Re: A serious flaw in Java
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 07:50:07 + (UTC), jb wrote: http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/625617 http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/01/critical-java-zero-day-bug-is-being-massively-exploited-in-the-wild/ -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ 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
A serious flaw in Java
http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/625617 jb ___ 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: editors/openoffice-org-3.3.0: serious issue with X11
On 02/03/11 14:12, Robert Huff wrote: Alexandre writes: On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Pavlo Greenbergsir_...@onet.com.uawrote: [SNIP] But I'm agree with you, OOo's behavior after the last update is abnormal. Why not give a try to LibreOffice, that is in ports : http://www.freshports.org/editors/libreoffice/ I switched yesterday, having not known it was available. It seems to work on all OOo-generated material (as one would expect), and build cleanly and (subjectively) somewhat faster than OO. (This is on an 4x3ghz amd64 machine with 8 gb of memory.) Robert Huff LibreOffice seems not to be that kind of 'replacement' I'd expected. Trying to start 'spadmin' for setting up printers fails with some libraries not found - I had to append paths to the right (weird) lib-path to /etc/ld-elf.so.conf. Done this, spadmin and sibblings will start but whatever I do have as printers (CUPS based on all of our systems), I'm incapable of having these printers for usage listed in LibreOffice! OpenOffice works fine. ___ 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: editors/openoffice-org-3.3.0: serious issue with X11
On 02/02/11 10:25, Anonymous wrote: O. Hartmannohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de writes: Hello. I just upgraded openoffice-3.2.1 to openoffice-org-3.3.0 and found myself in a serious issue. Opening openoffice works only sporadically, in most cases I get the error: XDM authorization key matches an existing client!/usr/local/openoffice.org-3.3.0/openoffice.org3/program/soffice.bin X11 error: Can't open display: Set DISPLAY environment variable, use -display option or check permissions of your X-Server (See man X resp. man xhost for details) Have you tried to add the following to xdm-config DisplayManager*authName: MIT-MAGIC-COOKIE-1 or adjusting permissions using xhost(1)? I did. Adding DisplayManager*authName: MIT-MAGIC-COOKIE-1 to xdm-config didn't make the problem disappear, only a global 'xhost +' helped. I also tried xhost + localhost:0.0 and all IP- or name-based combinations even FQDN/IP of the host, without success, except pure 'xhost +'. ___ 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: editors/openoffice-org-3.3.0: serious issue with X11
On 02/02/11 10:25, Anonymous wrote: O. Hartmannohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de writes: Hello. I just upgraded openoffice-3.2.1 to openoffice-org-3.3.0 and found myself in a serious issue. Opening openoffice works only sporadically, in most cases I get the error: XDM authorization key matches an existing client!/usr/local/openoffice.org-3.3.0/openoffice.org3/program/soffice.bin X11 error: Can't open display: Set DISPLAY environment variable, use -display option or check permissions of your X-Server (See man X resp. man xhost for details) Have you tried to add the following to xdm-config DisplayManager*authName: MIT-MAGIC-COOKIE-1 or adjusting permissions using xhost(1)? I did. Adding DisplayManager*authName: MIT-MAGIC-COOKIE-1 to xdm-config didn't make the problem disappear, only a global 'xhost +' helped. I also tried xhost + localhost:0.0 and all IP- or name-based combinations even FQDN/IP of the host, without success, except pure 'xhost +'. ___ 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 I solved the problem by adding xhost +local:my_user in ~/.xsession (I don't use any DE anymore, just WM, so in case of KDE or GNOME it may be another config file). But I'm agree with you, OOo's behavior after the last update is abnormal. ___ 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: editors/openoffice-org-3.3.0: serious issue with X11
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Pavlo Greenberg sir_...@onet.com.uawrote: [SNIP] But I'm agree with you, OOo's behavior after the last update is abnormal. Why not give a try to LibreOffice, that is in ports : http://www.freshports.org/editors/libreoffice/ ___ 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: editors/openoffice-org-3.3.0: serious issue with X11
Alexandre writes: On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Pavlo Greenberg sir_...@onet.com.uawrote: [SNIP] But I'm agree with you, OOo's behavior after the last update is abnormal. Why not give a try to LibreOffice, that is in ports : http://www.freshports.org/editors/libreoffice/ I switched yesterday, having not known it was available. It seems to work on all OOo-generated material (as one would expect), and build cleanly and (subjectively) somewhat faster than OO. (This is on an 4x3ghz amd64 machine with 8 gb of memory.) Robert Huff ___ 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: editors/openoffice-org-3.3.0: serious issue with X11
On 02/03/11 11:51, Alexandre wrote: On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Pavlo Greenberg sir_...@onet.com.ua mailto:sir_...@onet.com.ua wrote: [SNIP] But I'm agree with you, OOo's behavior after the last update is abnormal. Why not give a try to LibreOffice, that is in ports :Â http://www.freshports.org/editors/libreoffice/ I'll try, but when I installed/updated OO, I explicitely looked for LibreOffice (that was a couple of days ago, when OO 3.3.0 got into the ports), but it wasn't there. I'll try. Thanks for that hint. Oliver ___ 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: editors/openoffice-org-3.3.0: serious issue with X11
I just installed the current 3.3 snapshot openoffice.org-3.3.20110121 from good-day.net and it seems to work fine on my 8.1 amd64 gnome laptop. Regards, John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly ___ 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
editors/openoffice-org-3.3.0: serious issue with X11
Hello. I just upgraded openoffice-3.2.1 to openoffice-org-3.3.0 and found myself in a serious issue. Opening openoffice works only sporadically, in most cases I get the error: XDM authorization key matches an existing client!/usr/local/openoffice.org-3.3.0/openoffice.org3/program/soffice.bin X11 error: Can't open display: Set DISPLAY environment variable, use -display option or check permissions of your X-Server (See man X resp. man xhost for details) Deleting .Xauthority or restarting the session via resetting xdm/Xorg or removing ~/.openoffice didn't help anyway. Any suggestions are appreciated. Thanks in advance, Oliver ___ 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: editors/openoffice-org-3.3.0: serious issue with X11
O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de writes: Hello. I just upgraded openoffice-3.2.1 to openoffice-org-3.3.0 and found myself in a serious issue. Opening openoffice works only sporadically, in most cases I get the error: XDM authorization key matches an existing client!/usr/local/openoffice.org-3.3.0/openoffice.org3/program/soffice.bin X11 error: Can't open display: Set DISPLAY environment variable, use -display option or check permissions of your X-Server (See man X resp. man xhost for details) Have you tried to add the following to xdm-config DisplayManager*authName: MIT-MAGIC-COOKIE-1 or adjusting permissions using xhost(1)? ___ 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: SOLVED: serious (for me) Xorg 7.5 mouse/kbd problem in 8.1-STABLE
William Bulley w...@umich.edu wrote: See below for details of solution. [...] This problem is known (and fixed) in newer versions of xorg-server. See this URL for details of the problem. http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/commit/?id=1884db430a5680e37e94726dff46686e2218d525 I have also attached the changes I made to the dit/events.c file. Thank you very much for sharing the solution! I've been having similar problems with olvwm recently (apart from the fact that it doesn't work on amd64, but that's a different story). It keeps forgetting grabs every now and then, forcing me to restart the session. The description at the above URL sounds like it should be applicable to my problem, too. I'm going to rebuild my X server with that patch ASAP. I wish all of the recent xorg problems would be that easy to fix (such as Ctrl-Alt-Fx not working anymore). Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd Above all, they contribute to the genetic diversity in the operating system pool. Which is a good thing. -- Ruben van Staveren, on the question which BSD OS is the best 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
SOLVED: serious (for me) Xorg 7.5 mouse/kbd problem in 8.1-STABLE
See below for details of solution.
- Forwarded message from William Bulley w...@umich.edu -
To: FreeBSD Questions freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
From: William Bulley w...@umich.edu
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 07:38:34 -0400
Subject: serious (for me) Xorg 7.5 mouse/kbd problem in 8.1-STABLE
For years I have run Open-Motif on FreeBSD without issue.
I use a USB keyboard and a USB three button mouse attached to a Dell
Optiplex 960. This combination has worked fine for the past year.
This week I upgraded from 8.0-STABLE circa January 2010 to 8.1-STABLE.
I do this by doing a buildworld/installworld sequence after csup-ing
stable-supfile and rebooting. In this case I also pkg_deleted all of
my ports and am rebuilding them from source. Building Xorg is one of
the very first ports I attempt since I prefer to work in xterms not
virtual terminals.
