Installation with IP alias
Dear FreeBSD Aficionados, I am trying to install FreeBSD in my notebook through an external USB CD-ROM. While the installation manager runs fine, after choosing the installation media it says it cannot mount /dev/acd0 (which refers to the notebook's built-in broken cdrom). What could I do? As an alternative I tried installing through FTP. The problem is that my network configuration has to be as such (with ip aliasing and some static routes): defaultrouter=192.168.1.1 static_routes=beastie puffy route_beastie=-net 10.0.0.0/8 10.96.66.254 route_puffy=-net 10.96.66.253/32 10.96.66.2 hostname=payaso.costis.name ifconfig_rl0=inet 10.96.66.2 netmask 255.255.255.0 ifconfig_rl0_alias0=inet 192.168.1.36 netmask 255.255.255.0 ... and the holographic emergency shell is somewhat hostile to running ifconfig/route: (command: not found) My DNS server is 10.96.66.1 Thank you very much in advance for any insights!... Yours, Constantine Tsardounis http://costis.name ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ipw(4) and iwi(4): Intel's Pro Wireless firmware licensingproblems
On 05/10/06, Matt Emmerton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 05/10/06, Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 4, 2006, at 7:46 PM, Constantine A. Murenin wrote: Why are none of the manual pages of FreeBSD say anything about why Intel Wireless devices do not work by default? http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=ipw http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=iwi The manpages you've linked to explicitly state: This driver requires firmware to be loaded before it will work. You need to obtain ipwcontrol(8) from the IPW web page listed below to accomplish loading the firmware before ifconfig(8) will work. Is there some part of this which is unclear to you, Constantine? Yes, Chuck, some part is indeed unclear to me, precisely the part that explains why does one have to go into that much trouble to have a working system. It's required by Intel's choice of licence for the firmware for that wireless NIC. Where did you find that in the man-pages? Not permitting the firmware to be redistributed has nothing to do with the FCC, however. No, firmware redistribution is ENTIRELY up to Intel. I want the firmware to be available under a BSD or ISC licence, just as with Ralink. Intel's firmware is already available, but under a different licence. Where does the FCC say that Intel must distribute firmware under a non-OSS-friendly licence? It doesn't. However, most licences allow derivative works to be created outside of Intel's control. If one of these derivative work allows the device to be used in a manner that violates FCC rules and regulations, Intel remains liable because they a) the provider of the hardware device in question and b) the provider of the initial software (that spawned the derivative work) As I see it, no matter what Intel does, a) and b) will always be the case -- reverse-engineering efforts still have to use Intel's original software to produce any viable results. I.e. by extending your argument slightly further, Intel is screwed anyway. There is nothing stopping Intel from releasing the firmware, except for the legal fear that the FCC will hold them accountable for illegal acts performed with their device. Even if the original document does not allow one to distribute derivative works, anyone can still post complicated instructions on modifying Intel's binaries such that the device violates the law. I strongly doubt FCC would hold Intel accountable if any user follows those complicated instructions, as it's almost impossible for Intel to control those kind of things. Intel should not write their own law, they should just make sure that customers are unlikely to disrespect FCCs laws. FCC laws, on the other hand, never say that manufacturers have to keep completely secret anything about their wireless devices. Distributing the very same firmware that already available under another licence doesn't have anything to do with one's ability to respect or disrespect the FCC laws. Put it the other way around -- if Intel doesn't distribute the firmware on terms acceptable to the end user, then it basically _forces_ the user to come up with their own firmware, or use some alternative firmwares. And what if alternative firmwares violate FCC? Then who's fault is that? It is now clearly Intel's fault, because they've made it legally difficult for the user to use the original Intel firmware. I.e. Intel is better off distributing the firmware under a BSD or ISC licence, unless it wants problems with their devices with the FCC. Cheers, Constantine. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ipw(4) and iwi(4): Intel's Pro Wireless firmware licensing problems
On 06/10/06, Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 5, 2006, at 7:31 PM, Constantine A. Murenin wrote: On 05/10/06, Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 4, 2006, at 7:46 PM, Constantine A. Murenin wrote: Why are none of the manual pages of FreeBSD say anything about why Intel Wireless devices do not work by default? http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=ipw http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=iwi The manpages you've linked to explicitly state: This driver requires firmware to be loaded before it will work. You need to obtain ipwcontrol(8) from the IPW web page listed below to accomplish loading the firmware before ifconfig(8) will work. Is there some part of this which is unclear to you, Constantine? Yes, Chuck, some part is indeed unclear to me, precisely the part that explains why does one have to go into that much trouble to have a working system. That was explained below. You might not like the reasons, or agree with them, but your claim that the FreeBSD manpages do not say anything about the need for firmware is obviously mistaken. How is the claim obviously mistaken if the