On 3/08/2006 2:25 PM, User Freebsd wrote:
b. Duplicates.
Ted seems to have this covered with the CPU ID thing ...
Isn't this one of those things that BIOS vendors added a Disable flag
to their BIOS setup's for in order to prevent the wide-spread privacy
concerns that cropped up when it was
On Thu, 3 Aug 2006, Antony Mawer wrote:
Agreed...
I could probably add around 1,500 systems that could conceivably be setup to
chime in with their numbers periodically; one of the pre-requisites for that
would be that the access method be HTTP or HTTPS based so it could be relayed
via a
--- User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 3 Aug 2006, Antony Mawer wrote:
Agreed...
I could probably add around 1,500 systems that
could conceivably be setup to
chime in with their numbers periodically; one of
the pre-requisites for that
would be that the access method
On Thu, 3 Aug 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
maybe it's just because I've been reading up on it but what about
outputting the information in XML??? Then you could tag the Vendor,
Name, basic info, number of users, etc. in a tagged form that could be
then stored in a Dbase of some kind by
--- User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 3 Aug 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
maybe it's just because I've been reading up on it
but what about
outputting the information in XML??? Then you
could tag the Vendor,
Name, basic info, number of users, etc. in a
tagged form
On 4/08/2006 4:58 AM, User Freebsd wrote:
Getting a list of devices is actually pretty easy, and I've tried this
on my 4.x machines also, so it isn't something that will be a problem on
older versions:
# pciconf -l
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0: class=0x06 card=0x chip=0x700c1022 rev=0x20
On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Antony Mawer wrote:
On 4/08/2006 4:58 AM, User Freebsd wrote:
Getting a list of devices is actually pretty easy, and I've tried this on
my 4.x machines also, so it isn't something that will be a problem on older
versions:
# pciconf -l
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:
On 4/08/2006 10:29 AM, User Freebsd wrote:
I was thinking of that ... my concern, and it may be totally invalid,
but is it guaranteed to always translate the same? ie:
...
Will that always translate the same regardless of running 4.x vs 5.x vs
... ? If so, you are right, that does
On 8/3/06, Antony Mawer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/08/2006 4:58 AM, User Freebsd wrote:
Getting a list of devices is actually pretty easy, and I've tried this
on my 4.x machines also, so it isn't something that will be a problem on
older versions:
# pciconf -l
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:
On 4/08/2006 11:44 AM, Nikolas Britton wrote:
899 bytes * (10^7) = 8.37258995 gigabytes... Remember... Once this
code is pushed out to hosts you can't change it. 10 years from now
we'll still have hosts sending in old data What was wrong with my
netcat idea?
uname -mr | nc
On 8/3/06, Antony Mawer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/08/2006 11:44 AM, Nikolas Britton wrote:
899 bytes * (10^7) = 8.37258995 gigabytes... Remember... Once this
code is pushed out to hosts you can't change it. 10 years from now
we'll still have hosts sending in old data What was wrong
On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Antony Mawer wrote:
All of the expanded 'vendor', 'device', 'class' and 'subclass' information is
present in the non -v version of the command output. The numbers shown
earlier can be used to derive the text information:
class=0x010400
determines the
On 4/08/2006 1:31 PM, User Freebsd wrote:
'k, looking at the above, and comparing it to what I'm getting from
pciconf -l, I'm missing something ... namely:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:10:0:class=0x02 card=0x0027a0a0 chip=0x813910ec
rev=0x10 hdr=0x00
Translates to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:10:0:
start somewhere ... how many of us are really out there?
On 8/1/06, Ted Mittelstaedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why not just add in the patch in kern/65627 and run the CPU serial
number
through
your hash?
Because you can still fake the dam thing,
Why fake it when you can merely not supply
Atom Powers wrote:
It's still going to take you at least a release to get it into the
base install. But if you can find a way to use the portsnap data and
get useful information out of the cvsup data you can probably get
numbers now with an error margin as low as 8% to 15%.
Hey, I said that
On 8/2/06, Alex Zbyslaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Atom Powers wrote:
It's still going to take you at least a release to get it into the
base install. But if you can find a way to use the portsnap data and
get useful information out of the cvsup data you can probably get
numbers now with an
Nikolas Britton wrote:
On 8/2/06, Alex Zbyslaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But the question then goes back to: can you make any kind of count out
of cvsup servers? Someone already said they thought you couldn't.