This upgrade moved me from Xorg 7.3 to Xorg 7.5, but Open-Motif stayed
the same - open-motif-2.2.3_6 - it hasn't changed in years.
After building Xorg, as root, I ran the Xorg -configure command to
generate my xorg.conf.new file. Since a working /etc/X11/xorg.conf
file was still around after the upgrade from 8.0-STABLE/Xorg 7.3, I
felt no need to change anything in that file (later file comparisons
confirmed that nothing had changed).
My only relevant additions to /etc/X11/xorg.conf are these:
Section ServerFlags
Option AutoAddDevices off
Option DontZap false
EndSection
In my /etc/rc.conf file I have dbus and hald enabled, and that has
not changed since the beginning of 2010 after the confusion abated.
As a normal user, I start Xorg using /usr/local/bin/xinit as always.
I have several xterms configured in my ~/.xinitrc file. All those
came up in the correct location and state. I was able to open those
that started in iconic mode. In an open/raised xterm I could enter
carriage returns and see my shell prompt move down the window. But
when I tried to close/minimize an open/raised xterm, things failed.
I use the following keyboard/mouse combination (configured in my
.mwmrc file) to close (minimize) an xterm (and other applications):
Shift Btn3Click window f.minimize
This is also unchanged for some years. This particular setting has
no bearing on the problem I came across yesterday. I merely state
it for the record. However, this configuration triggers the bug.
The problem is as soon as I use that Shift/Btn3Click combination,
my arrow cursor disappears, then I cannot move to or select other
xterms - I am frozen, or locked, into the xterm I was trying to
close/minimize. All I can do at this point is to kill(1) the
/usr/local/bin/xinit command to return to the virtual terminal
where I launched my Xorg session.
I am now reluctantly using the good old /usr/local/bin/twm which
is always built when Xorg is built from source. I am at a loss
as to what to look for next. I suspect Xorg, or the keyboard and
mouse driver, not the video driver, that came with. It might be
a problem with hald(8), but again, I don't know how to debug this.
Any help with this very odd bug would be greatly appreciated.
- End forwarded message -
This problem is known (and fixed) in newer versions of xorg-server.
See this URL for details of the problem.
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/commit/?id=1884db430a5680e37e94726dff46686e2218d525
I have also attached the changes I made to the dit/events.c file.
After rebuilding xorg-server with those patches, the Open Motif
(mwm) window manager now works with the above minimize keyboard
and mouse squence. Thanks for all the help.
Regards,
web...
--
William Bulley Email: w...@umich.edu
72 characters width template -|
for (; grab; grab = grab-next)
{
DeviceIntPtrgdev;
XkbSrvInfoPtr xkbi = NULL;
/* 3471 Maskmask = 0; */
gdev= grab-modifierDevice;
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
}
xE = core;
count = 1;
/* 3586 mask = grab-eventMask; */
} else if (match XI2_MATCH)
{
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
count = 1;
/* 3599 * FIXME: EventToXI2 returns NULL for enter events, so
* dereferencing the event is bad. Internal event types are
* aligned with core events, so the else clause is valid.
* long-term we should use internal events for enter/focus
* as well *
if (xE)
mask =
grab-xi2mask[device-id][((xGenericEvent*)xE)-evtype/8];
else if (event-type == XI_Enter || event-type == XI_FocusIn)
mask = grab-xi2mask[device-id][event-type/8]; */
} else
{
rc = EventToXI((InternalEvent*)event, xE, count
Re: serious (for me) Xorg 7.5 mouse/kbd problem in 8.1-STABLE
According to Polytropon free...@edvax.de on Wed, 08/25/10 at 10:03: In case you're using HAL + DBUS, the setting now has to be coded in XML in some arbitrary file at a decentral location buried deep in the /usr/local subtree. According to the handbook 5.4.2 Configuring X11 http://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/x-config.html this is /usr/local/etc/hal/fdi/policy/x11-input.fdi with ?xml version=1.0 encoding=ISO-8859-1? deviceinfo version=0.2 device match key=info.capabilities contains=input.keyboard merge key=input.x11_options.XkbOptions type=stringterminate:ctrl_alt_bksp/merge /match /device /deviceinfo as well as /etc/X11/xorg.conf will need to be added Section ServerFlags Option DontZap off EndSection And the handbook also suggests a reboot (?!) to make sure HAL will pick up the new setting. Next time, you will have to reboot in order to make a mouse pointer position change visible. :-) Thanks for all the suggestions. Here is where things stand: I am still having the same problem since upgrading to 8.1-STABLE. First, what has changed. Then a clarification of the problem. xterm has changed: now 2.6.1 was 2.5.3 xorg has changed: now 7.5 was 7.3 xorg-server has changed: now 1.7.5,1 was 1.6.1,1 xf86-input-keyboard: now 1.4.0 was 1.3.2_2 xf86-input-mouse: now 1.5.0 was 1.4.0_6 hal has changed: now 0.5.14_8 was 0.5.13_12 kernel has changed: now 8.1-STABLE was 8.0-STABLE Note that open-motif _has_ _not_ _changed_ for some time. The problem is not in the method of shutting down my Xorg session. The problem is not the disappearance of my arrow cursor/pointer per se, although that may be a symptom of the underlying problem. The problem is that I am unable (now) to use open-motif through no change in my configs or my settings. Something has changed in the underlying applications, or system libraries, or kernel. In my use of open-motif, I use and depend on mouse focus. This means that when I move my mouse, the xterm I was in looses focus and the xterm into which I move my mouse pointer gains focus. This feature is also present in TWM, but open-motif (MWM) gives me the additional feature that the window having focus is also raised to the top - above all other windows/applications. This feature is critical for me and why I prefer using open-motif. When I first experienced this bug, all I could do at that point was to exit my xorg session (various folks have helped make that more normal). I have modified my .xinitrc file to include: /usr/local/bin/setxkbmap -option terminate:ctrl_alt_bksp and now Ctrl/Alt/BS sequence works as it used to in the old days. I have commented out ServerFlags section of my /etc/X11/xorg.conf file and I have rebooted my workstation. Both hald and dbus are still enabled in my /etc/rc.conf file. Nothing has changed. When I run open-motif, I still experience the crippling loss of mouse focus when I enter the sequence Shift/Btn3Click. The prevents me from using _any_ of my other windows or xterms or applications since I can no longer select them (give them focus). Recall this setting in my ~/.mwmrc file: Shift Btn3Click window f.minimize OTOH _everything_ works in /usr/local/bin/twm. I much prefer the features of MWM compared to TWM. I don't want to relearn another window manager just because of this problem, and I'd rather not reassign my f.minimize feature to a difference key and mouse sequence, since some day, some application may require me to enter Shift/Btn3Click which would effectively ruin that Xorg session. Since TWM works and the xterms therein also work just fine, I doubt that xterm is at fault. I also hold open-motif blameless since it has not changed in years. I think something in Xorg or one of its support modules is not properly registering the Shift/Btn3Click event to the xorg-server, or that xorg-server has changed so that this particular event causes my pointer focus to disappear. Unfortunately, I don't know how to track down this bug or to narrow the search for what changed. I was hoping someone in FreeBSD-land would have some suggestions. I have heard that contacting the Xorg developers may not result in a timely resolution. I greatly appreciate the comments on -questions to date. Thanks guys. Regards, web... -- William Bulley Email: w...@umich.edu 72 characters width template -| ___ 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: serious (for me) Xorg 7.5 mouse/kbd problem in 8.1-STABLE
According to Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com on Wed, 08/25/10 at 11:03: You are telling xorg-server to not use hald with the AutoAddDevices line: Section ServerFlags Option AutoAddDevices off Option DontZap false EndSection And the other option is already a default. So removing or commenting that section would let xorg-server use hald. I don't know if this will affect your window manager. Probably not, but worth testing. Did that. Made that change. No joy... :-( Regards, web... -- William Bulley Email: w...@umich.edu 72 characters width template -| ___ 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: serious (for me) Xorg 7.5 mouse/kbd problem in 8.1-STABLE