man-page DO NOT say what's the reason that the firmware must be downloaded from a web-site? There's no need to be curious about the matter; the Intel Pro Wireless adaptors, like many other brands of wireless adaptors, use a software-controlled radio which is capable of broadcasting at higher power levels and/or at frequencies outside of those allocated for 802.11 connectivity for specific regulatory domains. The US FCC, along with other regulatory agencies in Europe such as ETSI and elsewhere, require that end-users not have completely open access to these radios to prevent problems from deliberate misuse such as interference with other frequency bands. Yes, regulatory bodies, of cause, table specific requirements that must be satisfied by systems that utilise RF, i.e. the manufacturer must make reasonable attempt to prevent users from using non-permitted frequencies. Not permitting the firmware to be redistributed has nothing to do with the FCC, however. That's right. Intel permits you to redistribute their firmware under the terms of their license. This isn't a matter of choice on Intel's part; if you want this situation to change, you're going to have to obtain changes in the radio-frequency laws and policies in the US and a number of other countries first. No, firmware redistribution is ENTIRELY up to Intel. I want the firmware to be available under a BSD or ISC licence, just as with Ralink. Intel's firmware is already available, but under a different licence. Where does the FCC say that Intel must distribute firmware under a non-OSS-friendly licence? The BSD license and all other OSS-friendly licenses permit the user to modify the software and redistribute that modified version as a derivative work. A modified version of the firmware has not received FCC certification-- see Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter I, section 15 in general, and specificly: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_05/47cfr15_05.html Sec. 15.21 Information to user. The users manual or instruction manual for an intentional or unintentional radiator shall caution the user that changes or modifications not expressly approved by the party responsible for compliance could void the user's authority to operate the equipment. Right, this means a notice on the device or supporting documentation. It does not require a legal term in the firmware's licence. Sec. 15.202 Certified operating frequency range. Client devices that operate in a master/client network may be certified if they have the capability of operating outside permissible part 15 frequency bands, provided they operate on only permissible part 15 frequencies under the control of the master device with which they communicate. Master devices marketed within the United States must be limited to operation on permissible part 15 frequencies. Client devices that can also act as master devices must meet the requirements of a master device. Also see: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/unauthorizedradio.html Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934 prohibits the use or operation of any apparatus for the transmission of energy or communications or signals by radio without a license issued by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Thus, generally, in order to use or operate a radio station, the Communications Act requires that you first obtain a license by the FCC. However, there are certain limited exceptions. For example, the FCC has provided blanket authorization to operators of Citizens Band (CB) radios, radio control stations, domestic ship and aircraft radios and certain other types of devices. This blanket authorization means that operators of these radio facilities are not required to have individual station licenses. Operators are required to operate
Re: ipw(4) and iwi(4): Intel's Pro Wireless firmware licensing problems
On 05/10/06, Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 4, 2006, at 7:46 PM, Constantine A. Murenin wrote: Why are none of the manual pages of FreeBSD say anything about why Intel Wireless devices do not work by default? http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=ipw http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=iwi The manpages you've linked to explicitly state: This driver requires firmware to be loaded before it will work. You need to obtain ipwcontrol(8) from the IPW web page listed below to accomplish loading the firmware before ifconfig(8) will work. Is there some part of this which is unclear to you, Constantine? Yes, Chuck, some part is indeed unclear to me, precisely the part that explains why does one have to go into that much trouble to have a working system. If you are curious as to why things are the way they are, I suggest that you check the problems that are described in the misc@openbsd.org mailing list, and contact Intel people and say what you think about their user-unfriendly policy in regards to Intel Pro Wireless firmwares, which are REQUIRED to be loaded from the OS before the device functions, i.e. the OS developers must be allowed to freely distribute the firmware in order for the devices to work out-of-the-box. There's no need to be curious about the matter; the Intel Pro Wireless adaptors, like many other brands of wireless adaptors, use a software-controlled radio which is capable of broadcasting at higher power levels and/or at frequencies outside of those allocated for 802.11 connectivity for specific regulatory domains. The US FCC, along with other regulatory agencies in Europe such as ETSI and elsewhere, require that end-users not have completely open access to these radios to prevent problems from deliberate misuse such as interference with other frequency bands. Yes, regulatory bodies, of cause, table specific requirements that must be satisfied by systems that utilise RF, i.e. the manufacturer must make reasonable attempt to prevent users from using non-permitted