Re: after pkgng update, daily run still using pkg_info
>>On 09/28/13 10:52, Gary Aitken wrote: >> After switching to pkgng, I noticed that my daily run output constantly >> complains about the installed packages being corrupt, e.g.: >> "pkg_info: the package info for package 'asciidoc-8.6.8_1' is corrupt" >> >> The problem is with >> etc/periodic/daily/490.status-pkg-changes >> which is still using "pkg_info" instead of "pkg info" >> >> Was this script supposed to be automatically updated as part of the >> conversion? What's the "right" way to upgrade this on a 9.1 release >> system? Or should I just edit the script by hand and be done with it? > >On 09/28/13 13:57, Mark Felder wrote: > Run pkg_info. If there is anything listed you have not fully converted > to pkgng and have some old broken/corrupt packages. You'll want to clean > this up. What does "clean this up" mean, and how does one go about it, given the system is converted to using pkgng? There is no /var/db/pkg/pkgdb.db Some of the packages reported as corrupt were installed *after* the conversion to pkgng, so why is pkg_info even noticing them? "pkg info" reports 705 packages installed, and installs and re-installs using portmaster seem to be working. "pkg_info" reports 14 "good" packages and 658 "corrupt" packages. If pkg_info is picking up packages installed after the conversion, why doesn't the sum of good and corrupt packages equal the number pkg reports? It was my understanding that after switching to pkgng, the pkg_* cmds should no longer be used. If that's the case, shouldn't the daily script have been modified by the upgrade process? Gary ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: after pkgng update, daily run still using pkg_info
>>On 09/28/13 10:52, Gary Aitken wrote: >> After switching to pkgng, I noticed that my daily run output constantly >> complains about the installed packages being corrupt, e.g.: >> "pkg_info: the package info for package 'asciidoc-8.6.8_1' is corrupt" >> >> The problem is with >> etc/periodic/daily/490.status-pkg-changes >> which is still using "pkg_info" instead of "pkg info" >> >> Was this script supposed to be automatically updated as part of the >> conversion? What's the "right" way to upgrade this on a 9.1 release >> system? Or should I just edit the script by hand and be done with it? > >On 09/28/13 13:57, Mark Felder wrote: > Run pkg_info. If there is anything listed you have not fully converted > to pkgng and have some old broken/corrupt packages. You'll want to clean > this up. What does "clean this up" mean, and how does one go about it, given the system is converted to using pkgng? There is no /var/db/pkg/pkgdb.db Some of the packages reported as corrupt were installed *after* the conversion to pkgng, so why is pkg_info even noticing them? "pkg info" reports 705 packages installed, and installs and re-installs using portmaster seem to be working. "pkg_info" reports 14 "good" packages and 658 "corrupt" packages. If pkg_info is picking up packages installed after the conversion, why doesn't the sum of good and corrupt packages equal the number pkg reports? It was my understanding that after switching to pkgng, the pkg_* cmds should no longer be used. If that's the case, shouldn't the daily script have been modified by the upgrade process? Gary ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: How to ask a DNS resolver listening on a different port than the tcp/udp 53
Hi, for the list archive, here's how I solved my "problem". Some on the thread tell me to run BIND on the 1rst VPS, as DNS autoritative server and as caching resolver who let only hosts from my network send him queries. Well I'm quite happy my setup with NSD as DNS autoritative and UNBOUND as caching resolver so I don't really want to change them for BIND, but i'd do it if this is the only way. I descide to focus on the 2nd VPS, the one who can't send queries directly to tcp/udp 5353, I configure UNBOUND to forward all queries to my 1rst VPS with few dedicated lines in the /usr/local/etc/unbound/unbound.conf: ...snip... forward-zone: name: "." forward-addr: "public_ip_v4"@5353 # forward to port 5353. forward-first: yes and modify my /etc/resolv.conf to only have localhost as nameserver. The system footprint of UNBOUND is very small so it's just fine to me. Thanks all for the help. Laurent SALIN ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: How to ask a DNS resolver listening on a different port than the tcp/udp 53
On 2013-09-28 09:37, loran42o wrote:
Le 28.09.2013 00:08, Terje Elde a écrit :
On 28. sep. 2013, at 00:03, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
If I understand the way it works correctly, the resolver pulls a list of the NS
and hard-sets the port number for each to 53 (via a manifest constant) . See
libc/resolv/res_init.c. All you need to do(!) is change this to a value of your
choice and recompile libc
Sorry, but this is startin to look a lot like a complicated solution to a
problem that isn't really there...
Why not just point from resolv.conf to localhost, run a caching and/or
recursive dns-server there, and point it whereever?
As far as I can tell, that'd solve everything, add caching, and let it all be
controlled from the config of the DNS-server?