On Thu, 26 Aug 2010, William Bulley wrote: In my use of open-motif, I use and depend on mouse focus. ... Nothing has changed. When I run open-motif, I still experience the crippling loss of mouse focus when I enter the sequence Shift/Btn3Click. ... Shift Btn3Click window f.minimize Since TWM works and the xterms therein also work just fine, I doubt that xterm is at fault. I also hold open-motif blameless since it has not changed in years. I think something in Xorg or one of its support modules is not properly registering the Shift/Btn3Click event to the xorg-server, or that xorg-server has changed so that this particular event causes my pointer focus to disappear. Unfortunately, I don't know how to track down this bug or to narrow the search for what changed. I was hoping someone in FreeBSD-land would have some suggestions. I have heard that contacting the Xorg developers may not result in a timely resolution. I greatly appreciate the comments on -questions to date. Thanks guys. It's worth checking with the open-motif port maintainer. Also worth posting on the xorg mailing list. ___ 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
serious (for me) Xorg 7.5 mouse/kbd problem in 8.1-STABLE
For years I have run Open-Motif on FreeBSD without issue. I use a USB keyboard and a USB three button mouse attached to a Dell Optiplex 960. This combination has worked fine for the past year. This week I upgraded from 8.0-STABLE circa January 2010 to 8.1-STABLE. I do this by doing a buildworld/installworld sequence after csup-ing stable-supfile and rebooting. In this case I also pkg_deleted all of my ports and am rebuilding them from source. Building Xorg is one of the very first ports I attempt since I prefer to work in xterms not virtual terminals. This upgrade moved me from Xorg 7.3 to Xorg 7.5, but Open-Motif stayed the same - open-motif-2.2.3_6 - it hasn't changed in years. After building Xorg, as root, I ran the Xorg -configure command to generate my xorg.conf.new file. Since a working /etc/X11/xorg.conf file was still around after the upgrade from 8.0-STABLE/Xorg 7.3, I felt no need to change anything in that file (later file comparisons confirmed that nothing had changed). My only relevant additions to /etc/X11/xorg.conf are these: Section ServerFlags Option AutoAddDevices off Option DontZap false EndSection In my /etc/rc.conf file I have dbus and hald enabled, and that has not changed since the beginning of 2010 after the confusion abated. As a normal user, I start Xorg using /usr/local/bin/xinit as always. I have several xterms configured in my ~/.xinitrc file. All those came up in the correct location and state. I was able to open those that started in iconic mode. In an open/raised xterm I could enter carriage returns and see my shell prompt move down the window. But when I tried to close/minimize an open/raised xterm, things failed. I use the following keyboard/mouse combination (configured in my .mwmrc file) to close (minimize) an xterm (and other applications): Shift Btn3Click window f.minimize This is also unchanged for some years. This particular setting has no bearing on the problem I came across yesterday. I merely state it for the record. However, this configuration triggers the bug. The problem is as soon as I use that Shift/Btn3Click combination, my arrow cursor disappears, then I cannot move to or select other xterms - I am frozen, or locked, into the xterm I was trying to close/minimize. All I can do at this point is to kill(1) the /usr/local/bin/xinit command to return to the virtual terminal where I launched my Xorg session. I am now reluctantly using the good old /usr/local/bin/twm which is always built when Xorg is built from source. I am at a loss as to what to look for next. I suspect Xorg, or the keyboard and mouse driver, not the video driver, that came with. It might be a problem with hald(8), but again, I don't know how to debug this. Any help with this very odd bug would be greatly appreciated. Regards, web... -- William Bulley Email: w...@umich.edu 72 characters width template -| ___ 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: serious (for me) Xorg 7.5 mouse/kbd problem in 8.1-STABLE
On 08/25/2010 07:38, William Bulley wrote: For years I have run Open-Motif on FreeBSD without issue. I use a USB keyboard and a USB three button mouse attached to a Dell Optiplex 960. This combination has worked fine for the past year. This week I upgraded from 8.0-STABLE circa January 2010 to 8.1-STABLE. I do this by doing a buildworld/installworld sequence after csup-ing stable-supfile and rebooting. In this case I also pkg_deleted all of my ports and am rebuilding them from source. Building Xorg is one of the very first ports I attempt since I prefer to work in xterms not virtual terminals. This upgrade moved me from Xorg 7.3 to Xorg 7.5, but Open-Motif stayed the same - open-motif-2.2.3_6 - it hasn't changed in years. After building Xorg, as root, I ran the Xorg -configure command to generate my xorg.conf.new file. Since a working /etc/X11/xorg.conf file was still around after the upgrade from 8.0-STABLE/Xorg 7.3, I felt no need to change anything in that file (later file comparisons confirmed that nothing had changed). My only relevant additions to /etc/X11/xorg.conf are these: Section ServerFlags Option AutoAddDevices off Option DontZap false EndSection In my /etc/rc.conf file I have dbus and hald enabled, and that has not changed since the beginning of 2010 after the confusion abated. As a normal user, I start Xorg using /usr/local/bin/xinit as always. I have several xterms configured in my ~/.xinitrc file. All those came up in the correct location and state. I was able to open those that started in iconic mode. In an open/raised xterm I could enter carriage returns and see my shell prompt move down the window. But when I tried to close/minimize an open/raised xterm, things failed. I use the following keyboard/mouse combination (configured in my .mwmrc file) to close (minimize) an xterm (and other applications): Shift Btn3Click window f.minimize This is also unchanged for some years. This particular setting has no bearing on the problem I came across yesterday. I merely state it for the record. However, this configuration triggers the bug. The problem is as soon as I use that Shift/Btn3Click combination, my arrow cursor disappears, then I cannot move to or select other xterms - I am frozen, or locked, into the xterm I was trying to close/minimize. All I can do at this point is to kill(1) the /usr/local/bin/xinit command to return to the virtual terminal where I launched my Xorg session. I am now reluctantly using the good old /usr/local/bin/twm which is always built when Xorg is built from source. I am at a loss as to what to look for next. I suspect Xorg, or the keyboard and mouse driver, not the video driver, that came with. It might be a problem with hald(8), but again, I don't know how to debug this. Any help with this very odd bug would be greatly appreciated. Regards, web... -- William Bulley Email: w...@umich.edu 72 characters width template -| ___ 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 Though I can't really help you with the mouse disapearing I can say if you wish to modify you key-map to allow ctrl+alt+bksp you can add this to your .xinitrc ( setxkbmap -option terminate:ctrl_alt_bksp ) Regards Good luck, -- jhell,v ___ 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: serious (for me) Xorg 7.5 mouse/kbd problem in 8.1-STABLE
According to jhell jh...@dataix.net on Wed, 08/25/10 at 09:24: On 08/25/2010 07:38, William Bulley wrote: For years I have run Open-Motif on FreeBSD without issue. I use a USB keyboard and a USB three button mouse attached to a Dell Optiplex 960. This combination has worked fine for the past year. This week I upgraded from 8.0-STABLE circa January 2010 to 8.1-STABLE. I do this by doing a buildworld/installworld sequence after csup-ing stable-supfile and rebooting. In this case I also pkg_deleted all of my ports and am rebuilding them from source. Building Xorg is one of the very first ports I attempt since I prefer to work in xterms not virtual terminals. This upgrade moved me from Xorg 7.3 to Xorg 7.5, but Open-Motif stayed the same - open-motif-2.2.3_6 - it hasn't changed in years. After building Xorg, as root, I ran the Xorg -configure command to generate my xorg.conf.new file. Since a working /etc/X11/xorg.conf file was still around after the upgrade from 8.0-STABLE/Xorg 7.3, I felt no need to change anything in that file (later file comparisons confirmed that nothing had changed). My only relevant additions to /etc/X11/xorg.conf are these: Section ServerFlags Option AutoAddDevices off Option DontZap false EndSection In my /etc/rc.conf file I have dbus and hald enabled, and that has not changed since the beginning of 2010 after the confusion abated. As a normal user, I start Xorg using /usr/local/bin/xinit as always. I have several xterms configured in my ~/.xinitrc file. All those came up in the correct location and state. I was able to open those that started in iconic mode. In an open/raised xterm I could enter carriage returns and see my shell prompt move down the window. But when I tried to close/minimize an open/raised xterm, things failed. I use the following keyboard/mouse combination (configured in my .mwmrc file) to close (minimize) an xterm (and other applications): Shift Btn3Click window f.minimize This is also unchanged for some years. This particular setting has no bearing on the problem I came across yesterday. I merely state it for the