frequencies. Not permitting the firmware to be redistributed has nothing to do with the FCC, however. This isn't a matter of choice on Intel's part; if you want this situation to change, you're going to have to obtain changes in the radio-frequency laws and policies in the US and a number of other countries first. No, firmware redistribution is ENTIRELY up to Intel. I want the firmware to be available under a BSD or ISC licence, just as with Ralink. Intel's firmware is already available, but under a different licence. Where does the FCC say that Intel must distribute firmware under a non-OSS-friendly licence? Again, is there some part of this that is unclear or which you fail to understand? Yes, precicely, I don't understand why you think FCC requires Intel to not release the firmware under a BSD-like licence. For some recent information about Intel being an Open Source Fraud, see http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openbsd- miscm=115960734026283w=2. The firmware license for these devices has never been submitted to the OSI board for approval as an Open Source license, and I have never seen Intel claim that this license is an Open Source license. It might suit OpenBSD's advocacy purposes to deliberately misrepresent Intel's position, but doing so is unfair and is not especially helpful to the FreeBSD community, which does have somewhat decent relations with vendors like Intel, Lucent, Aironet, Broadcomm, and so forth. As to the point raised above, the firmware license actually does permit an individual user, including an OS developer, to copy and redistribute the software to others, so long as the recepient agrees to the license terms: LICENSE. You may copy and use the Software, subject to these conditions: 1. This Software is licensed for use only in conjunction with Intel component products. Use of the Software in conjunction with non-Intel component products is not licensed hereunder. So if I don't have an Intel Wireless in the system, is it still legal to have the firmware in my system files? 2. You may not copy, modify, rent, sell, distribute or transfer any part of the Software except as provided in this Agreement, and you agree to prevent unauthorized copying of the Software. 3. You may not reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the Software. What's exactly the purpose of this term, if reverse engineering is permitted under many jurisdictions? Is it just to scare potentional reverse-engineers? 4. You may not sublicense the Software. 5. The Software may contain the software or other property of third party suppliers. [ ... ] You may transfer the Software only if a copy of this license accompanies the Software and the recipient agrees to be fully bound by these terms. If a project such as OpenBSD wishes to redistribute the software, then it would probably be considered an Independent Software Vendor, and again
ipw(4) and iwi(4): Intel's Pro Wireless firmware licensing problems
Hi, My acquaintance with Unix started with FreeBSD, which I used for quite a while before discovering OpenBSD. I now mostly use OpenBSD, and I was wondering of how many FreeBSD users are aware about the licensing restrictions of Intel Pro Wireless family of wireless adapters? Why are none of the manual pages of FreeBSD say anything about why Intel Wireless devices do not work by default? http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=ipw http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=iwi If you are curious as to why things are the way they are, I suggest that you check the problems that are described in the misc@openbsd.org mailing list, and contact Intel people and say what you think about their user-unfriendly policy in regards to Intel Pro Wireless firmwares, which are REQUIRED to be loaded from the OS before the device functions, i.e. the OS developers must be allowed to freely distribute the firmware in order for the devices to work out-of-the-box. For some recent information about Intel being an Open Source Fraud, see http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openbsd-miscm=115960734026283w=2. Cheers, Constantine. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: wikipedia article
On 11/06/06, Hámorszky Balázs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems Whilst there, what about another important article that seems to have a Linux POV? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Open_Source_Wireless_Drivers ;) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ee(1): why Backspace doesn't work as expected if $TERM=xterm?
On 07 Dec 2005 09:27:48 -0500, Lowell Gilbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Constantine A. Murenin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hello, When I ssh my FreeBSD 4.8 machine and try to use ee(1), I always notice that Backspace erases the following character, not the previous one. On the contrary, I've noticed that it does not do that when I login via console. So I decided to play with the value of $TERM. By default, when I ssh FreeBSD via PuTTY or Apple Terminal, I have the TERM variable set to xterm or xterm-color. When I tried to manually change $TERM on FreeBSD and run ee, using setenv TERM vt102 ee test.txt, then Backspace key in ee(1) did behave as expected. Please, notice that Backspace does behave as expected in tcsh, it's only ee(1) that shows this problem. How do I fix it without changing $TERM? Offhand, it sounds as though your terminal programs aren't really emulating xterms perfectly. Look for adjustments on how they map the backspace key... They map it perfectly fine as 127, it's only FreeBSD's ee(1) that has this problem, tcsh and others work fine. Notice that ee(1) on OpenBSD from ports works fine from the very same terminals (PuTTY etc). Problem exists only with FreeBSD's ee(1). Cheers, Constantine. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ee(1): why Backspace doesn't work as expected if $TERM=xterm?
