Format error in /usr/ports/MOVED
#pkgdb -F Errors with: 'portsdb: MOVED file format error' Find in /usr/ports/MOVED at very bottom www/trac-webadmin|2010-03-30|Incorporated to www/trac change to: www/trac-webadmin||2010-03-30|Incorporated to www/trac -- Wil Hatfield HyperConX Customer Care HyperConX International - http://www.hyperconx.com 1.877.290.2446 - Toll Free in the US and Canada 1.209.751.4706 - International direct Premium e-commerce hosting, fully PCI Compliant, 24/7 technical support, 99.9% uptime and 30 day money back guarantees, toll free support lines for your convenience, great low cost packages to choose from. Everything your business needs to succeed. Host with the Pros so you can sell like one! ___ 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: Kernel Panics in 6.1 and 6.2 always Exim 4
> -Original Message- > From: Kris Kennaway [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 5:20 PM > To: Wil Hatfield > Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Kernel Panics in 6.1 and 6.2 always Exim 4 > > > Wil Hatfield wrote: > > Well after a year we still haven't tracked down the kernel > panic problems > > that are occuring on both our 6.1 and 6.2 machines for those we have had > > time to upgrade. It occurs on 6.1-RC, 6.1-RELEASE 6.1-STABLE, > 6.2, you name > > it. > > > > We are noticing that all of the dumps are during Exim 4.6x runtime. I am > > suspicious of PR-97095 but would like others insights into the > possibility. > > Well, as that PR says, the patch was committed after 6.1-RELEASE, > therefore it is expected that older systems will have the problem. You > only provided a trace from a 6.1 machine, so if you are saying that it > still persists on an up-to-date RELENG_6 kernel, please file a new PR > with the details. > > Kris Unfortunately when I upgraded the machine I have from 6.1-RELEASE to 6.2 it stopped dumping for me. So I have nothing to analyze. However, I still get the kernel panics I did before. Same frequency and always Exim. I bumped into a thread somewhere that said something about setting nmbclusters=0 might be a good workaround for this bug. Anybody heard anything about this or does it seem logical? Wil ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Kernel Panics in 6.1 and 6.2 always Exim 4
Well after a year we still haven't tracked down the kernel panic problems that are occuring on both our 6.1 and 6.2 machines for those we have had time to upgrade. It occurs on 6.1-RC, 6.1-RELEASE 6.1-STABLE, 6.2, you name it. We are noticing that all of the dumps are during Exim 4.6x runtime. I am suspicious of PR-97095 but would like others insights into the possibility. References http://unix.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/FreeBSD/stable/2006-06/msg00011.html http://unix.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/FreeBSD/stable/2006-06/msg00621.html http://unix.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/FreeBSD/stable/2006-06/msg00636.html Here is my ditty: uname -a FreeBSD machine1.ourdomain.net 6.1-RC FreeBSD 6.1-RC #1: Tue Apr 11 23:19:28 PDT 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CUSTOM-KERNEL i386 dmesg Fatal trap 12: page fault while in kernel mode fault virtual address = 0x5c fault code = supervisor read, page not present instruction pointer = 0x20:0xc06ab64c stack pointer = 0x28:0xf7ab1b10 frame pointer = 0x28:0xf7ab1b2c code segment= base 0x0, limit 0xf, type 0x1b = DPL 0, pres 1, def32 1, gran 1 processor eflags= interrupt enabled, resume, IOPL = 0 current process = 17074 (exim) trap number = 12 panic: page fault Uptime: 4d5h40m36s Dumping 1015 MB (2 chunks) chunk 0: 1MB (160 pages) ... ok chunk 1: 1015MB (259840 pages) 1000 984 968 952 936 920 904 888 872 856 840 824 808 792 776 760 744 728 712 696 680 664 648 632 616 600 584 568 552 536 520 504 488 472 456 440 424 408 392 376 360 344 328 312 296 280 264 248 232 216 200 184 168 152 136 120 104 88 72 56 40 24 8Copyright (c) 1992-2006 The FreeBSD Project. Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. FreeBSD 6.1-RC #1: Tue Apr 11 23:19:28 PDT 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CUSTOM-KERNEL Timecounter "i8254" frequency 1193182 Hz quality 0 CPU: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.00GHz (2000.03-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0xf24 Stepping = 4 Features=0x3febfbff real memory = 1065353216 (1016 MB) avail memory = 1032658944 (984 MB) MPTable: ioapic0: Assuming intbase of 0 ioapic0 irqs 0-23 on motherboard kbd1 at kbdmux0 npx0: [FAST] npx0: on motherboard npx0: INT 16 interface cpu0 on motherboard pcib0: pcibus 0 on motherboard pci0: on pcib0 agp0: mem 0xd000-0xd7ff,0xdc10-0xdc17 irq 16 at device 2.0 on pci0 agp0: detected 8060k stolen memory agp0: aperture size is 128M pci0: at device 29.0 (no driver attached) pci0: at device 29.1 (no driver attached) pci0: at device 29.2 (no driver attached) pci0: at device 29.7 (no driver attached) pcib1: at device 30.0 on pci0 pci1: on pcib1 fxp0: port 0xa000-0xa03f mem 0xdc00-0xdc000fff irq 20 at device 8.0 on pci1 miibus0: on fxp0 inphy0: on miibus0 inphy0: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto fxp0: Ethernet address: 00:10:dc:52:d4:3d isab0: at device 31.0 on pci0 isa0: on isab0 atapci0: port 0x1f0-0x1f7,0x3f6,0x170-0x177,0x376,0xcc00-0xcc0f mem 0xdc181000-0xdc1813ff irq 16 at device 31.1 on pci0 ata0: on atapci0 ata1: on atapci0 pci0: at device 31.3 (no driver attached) pci0: at device 31.5 (no driver attached) pmtimer0 on isa0 atkbdc0: at port 0x60,0x64 on isa0 atkbd0: irq 1 on atkbdc0 kbd0 at atkbd0 atkbd0: [GIANT-LOCKED] fdc0: at port 0x3f0-0x3f5,0x3f7 irq 6 drq 2 on isa0 fdc0: [FAST] ppc0: at port 0x378-0x37f irq 7 on isa0 ppc0: SMC-like chipset (ECP/EPP/PS2/NIBBLE) in COMPATIBLE mode ppc0: FIFO with 16/16/16 bytes threshold ppbus0: on ppc0 plip0: on ppbus0 lpt0: on ppbus0 lpt0: Interrupt-driven port ppi0: on ppbus0 sc0: at flags 0x100 on isa0 sc0: VGA <16 virtual