record. However, this configuration triggers the bug. The problem is as soon as I use that Shift/Btn3Click combination, my arrow cursor disappears, then I cannot move to or select other xterms - I am frozen, or locked, into the xterm I was trying to close/minimize. All I can do at this point is to kill(1) the /usr/local/bin/xinit command to return to the virtual terminal where I launched my Xorg session. I am now reluctantly using the good old /usr/local/bin/twm which is always built when Xorg is built from source. I am at a loss as to what to look for next. I suspect Xorg, or the keyboard and mouse driver, not the video driver, that came with. It might be a problem with hald(8), but again, I don't know how to debug this. Any help with this very odd bug would be greatly appreciated. Though I can't really help you with the mouse disapearing I can say if you wish to modify you key-map to allow ctrl+alt+bksp you can add this to your .xinitrc ( setxkbmap -option terminate:ctrl_alt_bksp ) Thanks. Interestingly enough, I do have this line in my /etc/X11/xorg.conf file: Section InputDevice Option XkbOptions terminate:ctrl_alt_bksp EndSection But that never has seemed to work. :-( I will try your suggestion. I hope it works, although killing the xinit process is not much more difficult. Of course, your suggestion (and my workaround) to return to the virtual terminal command line depends upon a working keyboard... :-) Regards, web... -- William Bulley Email: w...@umich.edu 72 characters width template -| ___ 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: serious (for me) Xorg 7.5 mouse/kbd problem in 8.1-STABLE
On Wed, 25 Aug 2010, William Bulley wrote: After building Xorg, as root, I ran the Xorg -configure command to generate my xorg.conf.new file. Since a working /etc/X11/xorg.conf file was still around after the upgrade from 8.0-STABLE/Xorg 7.3, I felt no need to change anything in that file (later file comparisons confirmed that nothing had changed). My only relevant additions to /etc/X11/xorg.conf are these: Section ServerFlags Option AutoAddDevices off Option DontZap false EndSection In my /etc/rc.conf file I have dbus and hald enabled, and that has not changed since the beginning of 2010 after the confusion abated. If you are running hald, why not use it? And the DontZap default is back to where it used to be (off), so you could remove or comment that entire ServerFlags section. ___ 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: serious (for me) Xorg 7.5 mouse/kbd problem in 8.1-STABLE
According to Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com on Wed, 08/25/10 at 09:49: If you are running hald, why not use it? And the DontZap default is back to where it used to be (off), so you could remove or comment that entire ServerFlags section. Not sure what you mean by using hald. Assuming I knew how to use hald, how would that solve my problem of the disappearing mouse pointer and consequent loss of functionality of my window manager? Regards, web... -- William Bulley Email: w...@umich.edu 72 characters width template -| ___ 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: serious (for me) Xorg 7.5 mouse/kbd problem in 8.1-STABLE
On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:29:21 -0400, William Bulley w...@umich.edu wrote: Interestingly enough, I do have this line in my /etc/X11/xorg.conf file: Section InputDevice Option XkbOptions terminate:ctrl_alt_bksp EndSection But that never has seemed to work. :-( In case you're using HAL + DBUS, the setting now has to be coded in XML in some arbitrary file at a decentral location buried deep in the /usr/local subtree. According to the handbook 5.4.2 Configuring X11 http://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/x-config.html this is /usr/local/etc/hal/fdi/policy/x11-input.fdi with ?xml version=1.0 encoding=ISO-8859-1? deviceinfo version=0.2 device match key=info.capabilities contains=input.keyboard merge key=input.x11_options.XkbOptions type=stringterminate:ctrl_alt_bksp/merge /match /device /deviceinfo as well as /etc/X11/xorg.conf will need to be added Section ServerFlags Option DontZap off EndSection And the handbook also suggests a reboot (?!) to make sure HAL will pick up the new setting. Next time, you will have to reboot in order to make a mouse pointer position change visible. :-) -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ 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: serious (for me) Xorg 7.5 mouse/kbd problem in 8.1-STABLE
On Wed, 25 Aug 2010, William Bulley wrote: According to Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com on Wed, 08/25/10 at 09:49: If you are running hald, why not use it? And the DontZap default is back to where it used to be (off), so you could remove or comment that entire ServerFlags section. Not sure what you mean by using hald. Assuming I knew how to use hald, how would that solve my problem of the disappearing mouse pointer and consequent loss of functionality of my window manager? You are telling xorg-server to not use hald with the AutoAddDevices line: Section ServerFlags Option AutoAddDevices off Option DontZap false EndSection And the other option is already a default. So removing or commenting that section would let xorg-server use hald. I don't know if this will affect your window manager. Probably not, but worth testing. ___ 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: serious (for me) Xorg 7.5 mouse/kbd problem in 8.1-STABLE
On Thursday 26 August 2010 01:03:10 Polytropon wrote: On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:29:21 -0400, William Bulley w...@umich.edu wrote: Interestingly enough, I do have this line in my /etc/X11/xorg.conf file: Section InputDevice Option XkbOptions terminate:ctrl_alt_bksp EndSection But that never has seemed to work. :-( In case you're using HAL + DBUS, the setting now has to be coded in XML in some arbitrary file at a decentral location buried deep in the /usr/local subtree. According to the handbook 5.4.2 Configuring X11 http://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/x-config.html this is /usr/local/etc/hal/fdi/policy/x11-input.fdi with ?xml version=1.0 encoding=ISO-8859-1? deviceinfo version=0.2 device match key=info.capabilities contains=input.keyboard merge key=input.x11_options.XkbOptions type=stringterminate:ctrl_alt_bksp/merge /match /device /deviceinfo as well as /etc/X11/xorg.conf will need to be added Section ServerFlags Option DontZap off EndSection And the handbook also suggests a reboot (?!) to make sure HAL will pick up the new setting. Next time, you will have to reboot in order to make a mouse pointer position change visible. :-) By the way, configureing input options via hald doesn't work for me X itself got flags from hal, write correct logfile about layout and options (us+ru+typo), keys for layout switching, but really it doesn't work. configuring keyboard via xorg.conf give me working layout, but no lvl3 (typographic symbols) So all options now konfigured via KDE system settings, which call setxkbmap when init session my /usr/local/etc/hal/fdi/policy/10-x11-input.fdi ?xml version=1.0 encoding=ISO-8859-1? deviceinfo version=0.2 device !-- KVM emulates a USB graphics tablet which works in absolute coordinate mode -- match key=input.product contains=QEMU USB Tablet merge key=input.x11_driver type=stringevdev/merge /match match key=info.capabilities contains=input.tablet match key=/org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/computer:system.kernel.name string=Linux merge key=input.x11_driver type=stringevdev/merge /match /match match key=info.capabilities contains=input.keyboard !-- If we're using Linux, we use evdev by default (falling back to keyboard otherwise). -- merge key=input.x11_driver type=stringkbd/merge match key=/org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/computer:system.kernel.name string=Linux merge key=input.x11_driver type=stringevdev/merge /match /match !-- Setup x11 keyboard layouts -- match key=info.capabilities contains=input.keymap append key=info.callouts.add type=strlisthal-setup-keymap/append /match match key=info.capabilities contains=input.keyboard merge key=input.x11_options.XkbRules type=stringbase/merge merge key=input.x11_options.XkbModel type=stringpc104/merge merge key=input.x11_options.XkbLayout type=stringus,ru/merge merge key=input.x11_options.XkbVariant type=string,winkeys/merge merge key=input.x11_options.XkbOptions type=stringgrp:ctr_shift_toggle,grp_led:scroll,altwin:meta_win,lv3:ralt_switch,misc:typo/merge /match /device /deviceinfo [flu...@fluffy] / uname -a FreeBSD Fluffy.Khv.RU 9.0-900016-CURRENT FreeBSD 9.0-900016-CURRENT #1 r211145M: Wed Aug 11 13:06:07 VLAST 2010 r...@fluffy.khv.ru:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/Spot amd64 -- Dima Red Fox Panov @ Home | C73E 2B72 1FFD 61BD E206 1234 A626 76ED 93E3 B018 Khabarovsk, Russia | 2D30 2CCB 9984 130C 6F87 BAFC FB8B A09D D539 8F29 k...@freebsd Team | FreeBSD committer since 10.08.2009 | FreeBSD since Sept 1995 Twitter: fluffy_khv | Skype: dima.panov | Jabber.[org|ru]/GTalk/QIP: fluffy.khv ___ 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: 'Serious' crypto?
Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk wrote: ... I don't think you could get support cover with a 4 hour on-site response from Soekris... OTOH, given the price difference, one could afford to keep a whole spare system on hand. ___ 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: 'Serious' crypto?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 27/05/2010 21:49:12, Peter Cornelius wrote: NAT. Doing serious crypto slows things up somewhat. I've been pondering this since a while but thought that crypto engines on modern hardware would make 'extra' hardware accelerators obsolete? Yes -- in many use cases this is true. Modern processors are fast enough that they don't need an external accelerator to perform. It doesn't mean that running crypto imposes *no* extra cost on a server. For instance, a web server running HTTP will (roughly speaking) be able to support an order of magnitude more simultaneous sessions than the same site served over HTTPS. Or is it still worthwhile to consider hardware accelerators such as the ones guys like soekris [1] and others offer? Does anyone have an idea how much such an accelerator may help on older vs. on newer hardware? Those soekris boards are designed to work in low power (both in wattage and in compute capability) appliances. That is a perfectly viable alternative design for a crypto-gateway router / packet filter intended for traffic levels within the specification they claim. Hmmm... 250Mb/s IPSec throughput is (I think -- not having tried this, I cannot be certain) easily accessible through a fairly run of the mill server such as the HP Proliant DL120 G6. Of course, the HP box costs about 4--5 times as much as the Soekris. It will have a great deal more spare RAM, disk, compute capacity etc. No idea abut on-going support costs, but I don't think you could get support cover with a 4 hour on-site response from Soekris... Would multiple engines work (and help) at all? From crypto(4), I would not guess so. One consequence would be that there may be certain limitations in using a separate accelerator once the platform comes with its own accelerator device? One feature that hardware accelerator boards provide which is hard to get otherwise is plenty of random numbers on tap. Generating cryptographically strong randomness in volume is pretty hard computationally, and a hardware solution really helps things like IPSec throughput. Also, if you need really high volume crypto traffic throughput (multiple Gb/s levels), then yes, you will need specialised hardware. However, in this case, you're likely to be using pretty fancy routers (Cisco, Juniper, etc.) and those all have options for hardware acceleration built into interface cards. Cheers, Matthew - -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkv/c3QACgkQ8Mjk52CukIxJIwCbBTN1wcUcOodn6s7Sxa8yv4lE d+sAmwTZLxLo7KyMIdEKJJOLfa8OfVmI =KzX7 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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: 'Serious' crypto? (was: FreeBSD router - large scale)
Hi Chuck, Thanks for the response. Or is it still worthwhile to consider hardware accelerators such as the ones guys like soekris [1] and others offer? Does anyone have an idea how much such an accelerator may help on older vs. on newer hardware? Something like a 1GHz P3 or equivalent can generally do the symmetric crypto about as fast as a decent PCI crypto card like the HiFN 795x could; bus limitations made faster CPUs better, although a newer PCIe crypto device ought to be more competitive. What matters more for some common use cases is that crypto H/W tends to do asymmetric crypto like RSA/DSA signing to negotiate a shared session key-- aka SSL session creation for SSL websites, secure email, SSH keys, etc much faster than normal CPUs could. I guess I try first without and see where I hit the ceiling. Then go to plan b. I was more thinking of many IPSEC connections but then there's also only so many slots and so many NICs in them. I'll try without and monitor that for a while and then see what happens. Would multiple engines work (and help) at all? From crypto(4), I would not guess so. One consequence would be that there may be certain limitations in using a separate accelerator once the platform comes with its own accelerator device? Sure, you can setup multiple engines, although this does better if you have separate services using each, since you do want to use an SSL session cache, but you don't want to pollute one for HTTPS with sessions from IMAPS and vice versa. Also, the config interface for Apache/IIS/whatever, or Dovecot/Cyrus/Exchange, etc might not let you specify more than one SSLEngine. On the other hand, it's not very much coding to adjust things to use multiple engines even within Apache or whatever-- I can recall some custom webserver modules from CryptoSwift for NSAPI / ISAPI / ASAPI which let you use multiple CryptoSwift boxes via ethernet network or local PCI slots, for example. Hmm... I was thinking more like round-robin the devices but I probably now too little about 'serious' crypto to see the side-effects. Anyways, I think the question is a bit academic at this time since I probably divide the servers anyways. Thanks again, All the best regards, Peter. -- GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT! Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01 ___ 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: 'Serious' crypto?
Hi Matthew, Thanks for the response. NAT. Doing serious crypto slows things up somewhat. I've been pondering this since a while but thought that crypto engines on modern hardware would make 'extra' hardware accelerators obsolete? Yes -- in many use cases this is true. Modern processors are fast enough that they don't need an external accelerator to perform. It doesn't mean that running crypto imposes *no* extra cost on a server. For instance, a web server running HTTP will (roughly speaking) be able to support an order of magnitude more simultaneous sessions than the same site served over HTTPS. And a hardware crypto device will level HTTPS to the HTTP volume without it? Or is it still worthwhile to consider hardware accelerators such as the ones guys like soekris [1] and others offer? Does anyone have an idea how much such an accelerator may help on older vs. on newer hardware? Those soekris boards are designed to work in low power (both in wattage and in compute capability) appliances. That is a perfectly viable alternative design for a crypto-gateway router / packet filter intended for traffic levels within the specification they claim. That is what I currently consider. The low power is a good thing. I just wonder whether it is worthwhile to hunt for a newer hardware (= more expensive, both in wattage and procurement) or stick to a known platform and just add a new component. Hmmm... 250Mb/s IPSec throughput is (I think -- not having tried this, I cannot be certain) easily accessible through a fairly run of the mill server such as the HP Proliant DL120 G6. Of course, the HP box costs about 4--5 times as much as the Soekris. It will have a great deal more spare RAM, disk, compute capacity etc. No idea abut on-going support costs, but I don't think you could get support cover with a 4 hour on-site response from Soekris... I know the DL series though I have used more the DL360 G4-G6 ones. I like something with low noise and power intake, hopefully achieving passive cooling. Would multiple engines work (and help) at all? From crypto(4), I would not guess so. One consequence would be that there may be certain limitations in using a separate accelerator once the platform comes with its own accelerator device? One feature that hardware accelerator boards provide which is hard to get otherwise is plenty of random numbers on tap. Generating cryptographically strong randomness in volume is pretty hard computationally, and a hardware solution really helps things like IPSec throughput. I think I do understand that (I hope :)) Also, if you need really high volume crypto traffic throughput (multiple Gb/s levels), then yes, you will need specialised hardware. However, in this case, you're likely to be using pretty fancy routers (Cisco, Juniper, etc.) and those all have options for hardware acceleration built into interface cards. Yes, I know the Ciscos very well but currently the Junipers look more appropriate to me for one application we have. The Junipers probably go outside the ASAs inside. My reason for the post was considering more another 'quiet' and 'lowpower' project I have, so that's probably a completely different pair of shoes. I'll try without first and then see what comes out of it. Thanks again, and All the best, Peter. -- GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT! Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01 ___ 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: 'Serious' crypto?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 28/05/2010 09:20:11, Peter Cornelius wrote: Yes -- in many use cases this is true. Modern processors are fast enough that they don't need an external accelerator to perform. It doesn't mean that running crypto imposes *no* extra cost on a server. For instance, a web server running HTTP will (roughly speaking) be able to support an order of magnitude more simultaneous sessions than the same site served over HTTPS. And a hardware crypto device will level HTTPS to the HTTP volume without it? Probably. The usual approach with HTTPS once traffic levels get big enough is crypto-offload. You use a separate device as the crypto endpoint: typically built into a load balancer. You can do this using a PF based firewall using relayd(8) for a lot less money, and in this case one crypto accelerator card in your firewall could support several webservers behind it. Also, if you need really high volume crypto traffic throughput (multiple Gb/s levels), then yes, you will need specialised hardware. However, in this case, you're likely to be using pretty fancy routers (Cisco, Juniper, etc.) and those all have options for hardware acceleration built into interface cards. Yes, I know the Ciscos very well but currently the Junipers look more appropriate to me for one application we have. The Junipers probably go outside the ASAs inside. Heh. When I said 'pretty fancy kit' I meant something considerably more *shiny* than a Cisco ASA5510. In fact, running OpenBSD on a commodity server is roughly performance compatible with a 5510 but considerably cheaper if you want all the trimmings like high-availability, unlimited numbers of servers, GB on all interfaces etc. Note that ASA5510 level kit tends to do things like deep packet inspection, content based filtering etc. [Not to mention fubar'ing EDNS0 and screwing with SMTP so hard it breaks.] PF itself is purely based on dealing with packet headers: however you can easily add things like squid caching and filtering, snort etc. but these will ramp up the CPU requirements beyond what a small appliance could support. My reason for the post was considering more another 'quiet' and 'lowpower' project I have, so that's probably a completely different pair of shoes. I'll try without first and then see what comes out of it. Commodity servers certainly don't fulfil the quiet requirement. Most of them have enough fannage to build a fairly respectable hovercraft. Cheers, Matthew - -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkv/gz4ACgkQ8Mjk52CukIwOfgCfXdrawnYYFZj3npV3gleqJlcY 5msAn2tVjGtoUJQTB/lR3dqMM4X+PS1U =LS+F -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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: 'Serious' crypto?