Hello, When I ssh my FreeBSD 4.8 machine and try to use ee(1), I always notice that Backspace erases the following character, not the previous one. On the contrary, I've noticed that it does not do that when I login via console. So I decided to play with the value of $TERM. By default, when I ssh FreeBSD via PuTTY or Apple Terminal, I have the TERM variable set to xterm or xterm-color. When I tried to manually change $TERM on FreeBSD and run ee, using setenv TERM vt102 ee test.txt, then Backspace key in ee(1) did behave as expected. Please, notice that Backspace does behave as expected in tcsh, it's only ee(1) that shows this problem. How do I fix it without changing $TERM? Thanks, Constantine. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
healthd does not show the correct temperature
Hello, The healthd does not seem to show the correct temperature on my system. Right after the start-up, BIOS usually shows around 31 centigrade for the motherboard and 21 for the processor. However, this is what the healthdc is usually showing right after the start-up of the FreeBSD after the start-up of the computer: host.name 62.0 15.0 69.0 3096 1.46 1.50 3.31 5.03 11.86 -11.62 -4.80 Then after a few minutes of ideling, BIOS would show the temperature of the processor at around 30 or 35. healthdc shows this: host.name 72.0 38.0 70.5 3096 1.46 1.50 3.31 5.03 11.86 -11.62 -4.80 UPDATE: Above lines refer to the standard heatsink and Intel Pentium 1.8A Northwood processor. Right now, as I have installed Zalman Fan Mate 1, the healthd does not show the speed of the processors fan, while BIOS still shows it at around 1500 rpm. He is what I get if I run `healthd -d`: %healthd -d * Hardware Information * WinBond Chip: W83627HF Temp.= 68.0, 51.5, 70.0; Rot.=0,0,0 Vcore = 1.46, 1.50; Volt. = 3.33, 5.03, 11.86, -11.62, -4.85 Temp.= 67.0, 51.5, 70.0; Rot.=0,0,0 Vcore = 1.46, 1.50; Volt. = 3.33, 5.03, 11.86, -11.62, -4.80 Temp.= 67.0, 51.5, 70.0; Rot.=0,0,0 Vcore = 1.46, 1.52; Volt. = 3.33, 5.03, 11.86, -11.62, -4.80 Temp.= 67.0, 51.5, 70.0; Rot.=0,0,0 Vcore = 1.46, 1.50; Volt. = 3.33, 5.03, 11.86, -11.62, -4.80 Thanks, Constantine. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Doug Richardson is (probably) back online
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 20:45:10 -0700, Ben Goren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2005 Mar 21, at 4:47 PM, Constantine A. Murenin wrote: In reading any document, one should never undoubtedly believe everything it says. :-) I don't believe you. I told ya! :-) P.S. I had a multiple-choice test in philosophy; in the true/false section of the test, the following question was given: The answer to this question is false. a. True b. False (c) 2004 Dr. Wisnewski. :-) Cheers, Constantine. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How to secure ftp over SSH (how to make ftpd listen only to 127.0.0.1)?
Hello, I am very concerned about the security of my servers. My favourite file-management software does not support any other unix standards than plain ftp. How is it possible to set up my FreeBSD 5.2.1 that way, that it will accept ftp connections only from itself, so that iff the login to the system is done via SSH with port-forwarding, then one can open ftp-connection? (It will be very nice if in this case the username/password is not requested again, i.e. the ftp connection is anonymous and yet the ftp-client gets the same rights to files as SSH-logged user, who has the port-forwarding, but this does not sound like easy doable.) Put it in other words, how can I make ftpd listen only to 127.0.0.1? Constantine. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
`atacontrol enclosure` does not work (ioctl(ATAENCSTAT): Device not configured)
Hello. It just does not seem to work. How do I fix that? cnst# whoami root cnst# atacontrol enclosure 0 0 atacontrol: ioctl(ATAENCSTAT): Device not configured cnst# uname -r 4.8-RELEASE Cheers, Constantine. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How to turn off the HDD? How to reduce the overall noise?
I do not have a monitor around my FreeBSD box, so there is no way of accessing the BIOS. Is there any utility that can do that for me from FreeBSD? On 2003-10-06 17:34, jason wrote: This is most easily done in the bios. Check for power settings or energy saver features. You can tell the bios to power down the hard drive after 1 min or an hour later. In your case I would set it to 1 min, so about 1 min after you boot and login the hard drive will power down, unless you touch the mouse or keyboard. Constantine wrote: Hello, My hard disc drive seems to be too noisy for me. I want to test, how much idle noise would the system make with the hard drive turned off. I do not want to unplug the wires, since I have had a lot of problems last time I did that. Is there any command / utility that can turn my HDD off for a minute or so? Are there any other utility that may help me reduce the noise in my system? Right now I have IBM Deskstar 60GXP 41.0GB IC35L040AVER07-0, and I am considering to change it to IBM (Hitachi) Deskstar 180GXP 60GB IC35L060AVV207-0, or may be even Hitachi Deskstar 7K250 80GB HDS722580VLAT20. Have anyone experienced any of those? Are they any different in the idle noise they produce? My motherboard is AOpen AX4G-N Intel 845G(+ICH4) chipset. Cheers, Constantine. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
atacontrol(8)