consoles, flags=0x300> sio0 at port 0x3f8-0x3ff irq 4 flags 0x10 on isa0 sio0: type 16550A sio1 at port 0x2f8-0x2ff irq 3 on isa0 sio1: type 16550A vga0: at port 0x3c0-0x3df iomem 0xa-0xb on isa0 unknown: can't assign resources (port) unknown: can't assign resources (memory) unknown: can't assign resources (port) unknown: can't assign resources (port) unknown: can't assign resources (port) unknown: can't assign resources (port) unknown: can't assign resources (port) Timecounter "TSC" frequency 233536 Hz quality 800 Timecounters tick every 1.000 msec IP Filter: v4.1.8 initialized. Default = block all, Logging = enabled ipfw2 (+ipv6) initialized, divert loadable, rule-based forwarding disabled, default to deny, logging unlimited ad0: 76319MB at ata0-master UDMA100 acd0: CDROM at ata1-master UDMA33 Trying to mount root from ufs:/dev/ad0s1a WARNING: / was not properly dismounted g_vfs_done():md0[WRITE(offset=23527424, length=131072)]error = 28 g_vfs_done():md0[WRITE(offset=23805952, length=32768)]error = 28 g_vfs_done():md0[WRITE(offset=23887872, length=32768)]error = 28 g_vfs_done():md0[WRITE(offset=23937024, length=819
RE: Upgrading from FreeBSD 6.1-Stable to Latest
Taking this thread a little further since it is right in line with my todo list for tonight. I currently have 6.1 installed on a Supermicro machine with two ata drives. There has been a major bug that causes frequent kernel panics which started at 6.0. The following build options seemed to help with quick rebooting and recovery. But of course this week the reboots aren't going to well and it is definately time to upgrade to 6.2-RELEASE (RELENG_6_2) in hopes that whatever is causing the kernel panics is software related and has been fixed. makeoptions DEBUG=-g options DDB, KDB, GDB options INVARIANTS options INVARIANT_SUPPORT options WITNESS_KDB options WITNESS_SKIPSPIN options BREAK_TO_DEBUGGER,ALT_BREAK_TO_DEBUGGER options KDB_UNATTENDED options QUOTA options PMAP_SHPGPERPROC=601 options TCP_DROP_SYNFIN options SMP options IPFILTER options IPFILTER_LOG options IPFILTER_DEFAULT_BLOCK options IPFIREWALL options IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE options DUMMYNET options IPSTEALTH options HZ=2000 #optionsRESTARTABLE_PANICS options PANIC_REBOOT_WAIT_TIME=5 Will some of these options still work with 6.2-RELEASE or should I omit something here in order to use the 6.2 release properly? I am sure there are some since I am going from a 6.1 prerelease to a release. I am just not sure which ones should be omitted. I still want the capability of the machine rebooting unattended if a panic should occur. Here is some more info in case anybody sees anything that I don't regarding those panics. Never a single vmcore so I have found debugging quite useless. But of course I do understand that I have alot to learn about debugging. Not my forte. ### uname -a ### 123.domain.net 6.1-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 6.1-PRERELEASE #0: Thu Apr 20 16:01:16 PDT 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CUSTOM-KERNEL i386 ### dmesg.today ### Copyright (c) 1992-2006 The FreeBSD Project. Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. FreeBSD 6.1-PRERELEASE #0: Thu Apr 20 16:01:16 PDT 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CUSTOM-KERNEL Timecounter "i8254" frequency 1193182 Hz quality 0 CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.20GHz (3206.53-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0xf43 Stepping = 3 Features=0xbfebfbff Features2=0x641d> AMD Features=0x2010 Hyperthreading: 2 logical CPUs real memory = 2146893824 (2047 MB) avail memory = 2094931968 (1997 MB) MPTable: FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 4 CPUs cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0 cpu1 (AP): APIC ID: 1 cpu2 (AP): APIC ID: 6 cpu3 (AP): APIC ID: 7 ioapic0: Assuming intbase of 0 ioapic1: Assuming intbase of 24 ioapic2: Assuming intbase of 48 ioapic3: Assuming intbase of 72 ioapic0 irqs 0-23 on motherboard ioapic1 irqs 24-47 on motherboard ioapic2 irqs 48-71 on motherboard ioapic3 irqs 72-95 on motherboard npx0: [FAST] npx0: on motherboard npx0: INT 16 interface cpu0 on motherboard cpu1 on motherboard cpu2 on motherboard cpu3 on motherboard pcib0: pcibus 0 on motherboard pci0: on pcib0 pci0: at device 0.1 (no driver attached) pci0: at device 1.0 (no driver attached) pcib1: irq 16 at device 2.0 on pci0 pci1: on pcib1 pcib2: at device 0.0 on pci1 pci2: on pcib2 pci1: at device 0.1 (no driver attached) pcib3: at device 0.2 on pci1 pci3: on pcib3 pci1: at device 0.3 (no driver attached) pcib4: irq 16 at device 4.0 on pci0 pci4: on pcib4 pcib5: irq 16 at device 6.0 on pci0 pci5: on pcib5 pcib6: at device 28.0 on pci0 pci6: on pcib6 em0: port 0x2000-0x203f mem 0xdd20-0xdd21 irq 24 at device 1.0 on pci6 em0: Ethernet address: 00:30:48:84:f0:04 em1: port 0x2040-0x207f mem 0xdd22-0xdd23 irq 25 at device 2.0 on pci6 em1: Ethernet address: 00:30:48:84:f0:05 uhci0: port 0x1400-0x141f irq 16 at device 29.0 on pci0 uhci0: [GIANT-LOCKED] usb0: on uhci0 usb0: USB revision 1.0 uhub0: Intel UHCI root hub, class 9/0, rev 1.00/1.00, addr 1 uhub0: 2 ports with 2 removable, self powered uhci1: port 0x1420-0x143f irq 19 at device 29.1 on pci0 uhci1: [GIANT-LOCKED] usb1: on uhci1 usb1: USB revision 1.0 uhub1: Intel UHCI root hub, class 9/0, rev 1.00/1.00, addr 1 uhub1: 2 ports with 2 removable, self powered pci0: at device 29.4 (no driver attached) pci0: at device 29.5 (no driver attached) ehci0: mem 0xdd001400-0xdd0017ff irq 23 at device 29.7 on pci0 ehci0: [GIANT-LOCKED] usb2: EHCI version 1.0 usb2: companion controllers, 2 ports each: usb0 usb1 usb2: on ehci0 usb2: USB revision 2.0 uhub2: Intel EHCI root hub, class 9/0, rev 2.00/1.00, addr 1 uhub2: 4 ports with 4 removable, self powered pcib7: at device 30.0 on pci0 pci7: on pcib7 pci7: at device 1.0 (no driver attached) isab0: at device 31.0 on pci0 isa0: on isab0 atapci0: port 0x1f0-0x1f7,0x3f6,0x170-0x1
RE: ATA Issues Fixed?