Hi Matthew, And a hardware crypto device will level HTTPS to the HTTP volume without it? Probably. The usual approach with HTTPS once traffic levels get big enough is crypto-offload. You use a separate device as the crypto endpoint: typically built into a load balancer. You can do this using a PF based firewall using relayd(8) for a lot less money, and in this case one crypto accelerator card in your firewall could support several webservers behind it. That's pretty close to what I had in mind though I considered a separate device in a DMZ for load balancing and mod_proxy/mod_security, as a minimum. However, HTTP(s) is only one of so many protocols. Heh. When I said 'pretty fancy kit' I meant something considerably more *shiny* than a Cisco ASA5510. In fact, running OpenBSD on a commodity Ok, you win that one :) We typically use one up from that as a minimum. Dunno if that regains me my face though... server is roughly performance compatible with a 5510 but considerably cheaper if you want all the trimmings like high-availability, unlimited numbers of servers, GB on all interfaces etc. That is all true but these arguments do only work if you talk to security-literate people, not managers who prefer something with a real seal on and regular updates etc. Since the latter are the ones who authorise the cash, here we go. There are some who I can convince but frequently it's just not worth the discussion. Imho, unfortunately, but I don't want to start an advocacy thread here. Note that ASA5510 level kit tends to do things like deep packet inspection, content based filtering etc. [Not to mention fubar'ing EDNS0 and screwing with SMTP so hard it breaks.] PF itself is purely based on dealing with packet headers: however you can easily add things like squid caching and filtering, snort etc. but these will ramp up the CPU requirements beyond what a small appliance could support. As indicated initially, I intend to shift the load off the firewall to a separate device which then may do a lot more to the traffic than the firewall. But I don't see why I should'nt try to use the same kind of hardware platform for both. However it may be, I first set up this with the hardware I already have and then see what I find and where to optimise best before going to series. I also must improve significantly on my config management before I actually can do that just as others do when I look at other threads. My reason for the post was considering more another 'quiet' and 'lowpower' project I have, so that's probably a completely different pair of shoes. I'll try without first and then see what comes out of it. Commodity servers certainly don't fulfil the quiet requirement. Most of them have enough fannage to build a fairly respectable hovercraft. Nope, they don't. I used to dry my hair behind the cabinets. And I used to have a lot of that :) Thanks again for your responses, and All the best regards, Peter. -- GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT! Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01 ___ 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
'Serious' crypto? (was: FreeBSD router - large scale)
Hi, NAT. Doing serious crypto slows things up somewhat. I've been pondering this since a while but thought that crypto engines on modern hardware would make 'extra' hardware accelerators obsolete? Or is it still worthwhile to consider hardware accelerators such as the ones guys like soekris [1] and others offer? Does anyone have an idea how much such an accelerator may help on older vs. on newer hardware? Would multiple engines work (and help) at all? From crypto(4), I would not guess so. One consequence would be that there may be certain limitations in using a separate accelerator once the platform comes with its own accelerator device? Thanks, Peter. --- [1] http://www.soekris.com/vpn1401.htm -- GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT! Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01 ___ 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: 'Serious' crypto? (was: FreeBSD router - large scale)
On May 27, 2010, at 1:49 PM, Peter Cornelius wrote: Hi, NAT. Doing serious crypto slows things up somewhat. I've been pondering this since a while but thought that crypto engines on modern hardware would make 'extra' hardware accelerators obsolete? It depends upon usage. Or is it still worthwhile to consider hardware accelerators such as the ones guys like soekris [1] and others offer? Does anyone have an idea how much such an accelerator may help on older vs. on newer hardware? Something like a 1GHz P3 or equivalent can generally do the symmetric crypto about as fast as a decent PCI crypto card like the HiFN 795x could; bus limitations made faster CPUs better, although a newer PCIe crypto device ought to be more competitive. What matters more for some common use cases is that crypto H/W tends to do asymmetric crypto like RSA/DSA signing to negotiate a shared session key-- aka SSL session creation for SSL websites, secure email, SSH keys, etc much faster than normal CPUs could. Would multiple engines work (and help) at all? From crypto(4), I would not guess so. One consequence would be that there may be certain limitations in using a separate accelerator once the platform comes with its own accelerator device? Sure, you can setup multiple engines, although this does better if you have separate services using each, since you do want to use an SSL session cache, but you don't want to pollute one for HTTPS with sessions from IMAPS and vice versa. Also, the config interface for Apache/IIS/whatever, or Dovecot/Cyrus/Exchange, etc might not let you specify more than one SSLEngine. On the other hand, it's not very much coding to adjust things to use multiple engines even within Apache or whatever-- I can recall some custom webserver modules from CryptoSwift for NSAPI / ISAPI / ASAPI which let you use multiple CryptoSwift boxes via ethernet network or local PCI slots, for example. Regards, -- -Chuck ___ 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: Serious problems updating Current after switching to libxul.
keneasson wrote:
Can anyone help me get my system back up and running?
make.conf looks like this:
WITH_MYSQL_VER=51
APACHE_VERSION=22
OVERRIDE_LINUX_BASE_PORT=f8
WWWDIR = /web/phpmyadmin
WITH_CUPS=yes
CUPS_OVERWRITE_BASE=true
#NO_LPR=true
USE_GECKO=libxul
^
This is your problem. You want to say:
WITH_GECKO=libxul
here.
# Begin portconf settings
# Do not touch these lines
.if !empty(.CURDIR:M/usr/ports*) amp;amp; exists(/usr/local/libexec/portconf)
_PORTCONF!=/usr/local/libexec/portconf
.for i in ${_PORTCONF:S/|/ /g}
${i:S/%/ /g}
.endfor
.endif
# End portconf settings
# added by use.perl 2009-09-19 16:22:20
PERL_VERSION=5.10.1
In general, you *never* add any USE_FOO flags to /etc/make.conf -- USE_FOO
is designed for use by port maintainers inside the limited scope of
port-specific Makefiles: the presence of a USE_FOO setting in scope
generally does dramatic things like adding dependencies on whole
software subsystems. Your 'USE_GECKO' setting in /etc/make.conf (which has
effect in the global scope) has made *every* port on your machine depend on
gecko related libraries. It's not really surprising you're experiencing a
bit of brokenness.
Instead, you need a WITH_FOO flag. WITH_FOO is designed for end users to
tweak the way ports work in detail: they only have any effect in ports that
are specifically written to take notice of them; everything else will just
ignore them. Even so, it's very common to use directory matching login or,
as you have, things like PORTCONF to limit the application of a WITH_FOO
flag to a specific port. The whole OPTIONS dialogue system is just a
front-end to setting WITH_FOO flags for a specific port.
Note: something that may cause a certain amount of astonishment to neophyte
users. The opposite of saying:
WITH_FOO=yes
is not:
WITH_FOO=no ### Don't do this.
but:
WITHOUT_FOO=yes ### Do this.
That's because the value of 'WITH_FOO' variables is not actually tested
anywhere, only whether the variable is defined or not. Setting
WITH_FOO=bananas would have exactly the same effect, as, indeed does
WITH_FOO=no or WITH_FOO=over_my_dead_body
Cheers,
Matthew
--
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard
Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
Kent, CT11 9PW
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Serious problems updating Current after switching to libxul.
Hello,
I'm running Freebsd 8.0-Stable #9 Dec 17/09 on amd64. I'm running gnome, and at
the time i started my update i was at Gnome 2.26
I went through UPDATING and tried to switch from firefox 2 which is marked
ignore to libxul by changing WITH_GECKO=libxul removed firefox3 and installed
firefox35
I used UPDATING to try and sort out libxul, but it seems i have some cyclic
dependencies.
I use portmaster (i did try to rebuild things for portupgrade and try, but it
had bigger problems and i couldn't even update the index.) I keep updating my
ports tree (cvsup) i used portsnap, and it seems that was when my problems
started, i rm -rf /usr/ports/* and cvsupped the entire thing back at one point.