Hello, I have a few questions about atacontrol. First, why the option 'enclosure' does not seem to work? cnst# atacontrol enclosure 0 0 atacontrol: ioctl(ATAENCSTAT): Device not configured Second, where do I have to indicate that my DVD-ROM supports UDMA66? I assume that after saying atacontrol mode 1 udma66 udma66, the settings are going to be vanished the next reboot. Third, why it does not want to set the DVD-ROM to UDMA66 (the device supports it, as well as my 80-pin cable, and motherboard): cnst# atacontrol mode 1 udma66 udma66 Master = UDMA33 Slave = ??? cnst# atacontrol info 1 Master: acd0 AOPEN 16XDVD-ROM/AMH 20020328/R14 ATA/ATAPI rev 4 Slave: no device present The other question I have, is on how can I turn on the automatic acoustic management? cnst# atacontrol cap 0 0 ATA channel 0, Master, device ad0: ATA/ATAPI revision5 device model IC35L040AVER07-0 serial number censored firmware revision ER4OA44A cylinders 16383 heads 16 sectors/track 63 lba supported 80418240 sectors lba48 not supported dma supported overlap not supported Feature Support EnableValue Vendor write cacheyes yes read ahead yes yes dma queued yes yes 31/1F SMART yes yes microcode download no no security yes yes power management yes yes advanced power management yes no 0/00 automatic acoustic management yes no 254/FE 128/80 Cheers, Constantine. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: atacontrol(8)
On 2003-10-15 00:20, Mike Maltese wrote: Second, where do I have to indicate that my DVD-ROM supports UDMA66? I assume that after saying atacontrol mode 1 udma66 udma66, the settings are going to be vanished the next reboot. Add the following to /boot/loader.conf: hw.ata.atapi_dma=1 Reboot. Check dmesg. Why to this file and not to /etc/sysctl.conf? I have no monitor on that box, so I want to make sure it is more likely to work after the reboot. :-) Third, why it does not want to set the DVD-ROM to UDMA66 (the device supports it, as well as my 80-pin cable, and motherboard): See above and try that first. But why does it sets it to UDMA33, but not to UDMA66? Cheers, Constantine. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How to turn off the HDD? How to reduce the overall noise?
Hello, My hard disc drive seems to be too noisy for me. I want to test, how much idle noise would the system make with the hard drive turned off. I do not want to unplug the wires, since I have had a lot of problems last time I did that. Is there any command / utility that can turn my HDD off for a minute or so? Are there any other utility that may help me reduce the noise in my system? Right now I have IBM Deskstar 60GXP 41.0GB IC35L040AVER07-0, and I am considering to change it to IBM (Hitachi) Deskstar 180GXP 60GB IC35L060AVV207-0, or may be even Hitachi Deskstar 7K250 80GB HDS722580VLAT20. Have anyone experienced any of those? Are they any different in the idle noise they produce? My motherboard is AOpen AX4G-N Intel 845G(+ICH4) chipset. Cheers, Constantine. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
BasiliskII: How to rip a data cd?
Hello! I am trying to use BasiliskII, and I am having some problems in using my cd-drive. I get an error WARNING: Cannot open /dev/cd0c (Permission denied). I have a thought that there is a way to copy an image file from the CD and put it instead of the CD. So, how is it possible to create an image file from a MacOS 7.x CD on FreeBSD 4.8? Cheers, Constantine. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
simple sh scripting. How to put a result of a command to a variable?
Hello! I am writing a script, which involves unzipping some files. I would have to unzip 4 different zip-files from some directory, and I would need to unzip them to the directory, which would have the same name in it as the original zip-file, i.e. I would like to run something like ls *.zip, have each file name recorded in some variable, and do a loop like unzip $filename[$i] -d $filename[$i].unzipped/. Can someone help me with the code? How can I put the results of a command to a variable? Cheers, Constantine. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How can I get rid of am/pm once and forever, and have a 24-hourtime?
Hello! How can I get rid of am/pm once and forever, and have a 24-hour time? I have an en-GB locale and koi8-r character set (to be able to see Russian characters in my console). What do I need to do, to have am/pm disappear and to have 24-hour time in all system utilities? For instance, the 'uptime' command still shows am/pm. %tail -n 6 /etc/csh.login /etc/profile == /etc/csh.login == setenv LANG en_GB.ISO8859-1 setenv MM_CHARSET KOI8-R # setenv LC_ALL en_GB.ISO8859-1 setenv LC_COLLATE ru_RU.KOI8-R setenv LC_CTYPE ru_RU.KOI8-R == /etc/profile == LANG=en_GB.ISO8859-1; export LANG MM_CHARSET=KOI8-R; export MM_CHARSET # LC_ALL=en_GB.ISO8859-1; export LC_ALL LC_COLLATE=ru_RU.KOI8-R; export LC_COLLATE LC_CTYPE=ru_RU.KOI8-R; export LC_CTYPE %date Mon 11 Aug 2003 16:42:18 EDT %uptime 4:42pm up 1:12, 1 user, load averages: 0.10, 0.03, 0.01 % Cheers, Constantine. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: simple sh scripting. How to put a result of a command to avariable?
Michael Conlen wrote:
Constantine wrote:
I am writing a script, which involves unzipping some files. I would
have to unzip 4 different zip-files from some directory, and I would
need to unzip them to the directory, which would have the same name
in it as the original zip-file, i.e. I would like to run something
like ls *.zip, have each file name recorded in some variable, and
do a loop like unzip $filename[$i] -d $filename[$i].unzipped/. Can
someone help me with the code? How can I put the results of a command
to a variable?