> In 6.0 and early 6.1 I started having some major issues with > fatals. After a new WD hard drive, new cables, etc and hearing of > other issues I pretty much came to the conclusion there was a bug > in the OS somewhere regarding how it was handling ATA drives and > that it just hadn't been discovered yet. > > Could any of you that were having those nasty ATA drive issues > back then please tell me if you are pleased with 6.2 and whether > those fatals went away? Duh! I have the flu and I think I relapsed to my MSDOS days. Replace the word fatals above with kernel panics and maybe somebody will know what I am talking about. Geesh sorry! Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
ATA Issues Fixed?
In 6.0 and early 6.1 I started having some major issues with fatals. After a new WD hard drive, new cables, etc and hearing of other issues I pretty much came to the conclusion there was a bug in the OS somewhere regarding how it was handling ATA drives and that it just hadn't been discovered yet. Could any of you that were having those nasty ATA drive issues back then please tell me if you are pleased with 6.2 and whether those fatals went away? Cheers, Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Requiring Manual FSCK -y
> background_fsck="YES" Perfect thank you. -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Requiring Manual FSCK -y
It seems that my FBSD 6.1 machines are requiring a shell and manual fsck -y after a kernel panic and dump. Is there any way to automate this so that I don't have to get the guys at the datacenter to do it for me? -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: DMA TIMEOUT
> Add the following to your kernel config: > makeoptions DEBUG=-g > options DDB, KDB, GDB > options INVARIANTS > options INVARIANT_SUPPORT > options WITNESS_KDB > options WITNESS_SKIPSPIN > # Add this if you're using a firewire console > options BREAK_TO_DEBUGGER,ALT_BREAK_TO_DEBUGGER > # Do an unattended dump and reboot > options KDB_UNATTENDED > > Then recompile your kernel. The problem you're going to run into > since the problems you're having seem to be with the ATA code is that > there is a good chance you're not going to be able to dump the crash > dump to disk. I'd highly recommend using a serial or firewire > console. The problem persisted so I rebuilt with the debugging options you gave me. Other than the firewire console option if a panic occurs where do I go to obtain a backtrace? Yes ado1a is dying with a complete failure it seems so I am guessing I am going to need to look into the firewire option. But I would like to look into the conventional backtrace retrieval first. -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: DMA TIMEOUT
> Do you have a backtrace? No. To be honest I have worked a little with the debugging but that was a long time ago. We ran 4.10 for eons and never needed to debug a thing. I got spoiled I guess. So now that I need to add debugging and backtrace to my arsenal of knowledge could someone point me in the direction of a howto? It would be good to catch up. -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: DMA TIMEOUT
> Did you use a 80- or 40-ATA cable? > If you've configured your drives to do UATA-66 or faster then > FreeBSD (or > any other OS for that matter) will crash if you connect a second drive... It's an 80 wire. I have two drives on nearly all of my machines and never had an issue with crashing until just recently. Started in 5.4, gone in 6.1-PRE, back in 6.1-RC. It doesn't happen alot though under 6.1-RC. But under 5.4 it was about every 8 hours on average. So in one sense 6.1 is still saving my arsh. -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: DMA TIMEOUT
> I had a similar situation under 6.0. My secondary drive would > throw DMA read > errors at bootup, adding several minutes to the boot process, so > I ran it in > PIO mode. The upgrade to 6.1 solved it, both drives work fine as DMA now. Looks like the DMA errors are back in 6.1-RC with ATA or at least similar DMA errors. The new one froze my machine with an error like "Error while performing DMA_WRITE command". A new twist to the WRITE_DMA Timeouts of 5.4. I am starting to think that they aren't going to get the ATA issues all worked out anytime soon so they are changing the errors. ;-) And of course no automatic reboot on panic. -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Bge Kernel Compile Issues
> > Check your RAM lately? Kernel and world compiles usually make RAM issues > > evident. RAM checked out fine. > /usr/src/sys/dev/bge/if_bge.c > /usr/src/sys/dev/bge/if_bge.c: In function `bge_newbuf_jumbo': > /usr/src/sys/sys/mbuf.h:513: warning: 'zone' might be used > uninitialized in > this function The problems with GENERIC build, the BGE 'zone' issue, and half a dozen other similar uninitialized variable errors were all caused by this: options RESTARTABLE_PANICS Turning it off made it all build just fine on multiple machines. Always something right in front of your face isn't it? Now my question is with the RESTARTABLE_PANICS turned off are my machines going to hang at kernel panics? What is the deal with that? Still waiting for an answer on that one. -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Bge Kernel Compile Issues
> Check your RAM lately? Kernel and world compiles usually make RAM issues > evident. /usr/src/sys/dev/bge/if_bge.c /usr/src/sys/dev/bge/if_bge.c: In function `bge_newbuf_jumbo': /usr/src/sys/sys/mbuf.h:513: warning: 'zone' might be used uninitialized in this function I haven't ever seen errors like that caused by RAM but heck I will put it on the tester. What can I lose. Though I would think running the buildworld with a -j4 would have found a ram issue before building the kernel would have. -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Bge Kernel Compile Issues
> Yes I ran a buildworld first. > No I can't build the GENERIC config as it has ALOT more problems than just > the bge drivers. What I am saying about the GENERIC is that it chokes when trying to install alot of the GENERIC drivers that aren't needed. For instance the aic and aha. Once I disable those the compile gets alot farther and eventually gets to the bge issue. Which I have yet to get resolved. I am going to try the GENERIC again without changing anything at all. Even the firewall and SMP. Just right out of the box GENERIC. If it makes it to 6.1-PRE then I will try the custom kernel. Perhaps the sequence of events is the issue. Or maybe the firewall and SMP. We shall see. -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Bge Kernel Compile Issues
> Let us start with the usual questions: > Did you do a buildworld first? > Can you build a GENERIC kernel? Yes I ran a buildworld first. No I can't build the GENERIC config as it has ALOT more problems than just the bge drivers. -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Bge Kernel Compile Issues
150 USB Ethernet # FireWire support #device firewire # FireWire bus code #device sbp # SCSI over FireWire (Requires scbus and da) #device fwe # Ethernet over FireWire (non-standard!) Any assist is greatly appreciated, -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Partitioning on existing system
> tmpmfs="YES" > tmpsize="100m" > tmpmfs_flags="-S -M -o noexec,nosuid" > > Is there something wrong with this because it isn't creating a > /tmp at all. > > Copyright (c) 1992-2006 The FreeBSD Project. > Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 > The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. > FreeBSD 6.1-PRERELEASE #4: Mon Apr 3 22:25:51 PDT 2006 Ok, I am going to solve my own problem just for search engine food. Aside from adding the rc.conf variables there has to also be a /tmp folder in the first place. I don't know why. I would figure that if needed that that would be part of the boot scripts. But it isn't, so for us tmpmfs newbies: Create an empty /tmp folder Add the following to rc.conf: tmpmfs="YES" tmpsize="50m" tmpmfs_flags="-S -M -o noexec,nosuid" clear_tmp_enable="YES" reboot -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Partitioning on existing system
