On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 03:27:09AM -0800, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
snip
Also one other thing that is important - if you don't get an answer
within a week or so, ask again, politely.
How do I ask after the second post with no reply? On bended knee?
Just keep asking periodically.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony
Atkielski
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:09 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Installation instructions for Firefox somewhere?
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
The AIC7880 stuff
On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 06:08 +0100, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
The AIC7880 stuff is in the good category of stuff from Adaptec,
not the junk category.
Well, that's nice to hear. I guess my $9000 wasn't entirely wasted.
The people that can answer questions don't
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony
Atkielski
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:53 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Installation instructions for Firefox somewhere?
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
It appears you have
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
HP didn't manufacture either of the drives nor the SCSI controller so
why would you think that they know what they are talking about?
They rebranded the drives and took the top 10% or so of production
batches (according to someone I knew on the inside). They also
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony
Atkielski
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 10:52 AM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Installation instructions for Firefox somewhere?
So perhaps FreeBSD is issuing commands
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
But that was under NT I understand, using NT drivers, right?
Yes.
I wouldn't put it past the NT driver author of your SCSI card, in an
effort to avoid problems, to have written the NT driver so that ALL
transactions on the SCSI bus are
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
I have an Adaptec AAA-131 Ultra 2 card here that is just jumping up and
down to prove you wrong.
This is an AIC7880. When you have one of those, let me know.
However, I CAN tell you how to go about finding out what you need to
change. Do you want to do this? It
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
I have an Adaptec AAA-131 Ultra 2 card here that is just jumping up and
down to prove you wrong.
This is an AIC7880. When you have one of those, let me know.
However, I CAN tell you how to go about finding out what you need to
change. Do you
Chris Hodgins writes:
I might have missed it but I can't find any information about what SCSI
errors you are receiving. Why don't you post the errors you are seeing
and/or perhaps your dmesg output as well and maybe someone can help
you. Without more information noone can do more than
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony
Atkielski
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 4:05 AM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Installation instructions for Firefox somewhere?
Chris Hodgins writes:
I might have missed it but I can't find any information
about what
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony
Atkielski
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:42 AM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Installation instructions for Firefox somewhere?
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
I have an Adaptec
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
It appears you have a narrow-SCSI max 10MB sync disk drive and a
ultra -3 20MB sync disk drive on the same adapter card.
Such a combination is iffy at best.
The configuration was the one recommended by HP. I bought the second
drive from HP directly. They both have
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
The AIC7880 stuff is in the good category of stuff from Adaptec,
not the junk category.
Well, that's nice to hear. I guess my $9000 wasn't entirely wasted.
The people that can answer questions don't always respond.
Remember what I said about problems with FreeBSD
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony
Atkielski
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2005 3:53 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Installation instructions for Firefox somewhere?
...ummm this is rather like a windows admin
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Leonard Zettel writes:
My own experiences have given me a definite bias toward using the
ports system to compile stuff to be added to my system rather than
going with the binary packages. I get the impression that many
port maintainers who are fairly careful about
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ramiro Aceves
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2005 2:33 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Installation instructions for Firefox somewhere?
Anthony, I understand your frustration. I think
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
One of the several techs that work for that company has your
attitude. He's been burned a few times when he's installed patches
that broke existing software at a customer.
However, the customers that he cares for have the highest percentage
of broken-into servers.
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
I agree Ramiro, I've setup dozens and dozens of different SCSI setups,
and I think that his problem is hardware, such as incorrect
termination, a bad scsi cable, bad connectors on the cable, or an
incompatible SCSI/disk combination (which is rare, but it does happen)
Ramiro Aceves writes:
Anthony, I understand your frustration. I think you should fix the SCSI
problems before doing anything.
If I could find out what is causing them, I would. The only thing I
know right now is that it's not hardware.
--
Anthony
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
I agree Ramiro, I've setup dozens and dozens of different SCSI setups,
and I think that his problem is hardware, such as incorrect
termination, a bad scsi cable, bad connectors on the cable, or an
incompatible SCSI/disk
RacerX writes:
The hardware has ran for over 8 years - you don't think that after 8 years
its going to show wear and tear? I do/would.
It's not going to suddenly fail on the very day and hour that I install
FreeBSD.
We as humans are not perfect - so that means the things we make can't be
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
RacerX writes:
The hardware has ran for over 8 years - you don't think that after 8 years
its going to show wear and tear? I do/would.