If I understand you properly I think the following would do what you want
#!/bin/sh
for i in `ls *.zip`
do
unzip ${i} -d ${i}.unzipped
done
Thank you very much indeed! Seems just what I wanted. But can I save the
archive names in an array for further manipulation? Also, how can I type
that apostrophe ` from my keyboard?
Cheers,
Constantine.
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
hostname on LAN with WAN
Hello! I am using my FreeBSD 4.8 in a local network, I do not have any routable IPs assigned to the box, so what am I supposed to use as a hostname for that FreeBSD box? I have an internet connection (DSL modem with NAT), and I am using the sendmail on the box, and the problem I have, is that during the boot time I need to wait 2 minutes for the DNS-timeout. I wanted to ask, how the hostname is meant to be set in my case. Cheers, Constantine. maillog: Aug 1 14:52:57 cnst sm-msp-queue[101]: My unqualified host name (cnst) unknown; sleeping for retry Aug 1 14:53:57 cnst sm-msp-queue[101]: unable to qualify my own domain name (cnst) -- using short name Aug 1 14:53:57 cnst sm-msp-queue[103]: starting daemon (8.12.8p1): [EMAIL PROTECTED]:30:00 Aug 2 14:41:22 cnst sm-mta[99]: My unqualified host name (cnst) unknown; sleeping for retry Aug 2 14:42:22 cnst sm-mta[99]: unable to qualify my own domain name (cnst) -- using short name Aug 2 14:42:22 cnst sm-mta[100]: starting daemon (8.12.8p1): [EMAIL PROTECTED]:30:00 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Host name for sendmail.
Hello, I have a FreeBSD 4.8 box, I run it for my local small home network I use it as a router. My DSL-modem has a NAT feature, and FreeBSD does not have any routable ip-address, only the modem does. My sendmail always complains about the domain name every time I start my FreeBSD, and the system is hanging for 2 minutes, until the sendmail finally starts. What I want to do, is to keep my own sendmail (I use it as my smtp-server), but I do not want the system to wait 2 minutes until the sendmail starts. What can I do? In /var/log/maillog I have: Jul 24 12:46:59 cnst sm-mta[99]: My unqualified host name (cnst) unknown; sleeping for retry Jul 24 12:47:59 cnst sm-mta[99]: unable to qualify my own domain name (cnst) -- using short name Jul 24 12:47:59 cnst sm-mta[100]: starting daemon (8.12.8p1): [EMAIL PROTECTED]:30:00 Jul 24 12:47:59 cnst sm-msp-queue[101]: My unqualified host name (cnst) unknown; sleeping for retry Jul 24 12:49:00 cnst sm-msp-queue[101]: unable to qualify my own domain name (cnst) -- using short name Jul 24 12:49:00 cnst sm-msp-queue[103]: starting daemon (8.12.8p1): [EMAIL PROTECTED]:30:00 In /var/log/messages I have: Jul 24 12:46:58 cnst ntpdate[85]: step time server 198.82.161.227 offset -0.104211 sec Jul 24 12:46:59 cnst sm-mta[99]: My unqualified host name (cnst) unknown; sleeping for retry Jul 24 12:47:59 cnst sm-mta[99]: unable to qualify my own domain name (cnst) -- using short name Jul 24 12:47:59 cnst sm-msp-queue[101]: My unqualified host name (cnst) unknown; sleeping for retry Jul 24 12:49:00 cnst sm-msp-queue[101]: unable to qualify my own domain name (cnst) -- using short name Jul 24 12:49:00 cnst apmd[117]: start Thank you, Constantine. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Host name for sendmail.