I got an error which seems to have started the whole ugly affair with
/usr/ports/Mk/bsd.gecko.mk causing post patch issues, the main problem seemed
to be e2fsprogs-libuuid which i was unable to rebuild due to it wanting a
bsd.gecko.mk patch which from what i've read is now removed with firefox2, i
deleted stuff till i got around that for now... but...
at present my key problem is a cyclic dependency when i try and rebuilt pretty
much anything, with libxul as the main issue.
glib20 =gt; libxul =gt;glib20 =gt; libxul =gt;glib20 =gt; libxul
=gt;glib20 =gt; libxul =gt;glib20 =gt; libxul =gt;glib20
I have tried installing the package for both. i've tried pkg_deleting both then
installing the port, or using portmaster, i've tried portmaster
--check-depends, i've tried portmaster -e to remove them and try and re-install
them. I've removed about 1/2 my system and now have even more problems. (i
removed gettext and now portmaster complains about missing libintl.so.8 not
found.
at best i get a much larger cyclic loop with:
glib20 =gt; libtool22 =gt; libiconv =gt; gettetxt =gt; atk =gt; libgmp4
=gt; farsight =gt; gdm =gt; libxul =gt; glib20
or some other combination of the cycle.
Can anyone help me get my system back up and running?
make.conf looks like this:
WITH_MYSQL_VER=51
APACHE_VERSION=22
OVERRIDE_LINUX_BASE_PORT=f8
WWWDIR = /web/phpmyadmin
WITH_CUPS=yes
CUPS_OVERWRITE_BASE=true
#NO_LPR=true
USE_GECKO=libxul
# Begin portconf settings
# Do not touch these lines
.if !empty(.CURDIR:M/usr/ports*) amp;amp; exists(/usr/local/libexec/portconf)
_PORTCONF!=/usr/local/libexec/portconf
.for i in ${_PORTCONF:S/|/ /g}
${i:S/%/ /g}
.endfor
.endif
# End portconf settings
# added by use.perl 2009-09-19 16:22:20
PERL_VERSION=5.10.1
thanks
ken
___
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
Serious problems updating 8.0-Stable after switching to with_gecko= libxul.
Hello,
I'm running Freebsd 8.0-Stable #9 Dec 17/09 on amd64. I'm running gnome, and at
the time i started my update i was at Gnome 2.26
I went through UPDATING and tried to switch from firefox 2 which is marked
ignore to libxul by changing WITH_GECKO=libxul removed firefox3 and installed
firefox35
I used UPDATING to try and sort out libxul, but it seems i have some cyclic
dependencies.
I use portmaster (i did try to rebuild things for portupgrade and try, but it
had bigger problems and i couldn't even update the index.) I keep updating my
ports tree (cvsup) i used portsnap, and it seems that was when my problems
started, i rm -rf /usr/ports/* and cvsupped the entire thing back at one point.
I got an error which seems to have started the whole ugly affair with
/usr/ports/Mk/bsd.gecko.mk causing post patch issues, the main problem seemed
to be e2fsprogs-libuuid which i was unable to rebuild due to it wanting a
bsd.gecko.mk patch which from what i've read is now removed with firefox2, i
deleted stuff till i got around that for now... but...
at present my key problem is a cyclic dependency when i try and rebuilt pretty
much anything, with libxul as the main issue.
glib20 =gt; libxul =gt;glib20 =gt; libxul =gt;glib20 =gt; libxul
=gt;glib20 =gt; libxul =gt;glib20 =gt; libxul =gt;glib20
I have tried installing the package for both. i've tried pkg_deleting both then
installing the port, or using portmaster, i've tried portmaster
--check-depends, i've tried portmaster -e to remove them and try and re-install
them. I've removed about 1/2 my system and now have even more problems. (i
removed gettext and now portmaster complains about missing libintl.so.8 not
found.
at best i get a much larger cyclic loop with:
glib20 =gt; libtool22 =gt; libiconv =gt; gettetxt =gt; atk =gt; libgmp4
=gt; farsight =gt; gdm =gt; libxul =gt; glib20
or some other combination of the cycle.
Can anyone help me get my system back up and running?
make.conf looks like this:
WITH_MYSQL_VER=51
APACHE_VERSION=22
OVERRIDE_LINUX_BASE_PORT=f8
WWWDIR = /web/phpmyadmin
WITH_CUPS=yes
CUPS_OVERWRITE_BASE=true
#NO_LPR=true
USE_GECKO=libxul
# Begin portconf settings
# Do not touch these lines
.if !empty(.CURDIR:M/usr/ports*) amp;amp; exists(/usr/local/libexec/portconf)
_PORTCONF!=/usr/local/libexec/portconf
.for i in ${_PORTCONF:S/|/ /g}
${i:S/%/ /g}
.endfor
.endif
# End portconf settings
# added by use.perl 2009-09-19 16:22:20
PERL_VERSION=5.10.1
thanks
ken___
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: RAID 5 - serious problem
2008/10/15 Jeremy Chadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 02:32:25PM +0200, Jon Theil Nielsen wrote: Dear list, Something happened that I don't think should be possible. I lost all three disks in my RAID 5 array simultaneously after approx. two years without any problem. And I fear I will never see my data again. But I really hope some of you clever persons can give me some hints. My system is: FreeBSD 7.0-Release Intel D975XBX2 motherboard (Intel Matrix Storage Technology) Are you using the Matrix Storage Technology? If so, immediately stop. FreeBSD's support for this is very, very bad, and will nearly guarantee data loss. There are many of us who have tried it, and it's known to be buggy on FreeBSD. http://wiki.freebsd.org/JeremyChadwick/ATA_issues_and_troubleshooting I recommend you stop using this feature and start using ZFS or gvinum for what you need. 3 WD Raptor 74 GB in a RAID 5 array 1 WD Raptor 150 GB as a standalone disk / and /var mounted on the standalone,, /usr on the RAID 5 I believe what happened was that one of the disks didn't respond for such a long time, that is was marked bad. And afterwards the same thing happened for the other disks. When I try to boot the system, all three disks are marked Offline. The BIOS utility for the host controller has no option to force the disks back online. I have another machine with a S5000XVN board and Intel Embedded Server RAID Technology II. The BIOS configuration utility on this board has the option to force offline drives back online. Any embedded RAID is usually BIOS RAID managed by either a software RAID IC (e.g. an IC on the motherboard that handles LBA/CHS addressing for creating a pseudo-array, but the OS still does all of the management and does not off-load anything). I am very desperate not to lose my data, so I don't know if I dare moving the drives to the other machine and try to make them online again. Do you think I should try? No, but you might not have any choice. It honestly sounds like the metadata on your disks is in a bad state. I would recommend you try booting Linux, since their support for MatrixRAID is significantly better/more advanced. Ideally, you should be able to bring the RAID members back online using their tools, then reboot into FreeBSD and cross your fingers that your data becomes accessible. Once accessible, offload it somewhere immediately, and follow my above recommendations. In general, are there any procedures I can try to recover my RAID array? Or is the offline status definitive ? and all data definitely lost? I guess some specialized companies have the expertise to recover lost data from a broken RAID array, but I don't know. And I don't know the price of such a service. I would really, really appreciate any kind of help. I have backups of most user data, but not of the system configuration (and maybe even not the databases). This is of course pretty stupid. In the future, I will not rely on RAID 5 as a foolproof solution? RAID 5 is a fine solution, but you have learned a very valuable lesson, one which I will enclose in asterisks to make it crystal clear: ***RAID DOES NOT REPLACE BACKUPS***. Repeat this mantra over and over until you accept it. :-) -- | Jeremy Chadwickjdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB | Hi Jeremy, Thanks for your advice. As I understand you, the best bet is to boot from Linux and try to repair. And that trying with my other controller might be the second best. Would it be an idea to try to run som sort of Linux live cd? I have no machines with Linux installed. Regards, Jon ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RAID 5 - serious problem
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 03:51:19PM +0200, Jon Theil Nielsen wrote: 2008/10/15 Jeremy Chadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 02:32:25PM +0200, Jon Theil Nielsen wrote: Dear list, Something happened that I don't think should be possible. I lost all three disks in my RAID 5 array simultaneously after approx. two years without any problem. And I fear I will never see my data again. But I really hope some of you clever persons can give me some hints. My system is: FreeBSD 7.0-Release Intel D975XBX2 motherboard (Intel Matrix Storage Technology) Are you using the Matrix Storage Technology? If so, immediately stop. FreeBSD's support for this is very, very bad, and will nearly guarantee data loss. There are many of us who have tried it, and it's known to be buggy on FreeBSD. http://wiki.freebsd.org/JeremyChadwick/ATA_issues_and_troubleshooting I recommend you stop using this feature and start using ZFS or gvinum for what you need. 3 WD Raptor 74 GB in a RAID 5 array 1 WD Raptor 150 GB as a standalone disk / and /var mounted on the standalone,, /usr on the RAID 5 I believe what happened was that one of the disks didn't respond for such a long time, that is was marked bad. And afterwards the same thing happened for the other disks. When I try to boot the system, all three disks are marked Offline. The BIOS utility for the host controller has no option to force the disks back online. I have another machine with a S5000XVN board and Intel Embedded Server RAID Technology II. The BIOS configuration utility on this board has the option to force offline drives back online. Any embedded RAID is usually BIOS RAID managed by either a software RAID IC (e.g. an IC on the motherboard that handles LBA/CHS addressing for creating a pseudo-array, but the OS still does all of the management