RE: FreeBSD 3.2
-Original Message- From: Chuck Swiger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2005 11:34 AM To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 3.2 Oh I always love these kinds of statements. Even if I am a lawyer (which I'll say I'm not, to save you from arguing that I am not) guess what - unless I'm retained by you or the OP for the purposes of giving legal advice, even as a lawyer, my advice has no legal significance whatsover. Yes, that's true - a lawyer's advice has no significance - unless paid for. You're simply wrong. Attorney-client privilege applies even when a lawyer has not been paid-- I said unless I'm retained by you or the OP for the purposes of giving legal advice Technically your correct on the paid for issue, it was a smartass comment of mine - every lawyer I've ever met doesen't give anyone dick unless he or she gets money for it, so from a practical standpoint the two statements are the same thing. But, I'm sure you could probably find a few exceptions to that if you looked hard enough. There must be somewhere at least 1 lawyer that gave someone something of value, by accident, without extracting his pound of flesh. I am qualified here on this topis as an expert witness however, and as a matter of fact, lawyers pay people like me to explain how laws like this apply to the real world. Oh, I've served as an expert witness, too. I was paid to evaluate software to determine whether copyright infringement had occured because the technical skills required to evaluate software require skills which people who are not experts with computers don't have. Whis is a simple way of saying you were paid to render an opinion, ie: advice on whether copyright law applied to an example in the real world. Jsut what I said. And of course I'll also gloss over the whole issue that your implying that laws are uninterpretable by the average person unless they are a lawyer. Riiggghhttt. So I guess you get a lawyer every time you get a parking ticket, eh? ;-) The law applies regardless of whether the average person is able to understand a specific matter or not. However, for the sake of example, if you are not an accountant, then you probably [1] cannot be held guilty of *willfully* violating accounting laws which are only comprehensible to an accountant (or to a lawyer specializing in that area of law). Accounting law is much more complex than what we are talking about here. Likewise, someone who has served as a legal expert on computer matters is expected to have a greater understanding of the ethics and professional responsibilities involved with computer usage. For example, because I am a network manager responsible for a network infrastructure including electronic mail systems, I know that I have a legal obligation to report child pornography in spam (ie, an email containing pictures as a MIME attachment, or a link to a porn web site) if and when I become aware of such filth. Yes, it is very unfortunate how many network managers out there somehow don't become aware of such illegal activities even when their own networks are stuffed with them. Makes you wonder how exactly they are managing their networks. -- [1]: But this becomes more complicated when you are expected to discuss matters with your accountants as part of your responsibilities: there are several high-profile cases going on right now involving CEOs who claimed to know nothing about accounting or financial irregularities who are still being prosecuted The rest of the industry knew Ebbers was running a Ponzi scheme years before it collapsed. What the courts in that mess are trying to do now is figure out how to make the obvious legally stick. It is a shame, though, that besides him the US government regulators aren't right up there with him, as their irresponsibility in failing to apply the anti-trust acts are what allowed the mess to get as big as it is. See 18 USC 1030: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_ 1030000-.html Interesting cite, let's look a bit more closely though: (a)(1) having knowingly accessed a computer without authorization He has authorization to -access- the computer. Note that access is not spelled out as a definition in section (e) (a)(1) or exceeding authorized access OK, so here we have something - as you could argue that updating the system is exceeding the authorized access on the machine, right? Except that, continuing on in this section: and by means of such conduct...unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national defense Ok, so section (a)(1) isn't applicable. So continuing on: (a)(2) exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains-... information from any department or agency of the United States I'll skip (a)(2)(a) and (a)(2)(c) as they obviously
RE: FreeBSD 3.2