It's not going to suddenly fail on the very day and hour that I install
FreeBSD.
Sounds like the perfect time for them to go wrong.
Chris Hodgins writes:
Sounds like the perfect time for them to go wrong. They have been doing
the same thing for 8 years without problem.
They are still doing the same thing today. There is no additional
stress in changing operating systems.
Suddenly you come along and give them a good old
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 22:35:54 +0100, Anthony Atkielski wrote
Chris Hodgins writes:
Sounds like the perfect time for them to go wrong. They have been doing
the same thing for 8 years without problem.
They are still doing the same thing today. There is no additional
stress in changing
John writes:
Have you considered the possibility that windows just didn't
report the error?
Yes. If that's true, and if no actual data loss is occurring, then I'm
not worried about the error ... although I'd like to know how to remove
the error messages, in that case.
FreeBSD actually stalls
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
The chance of these drives both failing _on the same day_ that I install
FreeBSD is less than one in 70 million. So that's not it.
Umm, I think the odds were greater then that when you think of how we
all got here - yanno, all the right elements at the right place, at
Chris writes:
So - it could be it. Never dismiss anything when it comes to hardware.
Even the littlest thing can cause the greatest catastrophes.
It's illogical to dismiss the extremely high probability of a software
bug or configuration error while embracing the extremely low probability
of
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chris writes:
So - it could be it. Never dismiss anything when it comes to hardware.
Even the littlest thing can cause the greatest catastrophes.
It's illogical to dismiss the extremely high probability of a software
bug or configuration error while embracing the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
I agree Ramiro, I've setup dozens and dozens of different SCSI
setups, and I think that his problem is hardware, such as incorrect
termination, a bad scsi cable, bad connectors on the cable, or an
incompatible SCSI/disk combination (which is
Robert Marella writes:
Perhaps you could try a live CD. Knoppix or Freesbie and see if the
trouble is gone.
This machine won't boot from a CD.
--
Anthony
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
But that was under NT I understand, using NT drivers, right?
Yes.
I wouldn't put it past the NT driver author of your SCSI card, in an
effort to avoid problems, to have written the NT driver so that ALL
transactions on the SCSI bus are asynchronous.
I don't know.
John writes:
I suppose I'm nit-picking here, but you would cron it rather than running it
by hand.
It's mostly the space that I prefer not to part with.
How much space have you got to play with?
About 2 GB total remaining on /usr. Just installing X stuff gobbled up
a few hundred megabytes,
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
John writes:
I suppose I'm nit-picking here, but you would cron it rather than running it
by hand.
It's mostly the space that I prefer not to part with.
How much space have you got to play with?
About 2 GB total remaining on /usr. Just installing X stuff gobbled up
a
On Sunday 27 February 2005 04:01 am, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
John writes:
I suppose I'm nit-picking here, but you would cron it rather than running
it by hand.
It's mostly the space that I prefer not to part with.
How much space have you got to play with?
About 2 GB total remaining on
Ramiro Aceves writes:
If you have 2 GB remaining in /usr, install the ports tree, it will eat
about 350 MB.
I tried it. The system generates so many SCSI errors that it panics
before the entire tree is installed.
--
Anthony
___
Leonard Zettel writes:
My own experiences have given me a definite bias toward using the
ports system to compile stuff to be added to my system rather than
going with the binary packages. I get the impression that many
port maintainers who are fairly careful about keeping their port
Dru Lavigne's book BSD Hacks has a hack called Build a Port Without the Ports Tree
which might be useful to you... and -- lucky you -- it's one of the sample hacks on
O'Reilly's site:
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/bsdhks/chapter/hack82.pdf
Ben
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Ramiro Aceves writes:
If
Leonard Zettel wrote:
On Sunday 27 February 2005 04:01 am, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
John writes:
If space is tight, running make
distclean after make install helps, as does periodically deleting the
contents of /usr/ports/distfiles
Does pkg_add do this?
There's no need for [one
On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 10:01:44 +0100, Anthony Atkielski wrote
About 2 GB total remaining on /usr. Just installing X stuff gobbled
up a few hundred megabytes, it seems.
[ I said]
If space is tight, running make
distclean after make install helps, as does periodically deleting the
John writes:
1. you mentioned that you had the ports tree on another machine. Can you nfs
mount it?