> "tmpmfs" and related variables in rc.conf(5). > By default it does a memory-backed disk instead of file-backed, but > that can be adjusted. > > Personally, I find memory-backed /tmp to be more useful anyway. tmpmfs="YES" tmpsize="100m" tmpmfs_flags="-S -M -o noexec,nosuid" Is there something wrong with this because it isn't creating a /tmp at all. Copyright (c) 1992-2006 The FreeBSD Project. Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. FreeBSD 6.1-PRERELEASE #4: Mon Apr 3 22:25:51 PDT 2006 -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Partitioning on existing system
> Thanks for the great kick in the right direction. Is it really > this easy? I > guess so cause it is working. I dropped in a helloworld script, chmoded it > and even as root I couldn't run it. Supreme! > > mdmfs -M -o noexec,nosuid -s 100m md0 /tmp > chmod 1777 /tmp > Ahhh crud! I guess it isn't that easy. After a reboot the old /tmp comes back with executable permissions. What do I have to do to keep the device around? -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Partitioning on existing system
Chad, > this appears that you want a file backed image file mounted as your / > tmp. This should be easy to do. Read the handbook for file-backed md > (4) devices. > > I don't use them for /tmp but I run them with jails... I have about > 60 such image files mounted now for example Thanks for the great kick in the right direction. Is it really this easy? I guess so cause it is working. I dropped in a helloworld script, chmoded it and even as root I couldn't run it. Supreme! mdmfs -M -o noexec,nosuid -s 100m md0 /tmp chmod 1777 /tmp Now anybody know of an easy way to search for chroot. Cheers, -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Partitioning on existing system
Ok I screwed up on one of my machines and forgot to put the /tmp directory on its own slice. How can I do this on an existing system? Linux has this procedure. Anything like it for FreeBSD? dd if=/dev/zero of=tmpMnt bs=1024 count=10 /sbin/mke2fs /dev/tmpMnt cd / cp -R /tmp /tmp_backup mount -o loop,noexec,nosuid,rw /dev/tmpMnt /tmp chmod 1777 /tmp cp -R /tmp_backup/* /tmp/ rm -rf /tmp_backup Any help is greatly appreciated. -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Panic Reboots
Debugging is not enabled ... yet. It just sits at the bottom of the panic screen and gives no options. The spot at the bottom is normally where it says "Rebooting in nn seconds" -- Wil Hatfield -Original Message- From: Anish Mistry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 11:51 AM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Wil Hatfield Subject: Re: Panic Reboots On Monday 03 April 2006 12:36, Wil Hatfield wrote: > Well that didn't work. My Fatal Trap 12 just sits there until we > get it plugged in and run a couple of fsck on it. > > So why doesn't 5.4 reboot on panics? And is this also an issue > with 6.x? Does it sit at a db> prompt? I normally have debugging enabled and have the following in my kernel config: options KDB, KDB_UNATTENDED -- Anish Mistry [EMAIL PROTECTED] AM Productions http://am-productions.biz/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: ATA Drive Issues
Ville, Yes I definitely noticed the "blame the hardware" issue. I suppose it is just the communities way of going through the process of elimination. The upgrade to 6.1 seems to be the best thing I have done so far. Now if I can just figure out why the 5.4 machine doesn't reboot on panics. I worry that 6.1 also has this issue but since it hasn't paniced I can't tell. Once I can figure that problem out I am home free. -- Wil Hatfield -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ville Lundberg Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 11:29 AM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: ATA Drive Issues > From: "Wil Hatfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I am giving 6.1 a whirl. > In the first 5 minutes I have already noticed that there are some > obvious filesystem issues fixed. I ran a tar and compared the > speed to that on one of my 4.x boxes and low and behold they are > about the same. THANK GOD! Hi, I had similar issues with a server freezing, and it also turned out to be WRITE_DMA failures on one of the (SATA) HDs. This was on 6.0-release, and upgrading to 6-stable helped. Nice to see it fixed your problem, too. 6.1 seems to be a really stable and performing branch. When reporting problems for HDs, it's good policy to always state the HD and motherboard/chipset brand, and to point out if/when one has checked/renewed the cabling (as you did). Also test results from smartmontools and HD manufacturer disk tests are good to state. Even when doing this, the FreeBSD community is peculiarly keen on blaming everything on failing HW and bad cabling. My experience is, though, that the first thing to blame (when cabling and HDs have passed tests), is the HD controller, especially when it's one of the crappy ones, like Silicon Image 3xxx. These crappy chipsets results in that FreeBSD doesn't have good support for them, as they are unreliable per definition. I don't meen to critisize FreeBSD, on the contrary. But it's a bit annoying to always get responses to all HD related stuff that "your HW is failing", when everything you've done for the last week is tests which claim it isn't. I'm not familiar with the innards of FreeBSD, so could someone explain why FreeBSD is so picky about cabling? I'm pretty well-read in physics, so the theory of FreeBSD using less-energetic electrons to pass data in the cables doesn't seem to hold up (insert smiley here). I mean, if other operating systems don't do some sort of error checking to exclude the errors on HD/CD-ROM drives that make FreeBSD hiccup, then what's up? --Ville ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Panic Reboots
Well that didn't work. My Fatal Trap 12 just sits there until we get it plugged in and run a couple of fsck on it. So why doesn't 5.4 reboot on panics? And is this also an issue with 6.x? -- Wil Hatfield -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Wil Hatfield Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 2:31 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Panic Reboots What are the best kernel options for rebooting after a panic? I am going to try these. Will this do the trick? Not sure about the restartable_panics so I figured I would ask. options PANIC_REBOOT_WAIT_TIME=10 options RESTARTABLE_PANICS > FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE-p11 #1: Sat Apr 1 13:58:33 PST 2006 I used to get reboots by default. Or at least as I recall I did. Did the default for PANIC_REBOOT_WAIT_TIME become -1 in this branch? -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: ATA Drive Issues
I did a make -j80 buildworld and this is about the worse that it got. The build finished without freezes of any kind. last pid: 98605; load averages: 19.98, 14.50, 10.16 up 0+00:52:34 15:54:35 45 processes: 1 running, 43 sleeping, 1 zombie CPU states: 14.8% user, 0.0% nice, 5.1% system, 0.2% interrupt, 79.9% idle Mem: 19M Active, 494M Inact, 158M Wired, 44K Cache, 112M Buf, 1331M Free Swap: 4096M Total, 4096M Free So I ran it again with two big tarballs being made in the background and that one finished too as did the tarballs in a very timely manner. I think I have found some stability and performance for my new machines. Thanks for all the help guys. The skies look so much bluer and brighter today.. ;-) Cheers, -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: ATA Drive Issues