At the end of the day, I think that unique IP address is as close as
it's
On 8/2/06, Alex Zbyslaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nikolas Britton wrote:
On 8/2/06, Alex Zbyslaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But the question then goes back to: can you make any kind of count out
of cvsup servers? Someone already said they thought you couldn't.
At the end of the day, I
Nikolas Britton wrote:
This may sound dumb but why don't we just put a registration link on
the FreeBSD main page... or registration in sysinstall. Isn't this
how everyone else handles the problem?
Not on the home page, I would suggest, because a) opt-in registrations
have really low take-up
On Wed, 2 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
This may sound dumb but why don't we just put a registration link on the
FreeBSD main page... or registration in sysinstall. Isn't this how
everyone else handles the problem?
User A installs FreeBSD, registers, works with it for a week, finds he
On Wed, 2 Aug 2006, Peter A. Giessel wrote:
On 2006/08/02 15:37, User Freebsd seems to have typed:
On Wed, 2 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
This may sound dumb but why don't we just put a registration link on the
FreeBSD main page... or registration in sysinstall. Isn't this how
everyone
User Freebsd wrote:
On Wed, 2 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
This may sound dumb but why don't we just put a registration link on the
FreeBSD main page... or registration in sysinstall. Isn't this how
everyone else handles the problem?
User A installs FreeBSD, registers, works with it
Mikhail Goriachev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
User Freebsd wrote:
On Wed, 2 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
This may sound dumb but why don't we just put a registration link on the
FreeBSD main page... or registration in sysinstall. Isn't this how
everyone else handles the problem?
You still can't avoid fakeries.
Except that the fake will not bother coming back 3 times at one week
interval, just to plant his faked data.
Olivier
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Olivier Nicole [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You still can't avoid fakeries.
Except that the fake will not bother coming back 3 times at one week
interval, just to plant his faked data.
Yes, just put it in the crontab. Easy, isn't it?
Olivier
--
Xiao-Yong
On Wed, 2 Aug 2006, Xiao-Yong Jin wrote:
Let me say it again. There are three problems we are trying to
solve.
a. Bandwidth.
Bandwidth, IMHO, isn't that big of an issue ... the ramp up time for this,
IMHO, will be slow, so the bandwidth usage will be a gradual increase ...
b.
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Xiao-Yong Jin wrote:
Chris Whitehouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alex Zbyslaw wrote:
Counting portsnap and cvsup accesses is non-intrusive - i.e. nothing
sent from local host - will count systems from any version of
FreeBSD, but will never count everything because sites
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Gerard Seibert wrote:
Xiao-Yong Jin wrote:
But one can't rely on that. You'll definitely see more than one ip
associated with my laptop, if I move it around.
A more reliable way that I can think of is generating a unique ID
number when a system finishes installation or
- Original Message -
From: User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Xiao-Yong Jin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 6:08 PM
Subject: Re: Gotta start somewhere ... how many of us are really out there?
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Xiao-Yong Jin wrote
On Aug 1, 2006, at 12:14 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
Sun's compiler and
some other
programs of theirs are serialized and when you buy them you have to
send in
the
cpu serial number to Sun who generates a key that will only allow the
compiler
to run on that system. If you move the compiler
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
- Original Message - From: User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Xiao-Yong Jin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 6:08 PM
Subject: Re: Gotta start somewhere ... how many of us are really out
there?
On Mon, 31 Jul
On 7/31/06, User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Xiao-Yong Jin wrote:
Chris Whitehouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alex Zbyslaw wrote:
Counting portsnap and cvsup accesses is non-intrusive - i.e. nothing
sent from local host - will count systems from any version of
Nikolas Britton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Generating a unique anonymous key is easy, proving why we need it is not.
That's how we can tell the differences between server to server.
Ok, here it is, ifconfig | sha256 | md5 . 16^32 unique anonymous
keys. Every host needs to have a NIC to send
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
Generating a unique anonymous key is easy, proving why we need it is not.