I pulled all the NFS stuff out of the kernel, alas!
2. As others have mentioned, firebird is a fast-moving target. You *need* a
cvsupped ports in order to keep up with it. So why not install
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
John writes:
1. you mentioned that you had the ports tree on another machine. Can
you nfs
mount it?
I pulled all the NFS stuff out of the kernel, alas!
It should be trivial to update your kernel config and rebuild and
install the new kernel. Remember to reboot
Chris Hodgins writes:
It should be trivial to update your kernel config and rebuild and
install the new kernel. Remember to reboot when you are done.
It's trivial in principle, but this is a production server. The golden
rule for production servers is never to change anything unless you have
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chris Hodgins writes:
It should be trivial to update your kernel config and rebuild and
install the new kernel. Remember to reboot when you are done.
It's trivial in principle, but this is a production server. The golden
rule for production servers is never to change
On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:13:51 +0100, Anthony Atkielski wrote
John writes:
1. you mentioned that you had the ports tree on another machine. Can you
nfs mount it?
I pulled all the NFS stuff out of the kernel, alas!
well, put it back in then :) You'd only need the client stuff on the
John wrote:
On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:13:51 +0100, Anthony Atkielski wrote
John writes:
1. you mentioned that you had the ports tree on another machine. Can you
nfs mount it?
I pulled all the NFS stuff out of the kernel, alas!
well, put it back in then :) You'd only need the client stuff on the
Chris Hodgins writes:
Well if you are doing all this you will carry out the updates to your
test machine first and validate everything works fine. Once you are
happy build a package from it and add it to your production server. I
am not sure how you would verify a package as big as firefox
John writes:
well, put it back in then :) You'd only need the client stuff on the
small-harddrive machine of course. Is it also stripped out of the server?
Yes. I saw it as an unnecessary overhead and a security risk.
I extended the usable lifetime of a p90 laptop like this. It was short
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Updating. yes you are constantly updating on a production server,
unless your idea of fun is somebody compromising your machine.
Unless the OS is a Swiss cheese of bugs, constant updating is not
necessary. If the OS is so insecure that you must constantly update
just to
Chris wrote:
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Updating. yes you are constantly updating on a production server,
unless your idea of fun is somebody compromising your machine.
Unless the OS is a Swiss cheese of bugs, constant updating is not
necessary. If the OS is so insecure that you must constantly
Chris writes:
Hmmm, what exactly are Windows Updates?
Unnecessary.
--
Anthony
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 23:26:08 -0800, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote
I brought this issue up a month or so ago. The problem was caused
by during the 4.11 development the ports people decided it was to
cpu intensive to do nightly builds of the INDEX file. So they
stopped doing it. Later on when the
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 00:53:29 +0100, Anthony Atkielski wrote
Unless the OS is a Swiss cheese of bugs, constant updating is not
necessary. If the OS is so insecure that you must constantly update
just to stay ahead of the kiddies, it's time to think of installing a
different OS.
Were we
- Original Message -
From: John [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 12:38 AM
Subject: Re: Installation instructions for Firefox somewhere?
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 00:53:29 +0100, Anthony Atkielski wrote
Unless the OS is a Swiss cheese of bugs
On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 03:48:21PM +0100, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chris writes:
If you don't have the ports tree (/usr/ports) on the box, put it there.
I don't have 300 MB to spare, particularly for something that I will use
so rarely.
Is there no machine you can nfs mount a ports tree
I'm currently struggling with the Xfce environment and I'd like to
install Firefox, but neither the Firefox site nor anywhere else I've
looked thus far has comprehensive installation instructions for the
product on FreeBSD (or any flavor of UNIX, apparently). Is there a page
somewhere that
On Saturday 26 February 2005 03:41 am, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
I'm currently struggling with the Xfce environment and I'd like to
install Firefox, but neither the Firefox site nor anywhere else I've
looked thus far has comprehensive installation instructions for the
product on FreeBSD (or any
I'm currently struggling with the Xfce environment and I'd like to
install Firefox, but neither the Firefox site nor anywhere else I've
looked thus far has comprehensive installation instructions for the
product on FreeBSD (or any flavor of UNIX, apparently). Is there a page
somewhere that
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 12:41:52 +0100
Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm currently struggling with the Xfce environment and I'd like to
install Firefox, but neither the Firefox site nor anywhere else I've
looked thus far has comprehensive installation instructions for the
product on
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2005 4:02 AM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Installation instructions for Firefox somewhere?