I am giving 6.1 a whirl. In the first 5 minutes I have already noticed that there are some obvious filesystem issues fixed. I ran a tar and compared the speed to that on one of my 4.x boxes and low and behold they are about the same. THANK GOD! Now I didn't put your -j100 to the test but I did give a -j20 a shot. No DMA issues, no kernel panics, and actually pretty good performance overall. 109 processes: 20 running, 88 sleeping, 1 zombie CPU states: 98.0% user, 0.0% nice, 2.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 0.0% idle Mem: 147M Active, 72M Inact, 109M Wired, 112M Buf, 1673M Free Swap: 4096M Total, 4096M Free PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 49641 root1 1290 12476K 11880K RUN1 0:01 45.00% cc1 49487 root1 1210 10148K 9584K CPU3 0 0:01 29.60% cc1 49585 root1 1210 12780K 12220K RUN0 0:01 28.71% cc1 49653 root1 1290 11036K 10428K RUN3 0:00 27.00% cc1 49649 root1 1280 9476K 8880K RUN1 0:00 24.00% cc1 49571 root1 1210 12540K 11972K RUN0 0:01 22.06% cc1 49592 root1 1210 11728K 11104K RUN0 0:00 13.31% cc1 49618 root1 1220 10684K 10116K RUN0 0:01 12.61% cc1 49599 root1 1210 10924K 10352K CPU1 0 0:00 12.26% cc1 49595 root1 1210 10576K 10012K RUN0 0:00 11.91% cc1 49632 root1 1210 10876K 10312K CPU2 0 0:00 10.85% cc1 49605 root1 1210 10704K 10132K RUN0 0:00 10.50% cc1 49630 root1 1210 10656K 10088K RUN0 0:00 10.50% cc1 49603 root1 1210 10864K 10296K RUN0 0:00 10.50% cc1 49621 root1 1210 10712K 10144K RUN0 0:00 8.75% cc1 49637 root1 1210 10920K 10300K RUN0 0:00 8.75% cc1 49611 root1 1210 10936K 10364K RUN0 0:00 8.40% cc1 49470 root1 80 3576K 3464K ppwait 2 0:00 3.50% make 588 root1 960 6120K 3096K select 0 0:03 0.00% sshd 37381 root1 960 548K 436K select 0 0:00 0.00% make 37467 root1 960 808K 696K select 0 0:00 0.00% make 37380 root1 960 2472K 1720K CPU0 0 0:00 0.00% top 597 root1 960 6080K 3080K select 0 0:00 0.00% sshd 47338 root1 960 772K 664K select 0 0:00 0.00% make 603 root1 200 5108K 3200K pause 2 0:00 0.00% csh 594 root1 200 4852K 2880K pause 0 0:00 0.00% csh Now off to try to kill it some more. -- Wil Hatfield -Original Message- From: Anish Mistry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 6:42 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Wil Hatfield Subject: Re: ATA Drive Issues On Friday 31 March 2006 21:28, Wil Hatfield wrote: > Beto, > > > fair enough, but you should be able to use some of the > > performance testing tools to hammer the server before pushing it > > live. > > Suggestions for tools that REALLY hammer? "make -j100 buildworld" is always fun :) > > > -- > Wil Hatfield > > > > -Original Message- > From: Norberto Meijome [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 5:17 PM > To: Wil Hatfield > Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: ATA Drive Issues > > > On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 18:00:34 -0800 > > "Wil Hatfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Beto, > > > > I am currently trying to upgrade one without customers on it to > > 6.0. But as was the problem with 5.4 the problems don't show up > > until the machine is under high load. So even under 6 I won't > > have a clue if the issues are fixed until I get the customers on > > it. So it doesn't make alot of difference. > > fair enough, but you should be able to use some of the performance > testing tools to hammer the server before pushing it live. > > > I checked with the manufacturer or the machine and they assure me > > that they installed brand new high quality 80/40 cables. But then > > again what did I expect them to say. So do you know of a good > > high quality 80/40 manufacture and where I can buy some new > > cables? What's the best of the best? > > not really - i had my bad experience with cables, just went out, > got the ones that a) weren't 10 for a buck , b) actually looked > well built. I just went to my preferred provider here in town > (eer... "online" actually...but they are local (Syd, AU) ) > > > At Supermicro's recommendation I already phlashed to the latest > > bios. > > cool - but my point was not to assume that new bios would be better > - it may actually be a step backwards when combined with your other > hardware and software. > > > Well it is good to know you think 6 is b
Panic Reboots
What are the best kernel options for rebooting after a panic? I am going to try these. Will this do the trick? Not sure about the restartable_panics so I figured I would ask. options PANIC_REBOOT_WAIT_TIME=10 options RESTARTABLE_PANICS > FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE-p11 #1: Sat Apr 1 13:58:33 PST 2006 I used to get reboots by default. Or at least as I recall I did. Did the default for PANIC_REBOOT_WAIT_TIME become -1 in this branch? -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Merging Groups
Nevermind I got it. audit:*:77: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Wil Hatfield Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 8:08 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Merging Groups U I have a bad habit of not merging the /etc/group file. Can someone send me over the line from your FBSD 6.0 install, for the new audit group? Thanks, -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Merging Groups
U I have a bad habit of not merging the /etc/group file. Can someone send me over the line from your FBSD 6.0 install, for the new audit group? Thanks, -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: ATA Drive Issues
I'm not that frustrated. ;-) -- Wil Hatfield -Original Message- From: Anish Mistry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 6:42 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Wil Hatfield Subject: Re: ATA Drive Issues On Friday 31 March 2006 21:28, Wil Hatfield wrote: > Beto, > > > fair enough, but you should be able to use some of the > > performance testing tools to hammer the server before pushing it > > live. > > Suggestions for tools that REALLY hammer? "make -j100 buildworld" is always fun :) > > > -- > Wil Hatfield > > > > -Original Message- > From: Norberto Meijome [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 5:17 PM > To: Wil Hatfield > Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: ATA Drive Issues > > > On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 18:00:34 -0800 > > "Wil Hatfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Beto, > > > > I am currently trying to upgrade one without customers on it to > > 6.0. But as was the problem with 5.4 the problems don't show up > > until the machine is under high load. So even under 6 I won't > > have a clue if the issues are fixed until I get the customers on > > it. So it doesn't make alot of difference. > > fair enough, but you should be able to use some of the performance > testing tools to hammer the server before pushing it live. > > > I checked with the manufacturer or the machine and they assure me > > that they installed brand new high quality 80/40 cables. But then > > again what did I expect them to say. So do you know of a good > > high quality 80/40 manufacture and where I can buy some new > > cables? What's the best of the best? > > not really - i had my bad experience with cables, just went out, > got the ones that a) weren't 10 for a buck , b) actually looked > well built. I just went to my preferred provider here in town > (eer... "online" actually...but they are local (Syd, AU) ) > > > At Supermicro's recommendation I already phlashed to the latest > > bios. > > cool - but my point was not to assume that new bios would be better > - it may actually be a step backwards when combined with your other > hardware and software. > > > Well it is good to know you think 6 is better than 5.4. But then > > again you are running SATA and we all know 6 runs SATA better. > > Hopefully it runs ATA better too. > > actually, that's the only box with SATA - all the others run PATA > or SCSI. > B > > > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" -- Anish Mistry [EMAIL PROTECTED] AM Productions http://am-productions.biz/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: ATA Drive Issues