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Chuck Swiger Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 10:34 AM To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 3.2 Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: [ ... ] Seriously - from a legal perspective you have absolutely no obligation to follow their restrictions unless of course they were smart enough to have you sign a piece of paper before they let you in the door. No contractual relationship exists between you and them now, you can ignore what they tell you to do with impunity as long as you don't break any civil laws, ie: theft, malicious mischief, etc. All they can do is tell you your not welcome in the door anymore. Ted, it's better to give no advice than bad advice. This is especially true when the issue is a legal matter, and you are not a lawyer. Oh I always love these kinds of statements. Even if I am a lawyer (which I'll say I'm not, to save you from arguing that I am not) guess what - unless I'm retained by you or the OP for the purposes of giving legal advice, even as a lawyer, my advice has no legal significance whatsover. Yes, that's true - a lawyer's advice has no significance - unless paid for. I am qualified here on this topis as an expert witness however, and as a matter of fact, lawyers pay people like me to explain how laws like this apply to the real world. And of course I'll also gloss over the whole issue that your implying that laws are uninterpretable by the average person unless they are a lawyer. Riiggghhttt. So I guess you get a lawyer every time you get a parking ticket, eh? ;-) See 18 USC 1030: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_ 1030000-.html Interesting cite, let's look a bit more closely though: (a)(1) having knowingly accessed a computer without authorization He has authorization to -access- the computer. Note that access is not spelled out as a definition in section (e) (a)(1) or exceeding authorized access OK, so here we have something - as you could argue that updating the system is exceeding the authorized access on the machine, right? Except that, continuing on in this section: and by means of such conduct...unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national defense Ok, so section (a)(1) isn't applicable. So continuing on: (a)(2) exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains-... information from any department or agency of the United States I'll skip (a)(2)(a) and (a)(2)(c) as they obviously aren't applicable. So it sounds like you might have a case here - except for one problem, that a backup-reformat-reinstall isn't accessing information in the computer over and above his authorized access. I'll admit this is a grey area and can be argued both ways - but bear with me and follow along. He obviously has permission for a certain level of access already on this machine. If he's administering it, as he says he is, then he has permission to access stuff like the root account that controls all settings and configuration of the system, ie: the environment of the system. Now here is the catch. The OP as administrator of the system has permission to access all the bits he needs to be able to effect a backup, reformat and install of a new version of FreeBSD. He has this because it's the same dataset of information that as administrator he already has permission to access. He does not really need to know anything about the data inside the FreeBSD environment. In short, the OP hasn't actually obtained information here. He's just taken the information inside the environment and shoved it aside, did some administrative things (the reformat) then brought the information back. Just like a blind man moving eggs around in a box, he's obtained no information about what's inside the eggs. Now you may argue this, but clearly the intent of the law of section (a)(2)(b) is that the person has obtained information for some sort of use. Maybe he wants to sell it, maybe he wants to just look at it. However you slice it, the law appears to intend that the information obtainer once they have obtained the information, they actually know what the information is. The OP when doing a reformat operation to update the system, he doesen't actually know what the information really is. So, I don't see how you can argue that he obtained information, so that this section applies, but feel free to do so. So, (a)(2) isn't applicable either. Let's continue on: (a)(3)without authorization to access any nonpublic computer ... such conduct affects that use by or for OK, so you could argue that a repair operation would affect the use by or for And that is true - it could. However, a good repair by definition would not result in the affecting of the use by or for, we aren't talking he nukes FreeBSD and reloads Windows which would substantially affect the use of the machine, we are talking he
Re: FreeBSD 3.2
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: [ ... ] Seriously - from a legal perspective you have absolutely no obligation to follow their restrictions unless of course they were smart enough to have you sign a piece of paper before they let you in the door. No contractual relationship exists between you and them now, you can ignore what they tell you to do with impunity as long as you don't break any civil laws, ie: theft, malicious mischief, etc. All they can do is tell you your not welcome in the door anymore. Ted, it's better to give no advice than bad advice. This is especially true when the issue is a legal matter, and you are not a lawyer. Oh I always love these kinds of statements. Even if I am a lawyer (which I'll say I'm not, to save you from arguing that I am not) guess what - unless I'm retained by you or the OP for the purposes of giving legal advice, even as a lawyer, my advice has no legal significance whatsover. Yes, that's true - a lawyer's advice has no significance - unless paid for. You're simply wrong. Attorney-client privilege applies even when a lawyer has not been paid-- it starts when a client initially discusses a matter with the intent of retaining the lawyer, even the lawyer decides not to take the case and no money changes hands. United States v. United