB of RAM. + Please refer to the website for a full list of supported hardware. https://www.openbsd.org/amd64.html Patrick Harper
Re: Should 80MB of RAM be enough for kernel relinking on i386?
> Your swap is only 256MB. That seem too low. (We have walked away > from making it correspond to physical memory, but still, it seems > uncomfortably low). > > As well, /usr seems a bit large, leaving not much for /home. > > The autoallocation scheme might have made a less than perfect > decision here. I tried the same thing except for editing the partition layout to allow for 512M of swap: wd1*> p m OpenBSD area: 64-15662304; size: 7647.6M; free: 955.0M #size offset fstype [fsize bsize cpg] a: 1060.6M 64 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # / b: 512.0M 2172128swap c: 7647.6M0 unused d: 3072.0M 3220704 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /usr e: 2048.0M 9512128 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /home and 768M: wd1*> p m OpenBSD area: 64-15662304; size: 7647.6M; free: 699.0M #size offset fstype [fsize bsize cpg] a: 1060.6M 64 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # / b: 768.0M 2172128swap c: 7647.6M0 unused d: 3072.0M 3744992 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /usr e: 2048.0M 10036416 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /home ...and there's no practical difference, the system will just sit for half an hour, print one or two seg faults in that time and then reboot. memtest86 didn't print any errors so I'm assuming my memory is fine. I'd say x86 computers without INT 13h Extensions support in the BIOS are pretty much obsolete at this point given that nearly all of them are going to be a combo of very small memory (>128MB was very rare before 1998) and small disk (8.4GB limit).
Re: Should 80MB of RAM be enough for kernel relinking on i386?
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 08:48:54AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Otto Moerbeek wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 05:28:06PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> >
> > > The problem appears to be here:
> > >
> > > > wdc2 at pcmcia0 function 0 "TRANSCEND, TS8GCF133, " port 0x340/16: irq 3
> > > > wd1 at wdc2 channel 0 drive 0:
> > > > wd1: 1-sector PIO, LBA48, 7647MB, 15662304 sectors
> > > > wd1(wdc2:0:0): using BIOS timings
> > >
> > > > a: 1060.6M 64 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /
> > > > b: 256.0M 2172128swap
> > > > c: 7647.6M0 unused
> > > > d: 3072.0M 2696416 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /usr
> > > > e: 2048.0M 8987872 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 #
> > > > /home
> > >
> > > Your swap is only 256MB. That seem too low. (We have walked away from
> > > making it correspond to physical memory, but still, it seems
> > > uncomfortably low).
> > >
> > > As well, /usr seems a bit large, leaving not much for /home.
> > >
> > > The autoallocation scheme might have made a less than perfect decision
> > > here.
> > >
> >
> > Thhis is bassed on the "medium" allocation, swap, /usr and /home have
> > reached there max according to the table. We can make swap have a
> > alrager max and take more of the pie. What would be a good max size
> > for swap these days omn such a small disk?
>
> I suspect, but don't know, that 400MB would be enough for the link.
So how aboht this? allocate a bit more to swap and increase the max,
plus increase the max for /home.
Index: editor.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sbin/disklabel/editor.c,v
retrieving revision 1.368
diff -u -p -r1.368 editor.c
--- editor.c30 May 2021 19:02:30 - 1.368
+++ editor.c16 Jul 2021 12:14:27 -
@@ -103,9 +103,9 @@ struct space_allocation alloc_big[] = {
struct space_allocation alloc_medium[] = {
{ MEG(800), GIG(2), 5, "/" },
- { MEG(80), MEG(256), 10, "swap"},
- { MEG(1300), GIG(3), 78, "/usr"},
- { MEG(256), GIG(2), 7, "/home" }
+ { MEG(80), MEG(512), 20, "swap"},
+ { MEG(1300), GIG(3), 68, "/usr"},
+ { MEG(256), GIG(3), 7, "/home" }
};
struct space_allocation alloc_small[] = {
This produces:
vnd0*> p g
OpenBSD area: 0-15662305; size: 7.5G; free: 0.0G
#size offset fstype [fsize bsize cpg]
a: 1.0G0 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /
b: 0.5G 2172064swap
c: 7.5G0 unused
d: 3.0G 3220640 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /usr
e: 2.9G 9512096 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /home
-Otto
Re: Should 80MB of RAM be enough for kernel relinking on i386?