Beto, > fair enough, but you should be able to use some of the performance > testing tools to hammer the server before pushing it live. Suggestions for tools that REALLY hammer? -- Wil Hatfield -Original Message- From: Norberto Meijome [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 5:17 PM To: Wil Hatfield Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ATA Drive Issues On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 18:00:34 -0800 "Wil Hatfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Beto, > > I am currently trying to upgrade one without customers on it to 6.0. > But as was the problem with 5.4 the problems don't show up until the > machine is under high load. So even under 6 I won't have a clue if > the issues are fixed until I get the customers on it. So it doesn't > make alot of difference. fair enough, but you should be able to use some of the performance testing tools to hammer the server before pushing it live. > > I checked with the manufacturer or the machine and they assure me > that they installed brand new high quality 80/40 cables. But then > again what did I expect them to say. So do you know of a good high > quality 80/40 manufacture and where I can buy some new cables? What's > the best of the best? not really - i had my bad experience with cables, just went out, got the ones that a) weren't 10 for a buck , b) actually looked well built. I just went to my preferred provider here in town (eer... "online" actually...but they are local (Syd, AU) ) > > At Supermicro's recommendation I already phlashed to the latest bios. > cool - but my point was not to assume that new bios would be better - it may actually be a step backwards when combined with your other hardware and software. > Well it is good to know you think 6 is better than 5.4. But then > again you are running SATA and we all know 6 runs SATA better. > Hopefully it runs ATA better too. actually, that's the only box with SATA - all the others run PATA or SCSI. B ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: ATA Drive Issues
Just never seen that before out of WD. Seen it with Seagate though. So I guess it could happen. But there are 3 batches involved I believe. The 4 200GB could be from the same batch but unlikely. Purchased first two then the second two a month later. Wil Hatfield -Original Message- From: David Kelly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 5:54 PM To: FreeBSD Questions Cc: Wil Hatfield Subject: Re: ATA Drive Issues On Mar 31, 2006, at 6:25 PM, Wil Hatfield wrote: > So are you saying that I have 5 new drives (a week old) all with > the same > problems? And S.M.A.R.T doesn't show any of the issues. > > I need to go play the lottery. ;-) Whats so strange about the notion of 5 identical new drives out of the same batch having the same problem? -- David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Upgrading 5.4 -> 6.0
You're right my bad. I forgot to run make buildworld first. This chit has me pretty frustrated. Thanks, Wil Hatfield -Original Message- From: Anish Mistry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 5:53 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Wil Hatfield Subject: Re: Upgrading 5.4 -> 6.0 On Friday 31 March 2006 20:41, Wil Hatfield wrote: > Is there a process for upgrading from 5.4 to 6.0 via CVS? Or do I > need to do this upgrade from CD? Never received this error before. > > > -- > > >>> stage 1: configuring the kernel > > -- > cd /usr/src/sys/i386/conf; > PATH=/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/legacy/usr/sbin:/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/lega >cy/usr/bi > n:/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/legacy/usr/games:/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/sb >in:/usr/o > bj/usr/src/tmp/usr/bin:/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/games:/sbin:/bin:/u >sr/sbin:/ usr/bin config -d /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CUSTOM-KERNEL > /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/CUSTOM-KERNEL > ERROR: version of config(8) does not match kernel! > config version = 500013, version required = 63 > > Make sure that /usr/src/usr.sbin/config is in sync > with your /usr/src/sys and install a new config binary > before trying this again. > > If running the new config fails check your config > file against the GENERIC or LINT config files for > changes in config syntax, or option/device naming > conventions > > *** Error code 1 > > Stop in /usr/src. > *** Error code 1 > > Stop in /usr/src. > > > -- > Wil Hatfield You need to follow the correct procedure. make buildworld && make kernel KERNCONF=CUSTOM-KERNEL reboot to since user mode, mount the partitions mergemaster -p && make installworld && mergemaster -- Anish Mistry [EMAIL PROTECTED] AM Productions http://am-productions.biz/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: ATA Drive Issues
Beto, I am currently trying to upgrade one without customers on it to 6.0. But as was the problem with 5.4 the problems don't show up until the machine is under high load. So even under 6 I won't have a clue if the issues are fixed until I get the customers on it. So it doesn't make alot of difference. I checked with the manufacturer or the machine and they assure me that they installed brand new high quality 80/40 cables. But then again what did I expect them to say. So do you know of a good high quality 80/40 manufacture and where I can buy some new cables? What's the best of the best? At Supermicro's recommendation I already phlashed to the latest bios. Well it is good to know you think 6 is better than 5.4. But then again you are running SATA and we all know 6 runs SATA better. Hopefully it runs ATA better too. -- Wil Hatfield -Original Message- From: Norberto Meijome [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 4:48 PM To: Wil Hatfield Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ATA Drive Issues On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 15:43:35 -0800 "Wil Hatfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ok I am just nervous about going to 6.x and putting these customers > through this not once more, but twice when I have to go back to 4.x. Sorry for asking the obvious, but why not try with 6 without any customers on the servers? putting new hardware/software straight into production seems to me like looking for troubles. Anyway, back to the problem at hand, just because they ARE new doesn't mean the cables/drives are NOT bad. Granted, that many drives in a bad state would be weird...but not really if they are from the same manufacturer's batch. smartmon clearing them would suggest that it's cabling issue. seriously, TRYING new good quality cables from a different provider can't be that hard/expensive? alternatively, try different BIOS version. usually a new version of the bIOS fixes problems. BUT I have a server (dual amd64 TYAN box, 2x SATA-I controllers with 4 SATA-II drives) which would simply not boot with a newer version of the bios, so I left it at the original BIOS (yes, keep backups of your BIOS upgrades! :-) . FWIW, 6 is better than 5.4, at least for me. good luck, Beto ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Upgrading 5.4 -> 6.0
Is there a process for upgrading from 5.4 to 6.0 via CVS? Or do I need to do this upgrade from CD? Never received this error before. -- >>> stage 1: configuring the kernel -- cd /usr/src/sys/i386/conf; PATH=/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/legacy/usr/sbin:/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/legacy/usr/bi n:/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/legacy/usr/games:/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/sbin:/usr/o bj/usr/src/tmp/usr/bin:/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/games:/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/ usr/bin config -d /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CUSTOM-KERNEL /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/CUSTOM-KERNEL ERROR: version of config(8) does not match kernel! config version = 500013, version required = 63 Make sure that /usr/src/usr.sbin/config is in sync with your /usr/src/sys and install a new config binary before trying this again. If running the new config fails check your config file against the GENERIC or LINT config files for changes in config syntax, or option/device naming conventions *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/src. *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/src. -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: ATA Drive Issues