Shoe Machinery Corp. is often cited as the test for privilege: The privilege applies only if (1) the asserted holder of the privilege is or sought to become a client; (2) the person to whom the communication is made (a) is a member of the bar of a court, or his subordinate and (b) in connection with the communication is acting as a lawyer; (3) the communication related to a fact of which the attorney was informed (a) by his client (b) without the presence of strangers (c) for the purpose of securing primarily either (i) an opinion on law or (ii) or legal services or (ii) assistance in some legal proceeding, and not (d) for the purpose of committing a crime or tort; and (4) the privilege has been (a) claimed and (b) not waived by the client. This privilege is of great significance with regard to discovery. I am qualified here on this topis as an expert witness however, and as a matter of fact, lawyers pay people like me to explain how laws like this apply to the real world. Oh, I've served as an expert witness, too. I was paid to evaluate software to determine whether copyright infringement had occured because the technical skills required to evaluate software require skills which people who are not experts with computers don't have. Being paid to give expert advice on a topic doesn't make me a legal expert any more than the lawyer who paid me was expecting me to provide legal advice-- that's what the lawyer does, not me. (And not you, either.) And of course I'll also gloss over the whole issue that your implying that laws are uninterpretable by the average person unless they are a lawyer. Riiggghhttt. So I guess you get a lawyer every time you get a parking ticket, eh? ;-) The law applies regardless of whether the average person is able to understand a specific matter or not. However, for the sake of example, if you are not an accountant, then you probably [1] cannot be held guilty of *willfully* violating accounting laws which are only comprehensible to an accountant (or to a lawyer specializing in that area of law). That doesn't mean someone who isn't an accountant can't commit fraud, it means that accountants who commit fraud are punished more severely than average people because they willfully violated the professional standards of their profession. Likewise, someone who has served as a legal expert on computer matters is expected to have a greater understanding of the ethics and professional responsibilities involved with computer usage. For example, because I am a network manager responsible for a network infrastructure including electronic mail systems, I know that I have a legal obligation to report child pornography in spam (ie, an email containing pictures as a MIME attachment, or a link to a porn web site) if and when I become aware of such filth. -- [1]: But this becomes more complicated when you are expected to discuss matters with your accountants as part of your responsibilities: there are several high-profile cases going on right now involving CEOs who claimed to know nothing about accounting or financial irregularities who are still being prosecuted See 18 USC 1030: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_ 1030000-.html Interesting cite, let's look a bit more closely though: (a)(1) having knowingly accessed a computer without authorization He has authorization to -access- the computer. Note that access is not spelled out as a definition in section (e) (a)(1) or exceeding authorized access OK, so here we have something - as you could argue that updating the system is exceeding the authorized access on the machine, right? Except that,
RE: FreeBSD 3.2
Greg, forgive the top post, If you are a volunteer then you can do what you want - what are they going to do, fire you? Har har. Seriously - from a legal perspective you have absolutely no obligation to follow their restrictions unless of course they were smart enough to have you sign a piece of paper before they let you in the door. No contractual relationship exists between you and them now, you can ignore what they tell you to do with impunity as long as you don't break any civil laws, ie: theft, malicious mischief, etc. All they can do is tell you your not welcome in the door anymore. If nobody at the school knows anything about FreeBSD then they won't know the difference between 3.2 and 4.11. What does this system boot into - a console with a login prompt on it. Do you think 4.11 will be any different? I cannot imagine in any case that this server, as old as it is, is running on any special hardware. I would bet that I have better hardware in my scrap pile in the basement than this server. You probably do too. If you try running 3.2 your just going to set yourself up for failure. My guess is that this is probably what they want. They have this old server in the corner that whomever is in charge of their network hates, that person wants it to crash and burn to have an excuse to get rid of it and spend the money on a nice new Windows box. You are just helping this person out by giving him a breather so he can work on windowizing some other system, once he gets done with that one your FreeBSD 3.2 system will be gone quicker than grapes through a goose. To be perfectly honest you really need to rethink your help. There's probably a dozen other charities in the area that have worse need than this ungrateful school, and would happily let you upgrade to a current FreeBSD version which wouldn't be a nightmare for you to administer. Take it from me I'm