Olaf Hoyer wrote: On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Constantine wrote: Olaf Hoyer wrote: On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Constantine wrote: Hi! Well, do the following: in /etc/hosts, enter your domain name. then, edit the file: /etc/mail/service.switch (or the corresponding file location defined in sendmail.cf) with the values : files dns to make sendmail first look in /etc/hosts and then try to resolve via DNS. Alternatively, in sendmail.cf there is the option to specify the own host name in case sendmail cannot determine it automagically. BTW: sendmail wants some FQDN, like cnts.local or something. Missing dots are iritating to sendmail. HTH Olaf Well, thank you. And the other problem I got, is that when I tried to use my sendmail to send the previous message to this FreeBSD.org postal list, I got these errors in my maillog: Jul 24 17:18:11 cnst sm-mta[1101]: h6OImYZI000711: to=[EMAIL PROTECTED], delay=02:29:36, xdelay=00:00:11, mailer=esmtp, pri=510414, relay=mx1.freebsd.org. [216.136.204.125], dsn=4.2.0, stat=Deferred: 450 cnst: Helo command rejected: Host not found Hi! Well, thats clear: Your box comes with the fake FQDN of cnst in the HELO command, which cannot be resolved by the remote host, in this case mx1.freebsd.org, so it rejects the mail. (Basic SPAM protection) Solutions: - The box gets the hostname corresponding to the IP that is assigned at dialup. So, if you get 1.2.3.4 as IP, which resolves to: 1-2-3-4.dial.provider.com you would take care that this appears in the HELO message. - you use your providers MTA as smarthost. In sendmail.cf it shall be the DS macro, IIRC. Is the better way, because Dial-up-IP-ranges are often blocked due to spammers and often misconfigured MTA... I also use a 4.8 box as DSL Router via PPPoE, and there is a sendmail on it. Ok, I'd have to check whether he can relay directly, and what IP in the HELO appears, but the box itself can identify its IP without probs. I'm also using the tunnel interface to connect... But I'd recommend using a smarthost. Is better and cleaner. Olaf I have a cable modem with nat, so the FreeBSD box itself does not has any routable ip-address (the ip, that is connects the box to the internet is 192.168.1.2). What can I do in this case? And actually, I started up my own SMTP-server, because the one that was provided by my ISP was in some spam-blocking programmes, so I was unable to send some messages through it. So, as I understood, smarthost will not work for me. Cheers, Constantine. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Host name for sendmail.
Olaf Hoyer wrote: On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Constantine wrote: Olaf Hoyer wrote: I also use a 4.8 box as DSL Router via PPPoE, and there is a sendmail on it. Ok, I'd have to check whether he can relay directly, and what IP in the HELO appears, but the box itself can identify its IP without probs. I'm also using the tunnel interface to connect... But I'd recommend using a smarthost. Is better and cleaner. Olaf I have a cable modem with nat, so the FreeBSD box itself does not has any routable ip-address (the ip, that is connects the box to the internet is 192.168.1.2). What can I do in this case? And actually, I started up my own SMTP-server, because the one that was provided by my ISP was in some spam-blocking programmes, so I was unable to send some messages through it. So, as I understood, smarthost will not work for me. Uups. Well, ok, you get a private IP. Ok, AOL users get this too, for surfing only its ok, but for anything else its debateable. The question is, why was the mailserver of your ISP rejected? Was it on any blacklists, and why? When the Mailserver of an ISP is for a longer period, or repeatedly, on some rbl lists, this is a sign of very poor service. In that case, I'd change my provider... Ok, you should in those cases register with a freemail-service, or any other independent mail-provider, which gives you the possibility to: a) Identify yourself with SMTP-Auth with his server b) and send mails with any from: address In the FreeBSD-handbook there is a chapter for using sendmail with SMTP-Auth as a client, shall work then. Olaf Okay, that seems to be too complicated to do, and my idea is not to use any third-party smtp-servers... The provider is Earthlink DSL, and the problem I was having, is that some mail-servers in Russia do not want to accept any mail from one of the Earthlinks' smtp-servers (207.217.120.122). The IP-address of my modem (the address of the FreeBSD box visible to the internet) stays constant usually within a week or so, so I believe there should be some more neat solutions for the problem... Cheers, Constantine. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Host name for sendmail.
Olaf Hoyer wrote: On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Constantine wrote: Ok, you should in those cases register with a freemail-service, or any other independent mail-provider, which gives you the possibility to: a) Identify yourself with SMTP-Auth with his server b) and send mails with any from: address In the FreeBSD-handbook there is a chapter for using sendmail with SMTP-Auth as a client, shall work then. Olaf Okay, that seems to be too complicated to do, and my idea is not to use any third-party smtp-servers... The provider is Earthlink DSL, and the problem I was having, is that some mail-servers in Russia do not want to accept any mail from one of the Earthlinks' smtp-servers (207.217.120.122). The IP-address of my modem (the address of the FreeBSD box visible to the internet) stays constant usually within a week or so, so I believe there should be some more neat solutions for the problem... Hi! Well, the IP 207.217.120.122 is not in rbl Lists, as I checked it quickly, so there must be another problem. Do you have a copy of those messages, resp. the mailerdeamon? When its a private IP, then it is regardless of being several minutes or a week, because the remote system only sees the public IP of the system... Olaf The message was [EMAIL PROTECTED] SMTP error from remote mailer after MAIL FROM:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: host rusonyx.ru [212.24.38.14]: 550 5.7.1 Mail from 207.217.120.122 refused by blackhole site work.drbl.rusonyx.ru It is some Russian spam-list, and since the server we are talking about is Earthlinks' server in the US, nobody really cares about it... The web-site of drbl can be found at http://www.drbl.ofisp.org/eng/ Indeed, my private ips stay the same all the time, it is the public ip that changes from week to week. Cheers, Constantine. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can I synchronise local time with some NTP-server?