David, So are you saying that I have 5 new drives (a week old) all with the same problems? And S.M.A.R.T doesn't show any of the issues. I need to go play the lottery. ;-) -- Wil Hatfield -Original Message- From: David Kelly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 3:50 PM To: FreeBSD Questions Cc: Wil Hatfield Subject: Re: ATA Drive Issues On Mar 31, 2006, at 4:52 PM, fbsd_user wrote: > Your problems may be caused by your HD starting to go bad. I agree. Its the classic symptoms of cable, power supply noise, and/ or HD CPU going sour. I have a brand new drive here with similar problems. And its twin from the same batch without. -- David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: ATA Drive Issues
Yah but I didn't see it as being "fixed" in 6.x either. That is why I mentioned the lack of acknowledgement. If there wasn't a bug acknowledged and tracked how can it be fixed? Perhaps none of the Write_DMA problemed folks have gone to 6.x and when they finally do the problem with show up again. Who knows. I guess maybe I am supposed to be that person. Ok I am just nervous about going to 6.x and putting these customers through this not once more, but twice when I have to go back to 4.x. So far I have the Write_DMA problems and Fatal Traps that claim /dev/ad0 to be the problem. Three outages today. Maybe it is time to look into the penguin. -- Wil Hatfield -Original Message- From: Anish Mistry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 3:34 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Wil Hatfield Subject: Re: ATA Drive Issues On Friday 31 March 2006 17:45, Wil Hatfield wrote: > I was afraid Soren was going to be mentioned. Well shouldn't the > FreeBSD 5.4 release information state that it isn't recommended for > machines with ATA drives? I really have no way of downgrading to > 5.3 without losing a couple hundred customers over it. But with > all these filesystem freezes I guess I will eventually lose them > anyways. > > Without the acknowledgement of the bugs and proper bug tracking I > doubt that these issues are going to get fixed in 5.5 or 6.1 > either. It seems the ATA issues are being ignored. How can a > release make it this far down the branch without fixing the good > old ATA drive issues first? ATA on 6.x and CURRENT are being maintained by Soren, just not 5.x. Moving to 6.x should fix the problem. Checking gnats only shows outstanding WRITE_DMA issues for 5.x. > > Cheers, > > -- > Wil Hatfield > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anish > Mistry Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 2:29 PM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Cc: Wil Hatfield - HyperConX > Subject: Re: ATA Drive Issues > > On Friday 31 March 2006 17:08, Wil Hatfield - HyperConX wrote: > > What is the problem with 5.4 and ATA drives? I am running the > > latest release of FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE-p11. I have two basic ATA > > drives, no raids and no scsi anything. Every now and then under a > > bit of load the harddrive freezes with either a kernel panic or a > > Write_DMA error. I have to reboot the machine and run fsck -y to > > recover. Sometimes I have to run it twice. > >From my understanding ATA in 5.4 is slightly broken since Soren > > hasn't > > actually touched that code. The last time he touched the 5.x > branch was for 5.3. I had a weird issue with a 5.3->5.4 upgrade a > while back. My tape drive disappeared :(. I didn't have time to > investigate, so I just backed down to 5.3, which works fine while I > work up a schedule to migrate to 6.X. > > -- > Anish Mistry > > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" -- Anish Mistry ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: ATA Drive Issues
5 brand new harddrives all going bad within 5 hours of installing FreeBSD 5.4? Not likely. And as I said smarttools reports there are no issues with any of the drives. What size/type/manufacturer are your ATA drives that you are running 5.4 with? -- Wil Hatfield -Original Message- From: fbsd_user [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 2:52 PM To: Wil Hatfield; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: ATA Drive Issues Hay I am ran ata HD on 5.4 and now on 6.0 with out any problems. Your problems may be caused by your HD starting to go bad. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Wil Hatfield Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 5:46 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: ATA Drive Issues I was afraid Soren was going to be mentioned. Well shouldn't the FreeBSD 5.4 release information state that it isn't recommended for machines with ATA drives? I really have no way of downgrading to 5.3 without losing a couple hundred customers over it. But with all these filesystem freezes I guess I will eventually lose them anyways. Without the acknowledgement of the bugs and proper bug tracking I doubt that these issues are going to get fixed in 5.5 or 6.1 either. It seems the ATA issues are being ignored. How can a release make it this far down the branch without fixing the good old ATA drive issues first? Cheers, -- Wil Hatfield -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anish Mistry Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 2:29 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Wil Hatfield - HyperConX Subject: Re: ATA Drive Issues On Friday 31 March 2006 17:08, Wil Hatfield - HyperConX wrote: > What is the problem with 5.4 and ATA drives? I am running the > latest release of FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE-p11. I have two basic ATA > drives, no raids and no scsi anything. Every now and then under a > bit of load the harddrive freezes with either a kernel panic or a > Write_DMA error. I have to reboot the machine and run fsck -y to > recover. Sometimes I have to run it twice. >From my understanding ATA in 5.4 is slightly broken since Soren hasn't actually touched that code. The last time he touched the 5.x branch was for 5.3. I had a weird issue with a 5.3->5.4 upgrade a while back. My tape drive disappeared :(. I didn't have time to investigate, so I just backed down to 5.3, which works fine while I work up a schedule to migrate to 6.X. -- Anish Mistry ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: ATA Drive Issues
I was afraid Soren was going to be mentioned. Well shouldn't the FreeBSD 5.4 release information state that it isn't recommended for machines with ATA drives? I really have no way of downgrading to 5.3 without losing a couple hundred customers over it. But with all these filesystem freezes I guess I will eventually lose them anyways. Without the acknowledgement of the bugs and proper bug tracking I doubt that these issues are going to get fixed in 5.5 or 6.1 either. It seems the ATA issues are being ignored. How can a release make it this far down the branch without fixing the good old ATA drive issues first? Cheers, -- Wil Hatfield -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anish Mistry Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 2:29 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Wil Hatfield - HyperConX Subject: Re: ATA Drive Issues On Friday 31 March 2006 17:08, Wil Hatfield - HyperConX wrote: > What is the problem with 5.4 and ATA drives? I am running the > latest release of FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE-p11. I have two basic ATA > drives, no raids and no scsi anything. Every now and then under a > bit of load the harddrive freezes with either a kernel panic or a > Write_DMA error. I have to reboot the machine and run fsck -y to > recover. Sometimes I have to run it twice. >From my understanding ATA in 5.4 is slightly broken since Soren hasn't actually touched that code. The last time he touched the 5.x branch was for 5.3. I had a weird issue with a 5.3->5.4 upgrade a while back. My tape drive disappeared :(. I didn't have time to investigate, so I just backed down to 5.3, which works fine while I work up a schedule to migrate to 6.X. -- Anish Mistry ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