an old hand at volunteering. Volunteers bring their talents to an organization because the organization needs their assistance. It's not the other way round. The second the organization stops valuing the volunteer is when they start telling the volunteer that they don't need the volunteer's efforts, and that the volunteer can only stay on if the volunteer does it the organization's way. But what you and the organization appear to be missing is that this kind of a relationship isn't a volunteer relationship - it's an employer/employee relationship. Now I am not saying that all charities out there just wouldn't love to have a raft of volunteers come in that they can boss around and tell exactly what to do. What I am saying is that charities that actually do this generally find quite quickly that they have no volunteers left. About the only ones that can get away with doing it this way are political campaigns, or charities like hospitals that people volunteer for because they want it to look good on a resume or some such. Everyone else, if they want to maintain a raft of volunteers, they cannot play the control freak card, they have to give the volunteers that they get, some leeway. Believe me, there's far more organizations looking for volunteers than volunteers looking for organizations. If you are willing to donate your time, your a valuable commodity - and if this school wants to get the free labor, they can't put these kinds of self-defeating restrictions on your efforts. Ted -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 5:12 AM To: Andrew Lewis; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 3.2 Yea, that is in the works, here is alittle more info, the school that I am working with is moving mostly to winblows, and they do not have anyone to support the BSD machine or linux machine that they have. So the nice guy that I am, I am donating my time to the school to work on the servers and some of the sites. I got them to let me keep some of the websites on the BSD server so that I can have better control over the sites and software. But updating is out of the question at the momment because of policy and budget so I have to work with what I have at the momment. Only thing that I can do is add software at this time. That is why I need the info for FreeBSD 3.2 Greg On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 12:28:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At this momment I am not allowed to up date from FreeBSD 3.2 to another version, this machine sits at a school and there policies are slow Time to suggest a change of policy. ;) Suggest that they need to keep the server current; that you need to do a full upgrade on another drive; pop that drive into the existing server; resurrect the bits you need keep that installation current! No-one's going to make you, but long-term this is a more sensible policy. ;) -AL. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Re: FreeBSD 3.2
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: [ ... ] Seriously - from a legal perspective you have absolutely no obligation to follow their restrictions unless of course they were smart enough to have you sign a piece of paper before they let you in the door. No contractual relationship exists between you and them now, you can ignore what they tell you to do with impunity as long as you don't break any civil laws, ie: theft, malicious mischief, etc. All they can do is tell you your not welcome in the door anymore. Ted, it's better to give no advice than bad advice. This is especially true when the issue is a legal matter, and you are not a lawyer. See 18 USC 1030: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_1030000-.html It would be a remarkably bad idea to reformat and reinstall the OS on a US-government-owned computer without getting written permission first. And yes, even a computer owned by your local school counts... -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FreeBSD 3.2
At this momment I am not allowed to up date from FreeBSD 3.2 to another version, this machine sits at a school and there policies are slow, so I have to use what is there for the most part, what I need to do is add some packages like mysql, update php etc. I was wondering if anyone knew if FreeBSD 3.2 uses the same package manager has 5.3? Does anyone know where I might be able to find docs for 3.2? Since this is a production server I can't just play and try things like I want to. Any info would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Greg ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD 3.2
On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 12:28:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At this momment I am not allowed to up date from FreeBSD 3.2 to another version, this machine sits at a school and there policies are slow Time to suggest a change of policy. ;) Suggest that they need to keep the server current; that you need to do a full upgrade on another drive; pop that drive into the existing server; resurrect the bits you need keep that installation current! No-one's going to make you, but long-term this is a more sensible policy. ;) -AL. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD 3.2
Greg,
Wow, talk about handcuffing. One thing I am interested in is if they apply
this policy to Microsoft/Sun/Oracle/{$Enterprise} software. Most
institutions I know seem to feel that since they've paid the big bucks for
this software they better stay up with the latest to be safe.