Otto Moerbeek wrote: > On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 05:28:06PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > The problem appears to be here: > > > > > wdc2 at pcmcia0 function 0 "TRANSCEND, TS8GCF133, " port 0x340/16: irq 3 > > > wd1 at wdc2 channel 0 drive 0: > > > wd1: 1-sector PIO, LBA48, 7647MB, 15662304 sectors > > > wd1(wdc2:0:0): using BIOS timings > > > > > a: 1060.6M 64 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # / > > > b: 256.0M 2172128swap > > > c: 7647.6M0 unused > > > d: 3072.0M 2696416 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /usr > > > e: 2048.0M 8987872 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /home > > > > Your swap is only 256MB. That seem too low. (We have walked away from > > making it correspond to physical memory, but still, it seems uncomfortably > > low). > > > > As well, /usr seems a bit large, leaving not much for /home. > > > > The autoallocation scheme might have made a less than perfect decision here. > > > > Thhis is bassed on the "medium" allocation, swap, /usr and /home have > reached there max according to the table. We can make swap have a > alrager max and take more of the pie. What would be a good max size > for swap these days omn such a small disk? I suspect, but don't know, that 400MB would be enough for the link.
Re: Should 80MB of RAM be enough for kernel relinking on i386?
Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2021-07-15, Otto Moerbeek wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 05:28:06PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > >> The problem appears to be here: > >> > >> > wdc2 at pcmcia0 function 0 "TRANSCEND, TS8GCF133, " port 0x340/16: irq 3 > >> > wd1 at wdc2 channel 0 drive 0: > >> > wd1: 1-sector PIO, LBA48, 7647MB, 15662304 sectors > >> > wd1(wdc2:0:0): using BIOS timings > >> > >> > a: 1060.6M 64 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # / > >> > b: 256.0M 2172128swap > >> > c: 7647.6M0 unused > >> > d: 3072.0M 2696416 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /usr > >> > e: 2048.0M 8987872 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /home > >> > >> Your swap is only 256MB. That seem too low. (We have walked away from > >> making it correspond to physical memory, but still, it seems uncomfortably > >> low). > >> > >> As well, /usr seems a bit large, leaving not much for /home. > >> > >> The autoallocation scheme might have made a less than perfect decision > >> here. > >> > > > > Thhis is bassed on the "medium" allocation, swap, /usr and /home have > > reached there max according to the table. We can make swap have a > > alrager max and take more of the pie. What would be a good max size > > for swap these days omn such a small disk? > > > > -Otto > > > > > > It depends on the RAM really, normally that space is better in /usr > so that upgrades don't break quite as easily... Swap allocation should not depend on available RAM. That outdated meme is silly, because it is impossible to come up with a reasonable calculation of how much memory a machine WOULD USE. Instead, we should just grab a piece of the disk, for swap. 256MB just seems too small. OTOH, machines like this should not be a priority for us.
Re: Should 80MB of RAM be enough for kernel relinking on i386?
On 2021-07-15, Otto Moerbeek wrote: > On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 05:28:06PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > >> The problem appears to be here: >> >> > wdc2 at pcmcia0 function 0 "TRANSCEND, TS8GCF133, " port 0x340/16: irq 3 >> > wd1 at wdc2 channel 0 drive 0: >> > wd1: 1-sector PIO, LBA48, 7647MB, 15662304 sectors >> > wd1(wdc2:0:0): using BIOS timings >> >> > a: 1060.6M 64 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # / >> > b: 256.0M 2172128swap >> > c: 7647.6M0 unused >> > d: 3072.0M 2696416 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /usr >> > e: 2048.0M 8987872 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /home >> >> Your swap is only 256MB. That seem too low. (We have walked away from >> making it correspond to physical memory, but still, it seems uncomfortably >> low). >> >> As well, /usr seems a bit large, leaving not much for /home. >> >> The autoallocation scheme might have made a less than perfect decision here. >> > > Thhis is bassed on the "medium" allocation, swap, /usr and /home have > reached there max according to the table. We can make swap have a > alrager max and take more of the pie. What would be a good max size > for swap these days omn such a small disk? > > -Otto > > It depends on the RAM really, normally that space is better in /usr so that upgrades don't break quite as easily...
Re: Should 80MB of RAM be enough for kernel relinking on i386?