Hello! I am running FreeBSD 4.8. How can I synchronise my clock with some NTP server? The time on my server right now is 4 minutes fast, and I do not like that... Can I set up a script that would automatically synchronise the time with some available server? My server is located in the USA, in case one would like to suggest some good servers to synchronise with. :-) Cheers, Constantine. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD gateway
Marc Perisa wrote: Derrick Ryalls wrote: Hello! I have installed FreeBSD 4.7 recently, and it seems it does not want to work as a gateway. I have two network cards in my FreeBSD computer, fxp0 for LAN and sis0 for the cable modem. I am new to FreeBSD, so I am confused what the difference between gateways and routers is (I was thinking they link to the same thing). I can ping my FreeBSD box from winxp, I can ping internet from remote session to FreeBSD, but I cannot ping internet from my winxp. My winxp has ip 192.168.0.1, netmask 255.255.255.0, and gateway 192.168.0.18 settings. Now FreeBSD /etc/rc.conf follows: gateway_enable=YES kern_securelevel_enable=NO nfs_reserved_port_only=YES ifconfig_sis0=DHCP ifconfig_fxp0=inet 192.168.0.18 netmask 255.255.255.0 #router_enable=YES # from handbook gateway_enable=YES firewall_enable=YES firewall_type=OPEN natd_enable=YES natd_interface=sis0 natd_flags= #/ handbook Are your ip's reversed? I think the gateway should have the .1 address and the xp box should use the .18 Nope. He set his FreeBSD box to the IP 192.168.0.18 and his Windows XP box to 192.168.0.1 . All is ok with that. It is only uncommon to do. Normally you would give the defaultgateway for a network x.y.z.1 or x.y.z.254 . But it is not forbidden to set it to any IP in that subnet. Are you using the default kernel? If so, you will need to add a couple lines are recompile. options IPFIREWALL #firewall options IPDIVERT#divert sockets as for the difference between a router and a gateway, a gateway is a machine to deal with going from one network (lan) to another network (wan), I think. From your point of view (as needed for this problem) routers and gateways are the same. In this case the FreeBSD box is acting as a router for your internal net to the Internet. A simple router would do the same. But for more complex routing you have to either setup gated (or similar software) or add all rules (if they are static) by hand. A gateway is the simplest form of a router. The last two lines from dmesg: IP packet filtering initialized, divert disabled, rule-based forwarding enabled, default to deny, logging disabled ip_fw_ctl: invalid command That hints to a problem with the /etc/rc.firewall script (which is called when you add to /etc/rc.conf firewall_enable=YES). Please provide us with the output of ipfw list. (You have to do that as root of course). I think your firewall ruleset is not tuned for a gateway situation. Hope that helps Marc # ipfw show 001000 0 allow ip from any to any via lo0 002000 0 deny ip from any to 127.0.0.0/8 003000 0 deny ip from 127.0.0.0/8 to any 65000 8102 5158330 allow ip from any to any 655351 60 deny ip from any to any I want FreeBSD to act as a simple gateway for my LAN, but for some reason it does not want to work that way, though I have confirmed to the installation programme that I want FreeBSD to function as a gateway. What are the simplest steps I need to follow to make FreeBSD act as a gateway? (I have a fresh 4.7R installation) Thanks. Constantine To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
FreeBSD gateway
Hello! I have installed FreeBSD 4.7 recently, and it seems it does not want to work as a gateway. I have two network cards in my FreeBSD computer, fxp0 for LAN and sis0 for the cable modem. I am new to FreeBSD, so I am confused what the difference between gateways and routers is (I was thinking they link to the same thing). I can ping my FreeBSD box from winxp, I can ping internet from remote session to FreeBSD, but I cannot ping internet from my winxp. My winxp has ip 192.168.0.1, netmask 255.255.255.0, and gateway 192.168.0.18 settings. Now FreeBSD /etc/rc.conf follows: gateway_enable=YES kern_securelevel_enable=NO nfs_reserved_port_only=YES ifconfig_sis0=DHCP ifconfig_fxp0=inet 192.168.0.18 netmask 255.255.255.0 #router_enable=YES # from handbook gateway_enable=YES firewall_enable=YES firewall_type=OPEN natd_enable=YES natd_interface=sis0 natd_flags= #/ handbook The last two lines from dmesg: IP packet filtering initialized, divert disabled, rule-based forwarding enabled, default to deny, logging disabled ip_fw_ctl: invalid command %netstat -rn Routing tables Internet: DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif Expire default68.105.xxx.x UGSc20 sis0 68.105.xxx/24 link#1 UC 10 sis0 68.105.xxx.x 00:03:xx:xx:xx:xx UHLW30 sis0 1197 68.105.xxx.xxx 127.0.0.1 UGHS00lo0 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 UH 10lo0 192.168.0 link#2 UC 10 fxp0 192.168.0.100:04:xx:xx:xx:xx UHLW328742 fxp0 1005 Thank you! -- Constantine To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