If this is the case for your situation you might want to encourage that
this to is required for such things as this server and what it is doing.
Enterprise or not they should see the business model for this.
Rob.
PS
If you *have* to stay at 3.2 you might want to consider shifting away
(IMHO) from packages/ports and start to work with the individual packages
themselves. Keeping in mind that if this is a production server you should
probably get a pre-production box with 3.2 on it and do your 'playing'
around there. FreeBSD is in the most part a good system to install
software on from the original source tar.gz.
eg:
- MySQL will install but you will have to place a fair amount of time
getting a proper foundation in place prior to actually attempting it.
(NOTE: Threads, compiler, make, etc.)
- PHP should be less of a hassle unless your ./configure line looks like a
short story.
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At this momment I am not allowed to up date from FreeBSD 3.2 to another
version, this machine sits at a school and there policies are slow, so I
have to use what is there for the most part, what I need to do is add
some packages like mysql, update php etc. I was wondering if anyone
knew if FreeBSD 3.2 uses the same package manager has 5.3? Does anyone
know where I might be able to find docs for 3.2? Since this is a
production server I can't just play and try things like I want to. Any
info would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
Greg
___
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: FreeBSD 3.2
Yea, that is in the works, here is alittle more info, the school that I am working with is moving mostly to winblows, and they do not have anyone to support the BSD machine or linux machine that they have. So the nice guy that I am, I am donating my time to the school to work on the servers and some of the sites. I got them to let me keep some of the websites on the BSD server so that I can have better control over the sites and software. But updating is out of the question at the momment because of policy and budget so I have to work with what I have at the momment. Only thing that I can do is add software at this time. That is why I need the info for FreeBSD 3.2 Greg On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 12:28:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At this momment I am not allowed to up date from FreeBSD 3.2 to another version, this machine sits at a school and there policies are slow Time to suggest a change of policy. ;) Suggest that they need to keep the server current; that you need to do a full upgrade on another drive; pop that drive into the existing server; resurrect the bits you need keep that installation current! No-one's going to make you, but long-term this is a more sensible policy. ;) -AL. ___ 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: FreeBSD 3.2
Where am I going to find a 3.2 to install, looked on the net and linuxcentral
for it with no luck.
Greg
Greg,
Wow, talk about handcuffing. One thing I am interested in is if they apply
this policy to Microsoft/Sun/Oracle/{$Enterprise} software. Most
institutions I know seem to feel that since they've paid the big bucks for
this software they better stay up with the latest to be safe.
If this is the case for your situation you might want to encourage that
this to is required for such things as this server and what it is doing.
Enterprise or not they should see the business model for this.
Rob.
PS
If you *have* to stay at 3.2 you might want to consider shifting away
(IMHO) from packages/ports and start to work with the individual packages
themselves. Keeping in mind that if this is a production server you should
probably get a pre-production box with 3.2 on it and do your 'playing'
around there. FreeBSD is in the most part a good system to install
software on from the original source tar.gz.
eg:
- MySQL will install but you will have to place a fair amount of time
getting a proper foundation in place prior to actually attempting it.
(NOTE: Threads, compiler, make, etc.)
- PHP should be less of a hassle unless your ./configure line looks like a
short story.