If you want to make accurate #s, you need to make sure that a host doesn't
send in multiple reports, which means you need a unique key for each host
... IP doesn't work,
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
On 7/31/06, User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Xiao-Yong Jin wrote:
Chris Whitehouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alex Zbyslaw wrote:
Counting portsnap and cvsup accesses is non-intrusive - i.e. nothing
sent from local host
User Freebsd writes:
Actually, using ifconfig wouldn't work ... it would give unique, but as
soon as you add another IP (ie. alias), the ID would change ... you'd need
to do something like:
ifconfig | grep ether | sha256 | md5
since the 'ether' would never change ...
At
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006, Robert Huff wrote:
User Freebsd writes:
Actually, using ifconfig wouldn't work ... it would give unique, but as
soon as you add another IP (ie. alias), the ID would change ... you'd need
to do something like:
ifconfig | grep ether | sha256 | md5
since the 'ether'
User Freebsd wrote:
Actually, using ifconfig wouldn't work ... it would give unique, but
as soon as you add another IP (ie. alias), the ID would change ...
you'd need to do something like:
ifconfig | grep ether | sha256 | md5
since the 'ether' would never change ...
I think you'd want
On 8/1/06, Robert Huff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
User Freebsd writes:
Actually, using ifconfig wouldn't work ... it would give unique, but as
soon as you add another IP (ie. alias), the ID would change ... you'd need
to do something like:
ifconfig | grep ether | sha256 | md5
since the
@freebsd.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 9:11 AM
Subject: Re: Gotta start somewhere ... how many of us are really out there?
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006, Robert Huff wrote:
User Freebsd writes:
Actually, using ifconfig wouldn't work ... it would give unique, but
as
soon as you add another IP (ie. alias
On 8/1/06, Ted Mittelstaedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why not just add in the patch in kern/65627 and run the CPU serial number
through
your hash?
Because you can still fake the dam thing, making the whole idea
useless!!! Am I the only one that can see this ... what the hell
people! I just
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
On 8/1/06, Ted Mittelstaedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why not just add in the patch in kern/65627 and run the CPU serial number
through
your hash?
Because you can still fake the dam thing, making the whole idea
useless!!! Am I the only one that can
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
On 8/1/06, Robert Huff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
User Freebsd writes:
Actually, using ifconfig wouldn't work ... it would give unique, but as
soon as you add another IP (ie. alias), the ID would change ... you'd
need
to do something like:
On 8/1/06, User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
On 8/1/06, Robert Huff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
User Freebsd writes:
Actually, using ifconfig wouldn't work ... it would give unique, but as
soon as you add another IP (ie. alias), the ID would
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
Ok.. lets start from the top, again. Why do we need uniqueness?
We want to count each host reporting *once* ... without uniqueness per
host, how are you going to know whether to update a hosts record, instead
of add it as a new host?
Marc G.
On 8/1/06, User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
Ok.. lets start from the top, again. Why do we need uniqueness?
We want to count each host reporting *once* ... without uniqueness per
host, how are you going to know whether to update a hosts record,
On 8/1/06, User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
Ok.. lets start from the top, again. Why do we need uniqueness?
We want to count each host reporting *once* ... without uniqueness per
host, how are you going to know whether to update a hosts record,
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
On 8/1/06, User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
Ok.. lets start from the top, again. Why do we need uniqueness?
We want to count each host reporting *once* ... without uniqueness per
host, how are you
Hi,
Just my 2 satangs.
It's nice to try to get a overall figure, but something that could be
easier to indentify and would have some importance too, is the VIP
users. If we can say that Google is using FreeBSD for their search
engine farm, even if there are only 2000 machines, it may have more
User Freebsd wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006, Colin Percival wrote:
Approximately 15000 portsnap snapshots (i.e., /var/db/portsnap or
/usr/local/portsnap directories) are being kept updated on systems
which send HTTP requests to portsnap*.freebsd.org. Of these, about
4300 are running FreeBSD 6.0,
Colin Percival wrote:
There are still a lot of people (particularly on pre-6.0 systems) who
are using CVSup rather than portsnap for updating their ports trees.