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 12:41:52 +0100
markzero writes:
# pkg-add -r firefox
I tried that, and it works, but the version installed is a preview
version that's well behind the current 1.0.1. And even after installing
it from the ports, I still can't install the most recent version; it
keeps complaining about that missing module.
Kent Stewart writes:
It appears to be built as a compat lib. Locate places it in
/usr/compat/linux/usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0
It's not there on my system. I did install Linux compatibility, and the
directory is there and filled with files, but that specific file is not
present. How do I put
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
Do a portupgrade first. Firefox depends on a lot of stuff.
I don't have the ports on the local machine. I go directly to the FTP
server each time I install something. Shouldn't they all be up to date
in that case?
The only Firefox version I see is 0.9, even though
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
Do a portupgrade first. Firefox depends on a lot of stuff.
I don't have the ports on the local machine. I go directly to the FTP
server each time I install something. Shouldn't they all be up to date
in that case?
The only Firefox version I
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 14:14:19 +0100, Anthony Atkielski wrote
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
Do a portupgrade first. Firefox depends on a lot of stuff.
I don't have the ports on the local machine. I go directly to the
FTP server each time I install something. Shouldn't they all be up
to
Chris writes:
This is simple. As someone has pointed out before, you need cvsup the
ports tree then a portupgrade. Yes, after the cvsup and portupgrade you
will have 1.0.1
There is no ports tree on the machine, so it cannot be out of date.
Isn't the index downloaded from the FTP site each
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chris writes:
This is simple. As someone has pointed out before, you need cvsup the
ports tree then a portupgrade. Yes, after the cvsup and portupgrade you
will have 1.0.1
There is no ports tree on the machine, so it cannot be out of date.
Isn't the index downloaded from
John writes:
It would help you if you installed the ports tree and portupgrade (and cvsup
it every day via cron to keep it up-to-date). If you did that, you would bave
been able to do like I have just done:
But I figured that if I always pull the index from an FTP site, it's
guaranteed to be
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
John writes:
It would help you if you installed the ports tree and portupgrade (and cvsup
it every day via cron to keep it up-to-date). If you did that, you would bave
been able to do like I have just done:
But I figured that if I always pull the index from an FTP site,
Chris writes:
If you don't have the ports tree (/usr/ports) on the box, put it there.
I don't have 300 MB to spare, particularly for something that I will use
so rarely.
What's wrong with getting the index from the FTP site when I run
sysinstall? Seems to me that it would guarantee that the
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chris writes:
If you don't have the ports tree (/usr/ports) on the box, put it there.
I don't have 300 MB to spare, particularly for something that I will use
so rarely.
What's wrong with getting the index from the FTP site when I run
sysinstall? Seems to me that it
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
John writes:
It would help you if you installed the ports tree and portupgrade (and cvsup
it every day via cron to keep it up-to-date). If you did that, you would bave
been able to do like I have just done:
But I figured that if I always pull the index from an FTP site,
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chris writes:
If you don't have the ports tree (/usr/ports) on the box, put it there.
I don't have 300 MB to spare, particularly for something that I will use
so rarely.
What's wrong with getting the index from the FTP site when I run
sysinstall? Seems to me that
Kevin Kinsey wrote:
Well, I've been under the impression for a while that sysinstall
is not necessarily reliable ...
big snip
I need to add, in order that my previous post not go into the archives
as absolute fact, and that I not be considered by the general public
as more of an idiot than I might
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 15:41:51 +0100, Anthony Atkielski wrote
But I figured that if I always pull the index from an FTP site, it's
guaranteed to be up to date. Isn't that true?
It guarantees that the index will be up-to-date [0]. The index is not the port
skeleton.
To be honest, I don't know
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 15:41:51 +0100, Anthony Atkielski wrote
How much space have you got to play with? If space is tight,
running make
distclean after make install helps, as does periodically
deleting the contents
of /usr/ports/distfiles
A refuse file would
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chris writes:
This is simple. As someone has pointed out before, you need cvsup the
ports tree then a portupgrade. Yes, after the cvsup and portupgrade
you will have 1.0.1
There is no ports tree on the machine, so it cannot be out of date.
Isn't the index
77 matches
Mail list logo