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At this momment I am not allowed to up date from FreeBSD 3.2 to another
version, this machine sits at a school and there policies are slow, so I
have to use what is there for the most part, what I need to do is add
some packages like mysql, update php etc. I was wondering if anyone
knew if FreeBSD 3.2 uses the same package manager has 5.3? Does anyone
know where I might be able to find docs for 3.2? Since this is a
production server I can't just play and try things like I want to. Any
info would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
Greg
___
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]
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD 3.2
On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 01:39:11PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Where am I going to find a 3.2 to install, looked on the net and linuxcentral for it with no luck. Check http://mirrorlist.FreeBSD.org/ to find a mirror-site carrying some given older release. -- Insert your favourite quote here. Erik Trulsson [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: FreeBSD 3.2
On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 13:39:11 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Where am I going to find a 3.2 to install, looked on the net and linuxcentral for it with no luck. You can search ftp sites by architecture/release at: http://mirrorlist.freebsd.org/FBSDsites.php HTH, Randy -- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD 3.2
John FTP would be great if that is possible, the only thing that I found was a mirror from TAIWAN, PROVINCE OF CHINA that has 3.2, I doubt it is in english though, about the only thing that I really need to get updated for now is mysql 3.23.39 and php 4.1.2 to newer versions. Greg On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 01:11:56PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yea, that is in the works, here is alittle more info, the school that I am working with is moving mostly to winblows, and they do not have anyone to support the BSD machine or linux machine that they have. So the nice guy that I am, I am donating my time to the school to work on the servers and some of the sites. I got them to let me keep some of the websites on the BSD server so that I can have better control over the sites and software. But updating is out of the question at the momment because of policy and budget so I have to work with what I have at the momment. Only thing that I can do is add software at this time. That is why I need the info for FreeBSD 3.2 Packrat that I am, I have the 4-CD sets for 3.1, 3.3, 3.4, and 3.5.1 (but not, of course, 3.2). The packages on these CD's may be useful to you. If you want them, let me know, and I'll set up authenticated FTP access for you to them - I'm working on getting my 7-CD rack on-line, anyway, so we could have several of these available to you at once, or I can arrange to lend them to you, if you promise to return them. They have a place of honor on my wall-of-fame! On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 12:28:56 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At this momment I am not allowed to up date from FreeBSD 3.2 to another version, this machine sits at a school and there policies are slow Time to suggest a change of policy. ;) Suggest that they need to keep the server current; that you need to do a full upgrade on another drive; pop that drive into the existing server; resurrect the bits you need keep that installation current! No-one's going to make you, but long-term this is a more sensible policy. ;) -AL. ___ 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] -- John Lind [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: FreeBSD 3.2
On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 01:59:52PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John FTP would be great if that is possible, the only thing that I found was a mirror from TAIWAN, PROVINCE OF CHINA that has 3.2, I doubt it is in english though, Why do you doubt that? Just because the mirror happens to be located in Taiwan doesn't mean the software is any different from that on mirrors in other countries. -- Insert your favourite quote here. Erik Trulsson [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: FreeBSD 3.2
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yea, that is in the works, here is alittle more info, the school that I am working with is moving mostly to winblows, and they do not have anyone to support the BSD machine or linux machine that they have. So the nice guy that I am, I am donating my time to the school to work on the servers and some of the sites. I got them to let me keep some of the websites on the BSD server so that I can have better control over the sites and software. But updating is out of the question at the momment because of policy and budget so I have to work with what I have at the momment. Only thing that I can do is add software at this time. That is why I need the info for FreeBSD 3.2 Greg OK, now, I'm not given to trolling, but this seems a tad strange. Also, please realize this isn't a personal attack, either. It does sound a bit like I'm ranting, though, so let's direct it at the establishment Budget can't be an excuse for this problem, because you are donating your time to the school; furthermore, FreeBSD is free as in Free Beer (they didn't have that at my school, but I understand the concept.) So what costs will you incur by upgrading the server, other than the PITA that it may be to you (3.2-3.5.1-4.1-4.11-5.3 is a long process...)