ATA Drive Issues
782MB [387621/16/63] at ata0-master PIO4 ad1: 190782MB [387621/16/63] at ata0-slave PIO4 acd0: CDROM at ata1-master PIO4 SMP: AP CPU #2 Launched! SMP: AP CPU #1 Launched! SMP: AP CPU #3 Launched! Mounting root from ufs:/dev/ad0s1a em0: Link is up 100 Mbps Full Duplex Let me know if anyone wants more info. Any help or insight that anyone can provide would be great. These machines went are production as of just recently and these issues didn't appear until put under some load. So basically I am now screwed. HELP! Cheers, -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
ATA Drive Issues
782MB [387621/16/63] at ata0-master PIO4 ad1: 190782MB [387621/16/63] at ata0-slave PIO4 acd0: CDROM at ata1-master PIO4 SMP: AP CPU #2 Launched! SMP: AP CPU #1 Launched! SMP: AP CPU #3 Launched! Mounting root from ufs:/dev/ad0s1a em0: Link is up 100 Mbps Full Duplex Let me know if anyone wants more info. Any help or insight that anyone can provide would be great. These machines went are production as of just recently and these issues didn't appear until put under some load. So basically I am now screwed. HELP! Cheers, -- Wil Hatfield ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: question on hosting and memory
David, First no host should be running anything less than dual 2.x Xeons and 1GB of RAM. Thats a minimum. Add a large swap of about 4GB. Then tailor your 1.3 so it only compiles with the components necessary. Basic core, PHP, Frontpage, Python as DSO whenever possible. And your PHP should only be compiled with what you actually expect to use. Our httpd's are using about 10MB each with PHP loaded. Then fine tune your httpd.conf timeouts so that those idle processes don't stick around too long. Then tune your kernel settings a bit. I use these in sysctl.conf and came about them through trial and error mostly. Of course this means that somebody on the list here may disagree with them but they work well and help keep the processes in line. kern.ipc.somaxconn=1024 kern.maxfiles=2 kern.maxproc=12328 kern.maxprocperuid=11084 kern.ipc.nmbclusters=32768 net.inet.tcp.recvspace=32768 Of course you will need to fine tune other full time applications on the machine to use as little resources as possible themselves. This includes your SMTP server, Pop3 server, etc. The more you can fine tune the faster the machine can do its business and move on to the next task. Hope it helps, Wil Hatfield HyperConX -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of David Banning Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 10:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: question on hosting and memory I am running apache 1.3 with php and I find when that for each person who visits the site, an additional 29 meg is consumed of my measly 512M. Searching around, it seems like this is relatively normal. So here is my question. How do big-time servers handle these type of memory requirements? Presumably there are servers out there getting thousands of visitors at once. Do they have 29 Meg * 1000 for every thousand visitors? At what memory ceiling do they setup another server machine to handle the load? Wouldn't it require a ton of servers to handle a load of a thousand visitors? I am nowhere in this league, but the question comes to mind because it seems crazy that 20 visitors to my site can clog things up, simply because I choose to run apache and php. I have been looking at lighttpd decrease memory usage, but I require url rewriting and I find the documentation for lighttpd is lacking is this area. Any comments or suggestions are welcome - -- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Making the Leap to 5.4 and 64bit
Chad, That answers my final question of which media to install from. And now I even understand why. Thanks a million. Wil Hatfield HyperConX -Original Message- From: Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 4:21 PM To: Wil Hatfield Cc: FreeBSD - Questions Subject: Re: Making the Leap to 5.4 and 64bit On Aug 3, 2005, at 4:16 PM, Wil Hatfield wrote: > Roland, > > Thanks for the tips and insight. Are they going to flame me on the > freebsd-amd64 list for my Xeon questions? As long as they are 64bit questions, they shouldn't. Intel adopted the 64bit extensions that AMD had made for their own 64bit Xeon series so the SW is the same. It has the amd64 name since it started with the AMD opteron, which for a while was the only chip with the architecture. Chad > > > Wil Hatfield > HyperConX > > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]" > --- Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC Your Web App and Email hosting provider [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Making the Leap to 5.4 and 64bit
Chad, So I can kick it down to 32bit. Great to know and I may have to do that myself. I will probably give the build a whirl both ways and compare some benchmarks. Maybe even all 3 ways as I have some R&D time. Any settings I should know about to kick the install down to 32bit? I suppose 4.11 is native 32bit or do I have to kick that down too on a 64bit system? Cheers, Wil Hatfield HyperConX -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 2:42 PM To: Wil Hatfield - HyperConX Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Making the Leap to 5.4 and 64bit On Aug 3, 2005, at 3:22 PM, Wil Hatfield - HyperConX wrote: > First, greetings to the group and nice to meet everyone's > acquaintance. > > We are getting ready to make a big leap to Dual 64bit Xeon machines > (SuperMicro) and FreeBSD 5.4. We would really have like to stick > with 4.11 > but from what I am gathering it certainly doesn't support the 64bit > processors. Jut FYI. You should be able to run 4.11 in i386 (32 bit mode) (or 5.4 in the same mode) if you want. I run dual 64bit opterons running i386 32bit version of 5.3... If you don't need the 64bit mode and there are 32bit things that you do require, you may want to consider it for the time being. Chad --- Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC Your Web App and Email hosting provider [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Making the Leap to 5.4 and 64bit
Roland, Thanks for the tips and insight. Are they going to flame me on the freebsd-amd64 list for my Xeon questions? Wil Hatfield HyperConX ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Making the Leap to 5.4 and 64bit
First, greetings to the group and nice to meet everyone's acquaintance. We are getting ready to make a big leap to Dual 64bit Xeon machines (SuperMicro) and FreeBSD 5.4. We would really have like to stick with 4.11 but from what I am gathering it certainly doesn't support the 64bit processors. Now on to my questions: Can anyone share any of their experiences that I may also encounter? How can I make the most out of SMP and the dual 64bits? Any undocumented or hard to find settings that I should know about? Are there any commonly used applications that won't run on this system? Thanks for your time, Wil Hatfield HyperConX ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