On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 05:28:06PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > The problem appears to be here: > > > wdc2 at pcmcia0 function 0 "TRANSCEND, TS8GCF133, " port 0x340/16: irq 3 > > wd1 at wdc2 channel 0 drive 0: > > wd1: 1-sector PIO, LBA48, 7647MB, 15662304 sectors > > wd1(wdc2:0:0): using BIOS timings > > > a: 1060.6M 64 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # / > > b: 256.0M 2172128swap > > c: 7647.6M0 unused > > d: 3072.0M 2696416 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /usr > > e: 2048.0M 8987872 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /home > > Your swap is only 256MB. That seem too low. (We have walked away from > making it correspond to physical memory, but still, it seems uncomfortably > low). > > As well, /usr seems a bit large, leaving not much for /home. > > The autoallocation scheme might have made a less than perfect decision here. > Thhis is bassed on the "medium" allocation, swap, /usr and /home have reached there max according to the table. We can make swap have a alrager max and take more of the pie. What would be a good max size for swap these days omn such a small disk? -Otto
Re: Should 80MB of RAM be enough for kernel relinking on i386?
On 2021-07-14, Patrick Harper wrote: > Hi All, > > The installation program on my Intel P5/80MB RAM machine works fine up > to 'Relinking to create unique kernel...', during which the system > either reboots or eventually prints a kernel panic message. If 80MB is > not enough under normal circumstances then it's not worth debugging. I've had enough problems on even 256MB machines with the relinking that's done in the background after booting. The LLVM linker uses quite a lot of memory, you have better chances if you hack the script to use the old binutils one (IIRC it's something like putting "-fuse-ld=bfd" in the right place). > Apparently 64MB was enough for 6.7 > (https://www.uninformativ.de/blog/postings/2020-06-21/0/POSTING-en.html) > but that was then, e.t.c. The author does disable kernel and library relinking though.
Re: Should 80MB of RAM be enough for kernel relinking on i386?
The problem appears to be here: > wdc2 at pcmcia0 function 0 "TRANSCEND, TS8GCF133, " port 0x340/16: irq 3 > wd1 at wdc2 channel 0 drive 0: > wd1: 1-sector PIO, LBA48, 7647MB, 15662304 sectors > wd1(wdc2:0:0): using BIOS timings > a: 1060.6M 64 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # / > b: 256.0M 2172128swap > c: 7647.6M0 unused > d: 3072.0M 2696416 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /usr > e: 2048.0M 8987872 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /home Your swap is only 256MB. That seem too low. (We have walked away from making it correspond to physical memory, but still, it seems uncomfortably low). As well, /usr seems a bit large, leaving not much for /home. The autoallocation scheme might have made a less than perfect decision here.
Should 80MB of RAM be enough for kernel relinking on i386?
Hi All,
The installation program on my Intel P5/80MB RAM machine works fine up
to 'Relinking to create unique kernel...', during which the system
either reboots or eventually prints a kernel panic message. If 80MB is
not enough under normal circumstances then it's not worth debugging.
Apparently 64MB was enough for 6.7
(https://www.uninformativ.de/blog/postings/2020-06-21/0/POSTING-en.html)
but that was then, e.t.c.
paianni$ doas cu
Connected to /dev/cua00 (speed 9600)
>> OpenBSD/i386 BOOT 3.44
boot> machine mem
Region 0: type 1 at 0x0 for 639KB
Region 1: type 1 at 0x10 for 80896KB
Low ram: 639KB High ram: 15360KB
Total free memory: 81535KB
boot> wd0a:/bsd.rd
boot> boot wd0a:/bsd.rd
cannot open wd0a:/etc/random.seed: No such file or directory
booting wd0a:/bsd.rd: 3213847+1405952+3358728+0+421888
[88+160+28]=0x805300
entry point at 0x201000
Copyright (c) 1982, 1986, 1989, 1991, 1993
The Regents of the University of California. All rights
reserved.
Copyright (c) 1995-2021 OpenBSD. All rights reserved.
https://www.OpenBSD.org
OpenBSD 6.9 (RAMDISK_CD) #768: Sat Apr 17 22:27:31 MDT 2021
dera...@i386.openbsd.org:/usr/src/sys/arch/i386/compile/RAMDISK_CD
real mem = 83423232 (79MB)
avail mem = 7228 (69MB)
random: good seed from bootblocks
mainbus0 at root
bios0 at mainbus0: date 11/15/96
pcibios at bios0 function 0x1a not configured
bios0: ROM list: 0xc/0xc000 0xef000/0x1000!