? So it must be policy. Are you still a student there? What control do they have over you? If you can install the software, are you not root? What's to keep you from installing 5.X and hacking newvers.sh to read something different? Better yet, grab the sources at home/other location and roll your own release, naming it something like, um, FreeBSD 3.2? Or ultratrollinghow 'bout FreeBSD 3.2 upgraded to something modern you $RANDOMEXPLETIVE dinosaurs!-RELEASE/ultratrolling. Really, if you're root and no one else knows anything about BSD or Tux, what's really holding you back? Anyway, enough trolling. What about compiling new versions of PHP/ MySQL from source, and seeing if they'll still run on 3.2? And I wish you luck whatever you decide (or are allowed?) to do. Kevin Kinsey ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD 3.2
No ofense taken, how I came to do this is, my kids go to school in the district. I offered to do a website for my daughters school. The web machine happen to be a unsupported BSD machine which they are getting rid of this year and going to winblows. so i was very limited on what i can do because of the versions of ports and so i started talking to the network engineer and he could not help so i went to the director and asked if i could suppor the bsd machine and he is fine with that, only thing is that I have to do it from with in the school and not remote. the other piece is there is still a couple of services that are running on the machine that can not go down as of yet for any reason, not sure what services. After they move the services to winblows the box is mine to do with as I please or i can go to a winblows box, with i don't want to. I am also doing maintance on another linux machine that is running red hat 7.2. All my time is donated, which i don't mind for now and for the experience and to learn more in a large enviorment, they said that they will give me a good refernece or possible a job in the future if there is ever a need.(school district is growing very fast). As for root, the network engineer logs me in, since i don't work there i will have to earn trust to gain root usage. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yea, that is in the works, here is alittle more info, the school that I am working with is moving mostly to winblows, and they do not have anyone to support the BSD machine or linux machine that they have. So the nice guy that I am, I am donating my time to the school to work on the servers and some of the sites. I got them to let me keep some of the websites on the BSD server so that I can have better control over the sites and software. But updating is out of the question at the momment because of policy and budget so I have to work with what I have at the momment. Only thing that I can do is add software at this time. That is why I need the info for FreeBSD 3.2 Greg OK, now, I'm not given to trolling, but this seems a tad strange. Also, please realize this isn't a personal attack, either. It does sound a bit like I'm ranting, though, so let's direct it at the establishment Budget can't be an excuse for this problem, because you are donating your time to the school; furthermore, FreeBSD is free as in Free Beer (they didn't have that at my school, but I understand the concept.) So what costs will you incur by upgrading the server, other than the PITA that it may be to you (3.2-3.5.1-4.1-4.11-5.3 is a long process...)? So it must be policy. Are you still a student there? What control do they have over you? If you can install the software, are you not root? What's to keep you from installing 5.X and hacking newvers.sh to read something different? Better yet, grab the sources at home/other location and roll your own release, naming it something like, um, FreeBSD 3.2? Or ultratrollinghow 'bout FreeBSD 3.2 upgraded to something modern you $RANDOMEXPLETIVE dinosaurs!-RELEASE/ultratrolling. Really, if you're root and no one else knows anything about BSD or Tux, what's really holding you back? Anyway, enough trolling. What about compiling new versions of PHP/ MySQL from source, and seeing if they'll still run on 3.2? And I wish you luck whatever you decide (or are allowed?) to do. Kevin Kinsey ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My FreeBSD 3.2
Dear Friends, In no apparent reason, I have used my 4-disc of FreeBSD 3.2 since I bought it. I read the book but now I want to install it. Now my question, if I install them is there a long shot to get by CSV the new FreeBSD 5.2.1 kernel and porting other supporting softwares. What steps should I do to eventually have the new release? Reading the handbook on-line, I found that it confusing how to compile the FREEBSD either by the old way or the new way. Looking forward hearing from you. Regards, Lyndon ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: My FreeBSD 3.2