Also, I would guess that some people who run multiple FreeBSD systems,
use some sort of local propagation of either the entire ports
Colin Percival wrote:
There are still a lot of people (particularly on pre-6.0 systems) who
are using CVSup rather than portsnap for updating their ports trees.
Even when I upgrade to 6 I think it unlikely I'll be switching to
portsnap for 2 main reasons:
1) I know csvup; I have
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Colin Percival wrote:
User Freebsd wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006, Colin Percival wrote:
Approximately 15000 portsnap snapshots (i.e., /var/db/portsnap or
/usr/local/portsnap directories) are being kept updated on systems
which send HTTP requests to portsnap*.freebsd.org. Of
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
Colin Percival wrote:
There are still a lot of people (particularly on pre-6.0 systems) who
are using CVSup rather than portsnap for updating their ports trees.
Also, I would guess that some people who run multiple FreeBSD systems,
use some
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
On Jul 30, 2006, at 8:42 PM, User Freebsd wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006, Colin Percival wrote:
User Freebsd wrote:
We can also collect the access information of the cvsup server and
portsnap server, can't we?
What does that give?
User Freebsd wrote:
We use cvsup here, daily, to update the ports tree ... and based on
someone else's post (alex?), finding out that portsnap overwrites the
ports tree, which I'm taking to mean it will remove anything I add to
it, makes changing over for me a no-op :(
Caveat: I don't
User Freebsd wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
Colin Percival wrote:
There are still a lot of people (particularly on pre-6.0 systems) who
are using CVSup rather than portsnap for updating their ports trees.
Also, I would guess that some people who run multiple
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Alex Zbyslaw wrote:
But this will then only count from the first version(s) of FreeBSD which
contain the periodic job. Then every machine running an earlier release
would be a ghost.
Agreed, but any active counting will fail dealing with older machines,
regardless ...
Alex Zbyslaw wrote:
Counting portsnap and cvsup accesses is non-intrusive - i.e. nothing
sent from local host - will count systems from any version of FreeBSD,
but will never count everything because sites with multiple hosts may
easily have local propagation mechanisms. But you will get an
Alex Zbyslaw wrote:
Colin Percival wrote:
Counting portsnap and cvsup accesses is non-intrusive - i.e. nothing
sent from local host - will count systems from any version of FreeBSD,
but will never count everything because sites with multiple hosts may
easily have local propagation
Chris Whitehouse wrote:
Maybe not so many, my non-static ip hasn't changed since I signed up 3
years ago despite turning off the modem for the odd day or two. Another
network I look after also hasn't changed in a year.
Yes, my IP changed just once in the last 5 years and that was when a new
Chris Whitehouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alex Zbyslaw wrote:
Counting portsnap and cvsup accesses is non-intrusive - i.e. nothing
sent from local host - will count systems from any version of
FreeBSD, but will never count everything because sites with multiple
hosts may easily have local
Xiao-Yong Jin wrote:
But one can't rely on that. You'll definitely see more than one ip
associated with my laptop, if I move it around.
A more reliable way that I can think of is generating a unique ID
number when a system finishes installation or upon the first boot.
However, it may
On 7/31/06, User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
Colin Percival wrote:
There are still a lot of people (particularly on pre-6.0 systems) who
are using CVSup rather than portsnap for updating their ports trees.
Also, I would guess that
My calculations are off, I though the monthly periodic was relative to
the system install date. Here are the new numbers:
Lets say each client sends 20 bytes and their are 10^7 clients for a
total of 190.7MB per month. Now... Lets say 50% (10^6.7) of those
clients are set to UTC and all of them
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
My shop runs 30+ FreeBSD hosts, and I have several more for personal
use. But of those there are maybe 2-3 that I would be ok with listing
and exactly zero that I will actually list. It's not that I don't want
to help, but I'm not going to run a
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
The only way this idea will work is if we put some code in the base
system that sends something generic every few months. for example. Send
'uname -mr' to stats.freebsd.org every 3 months. It would be very easy
to 'opt out', perhaps stats_enable=NO
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
Yes and no. Not all cvsup servers are under the control of the FreeBSD
project but you are right, they could log the release tag and more.
Also don't forget about website stats, mailing list subscriptions, and
ftp servers.