Terje
Hi,
I guess this is the way that'll end.
Laurent SALIN
You'll need to setup your bind.conf;
zone "fqdn" IN {
type forward;
forward first;
forwarders {
127.0.0.1 port 530;
};
};
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is it possible to suspend to disk with geli+Root on ZFS installation
In freebsd-questions Digest, Vol 486, Issue 7, Message: 5 On Sat, 28 Sep 2013 16:25:33 +0200 Roland Smith wrote: > On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 05:37:55PM +1000, yudi v wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Is it possible to suspend to disk (hibernate) when using geli for full disk > > encryption. > > As far as I can tell, FreeBSD doesn't support suspend to disk on all > architectures. On amd64 the necessary infrastructure doesn't exist, and on > i386 FPU state is lost, there is no multiprocessor support and some MSRs are > not restored [1]. > > [1]: https://wiki.freebsd.org/SuspendResume Roland, sorry, no; you (and that page) are talking about Suspend to RAM, ACPI state S3. What you've said is correct re Suspend to RAM - though some running amd64 have achieved some success on some machines lately; most of the issues are with restoring modern video, backlight and such. Those i386 comments don't apply to my Thinkpad T23s, which suspend and resume, in console mode and X, flawlessly on 9.1-R and properly after various tweaks on 8.x, 7.x and 6.x - but they're a single core P3-M .. I must reiterate, FreeBSD does not support Suspend to Disk (state S4 aka 'hibernate') on ANY platform, except - perhaps - on machines supporting S4 in BIOS (hw.acpi.s4bios=1) which are very rarely spotted in the wild. > And even suspend to RAM doesn't work on every machine [2]. > > [2]: https://wiki.freebsd.org/IdeasPage#Suspend_to_disk That page IS about Suspend to Disk - but only as a wishlist idea, as it has been for many years. Someone did take it on as a Google SoC project years ago, but nothing ever came of it to my knowledge. The last laptop I have that will properly hibernate - ie save RAM and all state to disk and power off, then reload all RAM and state on power return - is a 300MHz Compaq Armada 1500C (mfg '98), but using the older APM BIOS rather than ACPI. (It's still running, 24/7/365 since 2002 :) cheers, Ian ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Throughput test with iperf...
Thank you, Doug, I'll check it :) Best Regards, t.a.k On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Doug Hardie wrote: > > On 29 September 2013, at 01:20, takCoder wrote: > > > thanks for your reply.. :) > > > > i think it's iperf.. i installed /usr/ports/benchmarks/iperf port. > > where can i find iperf2? my machines are both FreeBsds but i can't find > iperf2 in my ports collection.. > > Bad memory - its iperf3. There is no port at this time. You find it at: > > http://code.google.com/p/iperf/ > > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " > freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Throughput test with iperf...
On 29 September 2013, at 01:20, takCoder wrote: > thanks for your reply.. :) > > i think it's iperf.. i installed /usr/ports/benchmarks/iperf port. > where can i find iperf2? my machines are both FreeBsds but i can't find > iperf2 in my ports collection.. Bad memory - its iperf3. There is no port at this time. You find it at: http://code.google.com/p/iperf/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Throughput test with iperf...
On 28 September 2013, at 23:38, takCoder wrote: > hi again.. > > would any of you please at least explain it to me what may cause iperf > server ending up with "Segmentation fault (core dumped)" message right at > the beginning of setting second connection in my bi-directional throughput > test, using -r flag?? > > i used these commands on client and server on two freebsd machines which > are connected straight with one cat5e cable: > > iperf -s -i 1 > iperf -c X.Y.Z.T -t 60 -r > > just getting more confused.. :( Are you using iperf or iperf2. Iperf has a few problems. Iperf2 is more stable. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Throughput test with iperf...
thanks for your reply.. :) i think it's iperf.. i installed /usr/ports/benchmarks/iperf port. where can i find iperf2? my machines are both FreeBsds but i can't find iperf2 in my ports collection.. Best Regards, t.a.k On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Doug Hardie wrote: > On 28 September 2013, at 23:38, takCoder wrote: > > > hi again.. > > > > would any of you please at least explain it to me what may cause iperf > > server ending up with "Segmentation fault (core dumped)" message right at > > the beginning of setting second connection in my bi-directional > throughput > > test, using -r flag?? > > > > i used these commands on client and server on two freebsd machines which > > are connected straight with one cat5e cable: > > > > iperf -s -i 1 > > iperf -c X.Y.Z.T -t 60 -r > > > > just getting more confused.. :( > > Are you using iperf or iperf2. Iperf has a few problems. Iperf2 is more > stable. > > > > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