cpu0 at mainbus0: (uniprocessor)
cpu0: Intel Pentium (P54C) ("GenuineIntel" 586-class) 134 MHz, 05-02-0c
cpu0: FPU,V86,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,MCE,CX8,MELTDOWN
cpu0: F00F bug workaround installed
pci0 at mainbus0 bus 0: configuration mode 1 (bios)
pchb0 at pci0 dev 0 function 0 "Opti 82C557 Host" rev 0x00
pcib0 at pci0 dev 1 function 0 "Opti 82C558 ISA" rev 0x00
vga1 at pci0 dev 2 function 0 "Cirrus Logic CL-GD7543" rev 0x00
vga1: aperture needed
wsdisplay0 at vga1 mux 1: console (80x25, vt100 emulation)
isa0 at pcib0
isadma0 at isa0
fdc0 at isa0 port 0x3f0/6 irq 6 drq 2
com0 at isa0 port 0x3f8/8 irq 4: ns16550a, 16 byte fifo
com0: console
com2 at isa0 port 0x3e8/8 irq 5: ns16550a, 16 byte fifo
pckbc0 at isa0 port 0x60/5 irq 1 irq 12
pckbd0 at pckbc0 (kbd slot)
wskbd0 at pckbd0: console keyboard, using wsdisplay0
wdc0 at isa0 port 0x1f0/8 irq 14
wd0 at wdc0 channel 0 drive 0:
wd0: 1-sector PIO, LBA48, 7647MB, 15662304 sectors
wd0(wdc0:0:0): using BIOS timings
npx0 at isa0 port 0xf0/16: reported by CPUID; using exception 16
pcic0 at isa0 port 0x3e0/2 iomem 0xd/16384
pcic0 controller 0: has sockets A and B
pcmcia0 at pcic0 controller 0 socket 0
wdc2 at pcmcia0 function 0 "TRANSCEND, TS8GCF133, " port 0x340/16: irq 3
wd1 at wdc2 channel 0 drive 0:
wd1: 1-sector PIO, LBA48, 7647MB, 15662304 sectors
wd1(wdc2:0:0): using BIOS timings
pcmcia1 at pcic0 controller 0 socket 1
ne3 at pcmcia1 function 0 "D-Link, DE-660, 118B6603" port 0x300/32, irq
9, address 00:80:c8:8b:ec:8e
pcic0: irq 10, polling enabled
softraid0 at root
scsibus0 at softraid0: 256 targets
root on rd0a swap on rd0b dump on rd0b
WARNING: CHECK AND RESET THE DATE!
fd0 at fdc0 drive 0: 1.44MB 80 cyl, 2 head, 18 sec
erase ^?, werase ^W, kill ^U, intr ^C, status ^T
Welcome to the OpenBSD/i386 6.9 installation program.
WARNING: /mnt was not properly unmounted
(I)nstall, (U)pgrade, (A)utoinstall or (S)hell? i
At any prompt except password prompts you can escape to a shell by
typing '!'. Default answers are shown in []'s and are selected by
pressing RETURN. You can exit this program at any time by pressing
Control-C, but this can leave your system in an inconsistent state.
Terminal type? [vt220]
System hostname? (short form, e.g. 'foo') paipaq
Available network interfaces are: ne3 vlan0.
Which network interface do you wish to configure? (or 'done') [ne3]
IPv4 address for ne3? (or 'dhcp' or 'none') [dhcp]
ne3: no lease..sleeping
IPv6 address for ne3? (or 'autoconf' or 'none') [none]
Available network interfaces are: ne3 vlan0.
Which network interface do you wish to configure? (or 'done') [done]
DNS domain name? (e.g. 'example.com') [my.domain] home
DNS nameservers? (IP address list or 'none') [none]
Password for root account? (will not echo)
Password for root account? (again)
Start sshd(8) by default? [yes]
Do you expect to run the X Window System? [yes] no
Change the default console to com0? [yes] no
Setup a user? (enter a lower-case loginname, or 'no') [no] paianni
Full name for user paianni? [paianni] Patrick Harper
Password for user paianni? (will not echo)
Password for user paianni? (again)
WARNING: root is targeted by password guessing attacks, pubkeys are
safer.
Allow root ssh login? (yes, no, prohibit-password) [no]
Available disks are: wd0 wd1.
Which disk is the root disk? ('?' for details) [wd0] wd1
Disk: wd1 geometry: 15538/16/63 [15662304 Sectors]
Offset: 0 Signature: 0xAA55
Starting Ending LBA Info:
#: id C H S - C H S [ start:size ]