None of which
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
You might think this sounds harmless but folks have done this kind of
thing in the past with other products and wreaked havoc on the Internet.
You can start by referencing dlink ntp fiasco in google to get an idea
of what can happen to these kinds
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006, Xiao-Yong Jin wrote:
People like me who only use FreeBSD on the laptop would certainly give
much shorter uptimes. Okay, I just wanna say, it's very strange to a
mobile/desktop user.
Again, I wasn't thinking so much about uptimes as the fact that the
information is
User Freebsd wrote:
We can also collect the access information of the cvsup server and
portsnap server, can't we?
What does that give?
Approximately 15000 portsnap snapshots (i.e., /var/db/portsnap or
/usr/local/portsnap directories) are being kept updated on systems
which send HTTP requests
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006, Colin Percival wrote:
User Freebsd wrote:
We can also collect the access information of the cvsup server and
portsnap server, can't we?
What does that give?
Approximately 15000 portsnap snapshots (i.e., /var/db/portsnap or
/usr/local/portsnap directories) are being
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006, Colin Percival wrote:
User Freebsd wrote:
We can also collect the access information of the cvsup server and
portsnap server, can't we?
What does that give?
Approximately 15000 portsnap snapshots (i.e., /var/db/portsnap or
/usr/local/portsnap directories) are being
On Jul 30, 2006, at 8:42 PM, User Freebsd wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006, Colin Percival wrote:
User Freebsd wrote:
We can also collect the access information of the cvsup server and
portsnap server, can't we?
What does that give?
Approximately 15000 portsnap snapshots (i.e.,
On 7/29/06, User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
On 7/28/06, Atom Powers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My shop runs 30+ FreeBSD hosts, and I have several more for personal
use. But of those there are maybe 2-3 that I would be ok with listing
and
On 7/28/06, User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, Atom Powers wrote:
My shop runs 30+ FreeBSD hosts, and I have several more for personal
use. But of those there are maybe 2-3 that I would be ok with listing
and exactly zero that I will actually list. It's not that I
On 7/29/06, User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
You might think this sounds harmless but folks have done this kind of
thing in the past with other products and wreaked havoc on the Internet.
You can start by referencing dlink ntp fiasco in
On 7/29/06, Atom Powers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/28/06, User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, Atom Powers wrote:
My shop runs 30+ FreeBSD hosts, and I have several more for personal
use. But of those there are maybe 2-3 that I would be ok with listing
and
On 7/29/06, Nikolas Britton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/29/06, Atom Powers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/28/06, User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, Atom Powers wrote:
My shop runs 30+ FreeBSD hosts, and I have several more for personal
use. But of those there
Okay, here is the challenge ... for vendors to 'take notice' of the fact
that exist as a market, there really needs to be *some* numbers that ppl
like -core, -advocacy and -marketing can use ... right now, there is
nothing out there that can be considered either 'half the story', or just
On 7/28/06, User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Towards that end, as a starter, I would like to encourage everyone out
there running 1 or more FreeBSD boxes to go to
http://www.mreriksson.net/uptimes
register all of your hosts, and install /usr/ports/sysutils/uptimec and
get it
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, Atom Powers wrote:
On 7/28/06, User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Towards that end, as a starter, I would like to encourage everyone out
there running 1 or more FreeBSD boxes to go to
http://www.mreriksson.net/uptimes
register all of your hosts, and
On 7/28/06, Atom Powers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/28/06, User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Towards that end, as a starter, I would like to encourage everyone out
there running 1 or more FreeBSD boxes to go to
http://www.mreriksson.net/uptimes
register all of your hosts,
Nikolas Britton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 7/28/06, Atom Powers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/28/06, User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Towards that end, as a starter, I would like to encourage everyone out
there running 1 or more FreeBSD boxes to go to
- Original Message -
From: Nikolas Britton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Atom Powers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 9:39 PM
Subject: Re: Gotta start somewhere ... how many of us are really out there?
On 7/28/06
On 7/28/06, Xiao-Yong Jin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nikolas Britton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 7/28/06, Atom Powers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/28/06, User Freebsd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Towards that end, as a starter, I would like to encourage everyone out
there running 1 or more
86 matches
Mail list logo