On Tue, Mar 30, 2004 at 04:44:53PM +0800, Lyndon M. Realubit wrote: In no apparent reason, I have used my 4-disc of FreeBSD 3.2 since I bought Err -- do you mean that you have /not/ used it? it. I read the book but now I want to install it. Now my question, if I install them is there a long shot to get by CSV the new FreeBSD 5.2.1 kernel and porting other supporting softwares. What steps should I do to eventually have the new release? Reading the handbook on-line, I found that it confusing how to compile the FREEBSD either by the old way or the new way. You can certainly install FreeBSD-3.2 if you have appropriate hardware. Remember that there won't be much support (if any) in 3.2 for anything that has been introduced in the last 5 or so years (3.2 was released in May 1999). If you succeed in building a 3.2 system, please don't expose it to the Internet without due care and attention. There were several nasty security holes closed in that and later versions: even worse, by now, it's so old that security fixes don't get backported to it. You can almost definitely use a 3.2 system to download the 5.2.1 sources via cvsup(1) [not CSV -- that's comma separated values, a text format for columnar data...] However, once you've got the 5.2.1 sources, there's not a lot else you can do with them. You won't be able to compile 5.2.1 directly on 3.2, nor will you be able to upgrade in one jump. I think your best bet is to put away your 3.2 CDs as of historical interest only. To install 5.2.1, either download one of the iso images and cut your own CD, or make yourself some install floppies. You can install the whole system over the net quite readily -- there are detailed instructions here: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/install.html The 5.2.1 floppy images are at: ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/releases/i386/5.2.1-RELEASE/floppies/ and you need kern.flp and mfsroot.flp images, plus possibly the drivers.flp image depending on your hardware. See the README.TXT and DRIVERS.TXT files in that directory. To find .iso images to download, use the mirrorlist.freebsd.org service: http://mirrorlist.freebsd.org/FBSDsites.php The minimum you need is the 'bootonly.iso' (21184Kb) which gives you a bootable CD-Rom with sysinstall(8) -- to use this, from within sysinstall you'll setup a network connection and then download everything else for the rest of the system over the net. Next in size is the miniinst.iso (245536Kb) which has everything on the bootonly.iso, plus all of the system. You won't get an X-Windows environment or anything like that: just the console. No ports or extra packages. With this disk you can do a minimal install, and then setup cvsup(1) to pull down system sources, the ports tree etc. Third option is to grab the disc1.iso (659328), which is basically miniinst.iso + some popular packages. The disk2.iso (268416Kb) is not usually needed unless things go horribly wrong -- it contains a live filesystem image which you can boot into and use to fix an otherwise unbootable system. Even so, there will not be many 3rd party packages bundled with these .iso's. Vendors like http://www.freebsdmall.com/ or http://www.bsdmall.com/ will happilly sell you a 4-disk set: this consists of the disk1 and disk2 iso images as above, with all spare space and another two disks jam packed with extra 3rd party software. Mind you, even that is nowhere near a complete copy of the available packages -- you'ld need 11 or 12 CD-Roms to provide that. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks Savill Way PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Marlow Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: My FreeBSD 3.2
Lyndon M. Realubit [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In no apparent reason, I have used my 4-disc of FreeBSD 3.2 since I bought it. I read the book but now I want to install it. Now my question, if I install them is there a long shot to get by CSV the new FreeBSD 5.2.1 kernel and porting other supporting softwares. What steps should I do to eventually have the new release? Reading the handbook on-line, I found that it confusing how to compile the FREEBSD either by the old way or the new way. Upgrading by cvsuping all the way from 3.2 to 5.2.1 is likely to take a long time, and as far as I know should not be done in one step. Seriously, you'll save yourself a lot of trouble by just installing the newer release clean and restoring whatever it is you need (such as home directories) from a reliable backup. - P -- Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/ http://www.datadok.no/ First, we kill all the spammers The Usenet Bard, Twice-forwarded tales ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
finding FreeBSD 3.2-RELASE
Hello, I need to create a FreeBSD 3.2 system in order to facilitate the upgrade of one of our important systems, but ftp.freebsd.org doesn't have 3.2-RELEASE anymore. Does anybody know of an FTP server that does still have it? Or of a site that has the distribution ISOs? Any such information would be very much appreciated. Thank you, John -- +---+ | John Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] |System Administrator | InfoStructure | +---+ | The people and friends that we have lost, the dreams that have faded... | | never forget them. -- Yuna, Final Fantasy X| +---+ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: finding FreeBSD 3.2-RELASE
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 01:22:24PM -0700, John Fox wrote: Hello, I need to create a FreeBSD 3.2 system in order to facilitate the upgrade of one of our important systems, but ftp.freebsd.org doesn't have 3.2-RELEASE anymore. Does anybody know of an FTP server that does still have it? Or of a site that has the distribution ISOs? Any such information would be very much appreciated. http://freebsdmirrors.com -- Bob Bomar [EMAIL PROTECTED] - FreeBSD: The Power to Serve http://www.freebsd.org pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