and does not off-load anything). I am very desperate not to lose my data, so I don't know if I dare moving the drives to the other machine and try to make them online again. Do you think I should try? No, but you might not have any choice. It honestly sounds like the metadata on your disks is in a bad state. I would recommend you try booting Linux, since their support for MatrixRAID is significantly better/more advanced. Ideally, you should be able to bring the RAID members back online using their tools, then reboot into FreeBSD and cross your fingers that your data becomes accessible. Once accessible, offload it somewhere immediately, and follow my above recommendations. In general, are there any procedures I can try to recover my RAID array? Or is the offline status definitive ? and all data definitely lost? I guess some specialized companies have the expertise to recover lost data from a broken RAID array, but I don't know. And I don't know the price of such a service. I would really, really appreciate any kind of help. I have backups of most user data, but not of the system configuration (and maybe even not the databases). This is of course pretty stupid. In the future, I will not rely on RAID 5 as a foolproof solution? RAID 5 is a fine solution, but you have learned a very valuable lesson, one which I will enclose in asterisks to make it crystal clear: ***RAID DOES NOT REPLACE BACKUPS***. Repeat this mantra over and over until you accept it. :-) -- | Jeremy Chadwickjdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB | Hi Jeremy, Thanks for your advice. As I understand you, the best bet is to boot from Linux and try to repair. And that trying with my other controller might be the second best. You risk corrupting or losing the metadata using another controller. The two controllers are *not* identical; just because they're Intel doesn't mean they speak the same metadata format. :-) Would it be an idea to try to run som sort of Linux live cd? I have no machines with Linux installed. Yes, absolutely. I assume any Linux distribution which uses libata should be able to speak to Intel MatrixRAID disks and BIOSes. Linux refers to this feature as Intel SATA RAID or Intel Software RAID, Any present-day 2.6.x kernel uses libata; the newer the better. I do not know how to manipulate or interface with MatrixRAID on Linux. You will have to Google for how to get support in that regard. My quick searches turn up the following useful links: http://linux-ata.org/faq-sata-raid.html http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Gentoo_Install_on_Bios_(Onboard)_RAID http://www.intel.com/support/chipsets/imsm/sb/cs-020663.htm http://iswraid.sourceforge.net/ (old/outdated from the look of it) It would appear the tool to manipulate the
RAID 5 - serious problem
Dear list, Something happened that I don't think should be possible. I lost all three disks in my RAID 5 array simultaneously after approx. two years without any problem. And I fear I will never see my data again. But I really hope some of you clever persons can give me some hints. My system is: FreeBSD 7.0-Release Intel D975XBX2 motherboard (Intel Matrix Storage Technology) 3 WD Raptor 74 GB in a RAID 5 array 1 WD Raptor 150 GB as a standalone disk / and /var mounted on the standalone,, /usr on the RAID 5 I believe what happened was that one of the disks didn't respond for such a long time, that is was marked bad. And afterwards the same thing happened for the other disks. When I try to boot the system, all three disks are marked Offline. The BIOS utility for the host controller has no option to force the disks back online. I have another machine with a S5000XVN board and Intel Embedded Server RAID Technology II. The BIOS configuration utility on this board has the option to force offline drives back online. I am very desperate not to lose my data, so I don't know if I dare moving the drives to the other machine and try to make them online again. Do you think I should try? In general, are there any procedures I can try to recover my RAID array? Or is the offline status definitive – and all data definitely lost? I guess some specialized companies have the expertise to recover lost data from a broken RAID array, but I don't know. And I don't know the price of such a service. I would really, really appreciate any kind of help. I have backups of most user data, but not of the system configuration (and maybe even not the databases). This is of course pretty stupid. In the future, I will not rely on RAID 5 as a foolproof solution… Regards, Jon -- *Jon Theil Nielsen* ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RAID 5 - serious problem
Hello, the drives to the other machine and try to make them online again. Do you think I should try? If I were you, I would first buy/get a XXX GB SATA drive, create a filesystem there and copy all three disks block-by-block as three separate files (which will be the size of the disks). This way you'll still have the backup of your screwed up drives somewhere in case something goes even more wrong. However, I don't think your data is *physically* lost. I am almost sure that it is still on that drives, only the metadata could be fscked up. Now how to get the data back is another thing. In worst case scenario you could analyze the specification of the metadata format for you controller and then write a C program which would somehow put the bits together again using syscalls. Bye, Nejc ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RAID 5 - serious problem
FreeBSD 7.0-Release Intel D975XBX2 motherboard (Intel Matrix Storage Technology) 3 WD Raptor 74 GB in a RAID 5 array 1 WD Raptor 150 GB as a standalone disk / and /var mounted on the standalone,, /usr on the RAID 5 I believe what happened was that one of the disks didn't respond for such a long time, that is was marked bad. And afterwards the same thing happened for the other disks. When I try to boot the system, all three disks are marked Offline. I am very desperate not to lose my data, In that case, step one is to use dd(1) to make a bit-for-bit copy of the three drives to some trusted media. Since they are marked bad/offline, you might need to move them to a controller that doesn't know anything about RAID. (Note that there is risk here, and in almost anything you do at this point.) Once you have this bit-for-bit backup, you can run any experiment you like to attempt to recover your data. If the experiment goes bad, you can dd the exact original contents back using dd, then try a different experiment. While you're at it, make a normal backup using dump(8) or whatever you normally use, of / and /var. Once you have *everything* backed up, you can do risky experiments like booting linux. My personal approach to avoiding data loss is (a) avoid buggy things like inthell and linux. (b) FFS with softdeps and the disk write cache turned off, (c) full backups. I don't have enough ports to run RAID. :-( The downside is that FreeBSD doesn't have NCQ support yet (when? when? when?) so writes are slow. :-( ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RAID 5 - serious problem
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 02:32:25PM +0200, Jon Theil Nielsen wrote: Dear list, Something happened that I don't think should be possible. I lost all three disks in my RAID 5 array simultaneously after approx. two years without any problem. And I fear I will never see my data again. But I really hope some of you clever persons can give me some hints. My system is: FreeBSD 7.0-Release Intel D975XBX2 motherboard (Intel Matrix Storage Technology) Are you using the Matrix Storage Technology? If so, immediately stop. FreeBSD's support for this is very, very bad, and will nearly guarantee data loss. There are many of us who have tried it, and it's known to be buggy on FreeBSD. http://wiki.freebsd.org/JeremyChadwick/ATA_issues_and_troubleshooting I recommend you stop using this feature and start using ZFS or gvinum for what you need. 3 WD Raptor 74 GB in a RAID 5 array 1 WD Raptor 150 GB as a standalone disk / and /var mounted on the standalone,, /usr on the RAID 5 I believe what happened was that one of the disks didn't respond for such a long time, that is was marked bad. And afterwards the same thing happened for the other disks. When I try to boot the system, all three disks are marked Offline. The BIOS utility for the host controller has no option to force the disks back online. I have another machine with a S5000XVN board and Intel Embedded Server RAID Technology II. The BIOS configuration utility on this board has the option to force offline drives back online. Any embedded RAID is usually BIOS RAID managed by either a software RAID IC (e.g. an IC on the motherboard that handles LBA/CHS addressing for creating a pseudo-array, but the OS still does all of the management and does not off-load anything). I am very desperate not to lose my data, so I don't know if I dare moving the drives to the other machine and try to make them online again. Do you think I should try? No, but you might not have any choice. It honestly sounds like the metadata on your disks is in a bad state. I would recommend you try booting Linux, since their support for MatrixRAID is significantly better/more advanced. Ideally, you should be able to bring the RAID members back online using their tools, then reboot into FreeBSD and cross your fingers that your data becomes accessible. Once accessible, offload it somewhere immediately, and follow my above recommendations. In general, are there any procedures I can try to recover my RAID array? Or is the offline status definitive ? and all data definitely lost? I guess some specialized companies have the expertise to recover lost data from a broken RAID array, but I don't know. And I don't know the price of such a service. I would really, really appreciate any kind of help. I have backups of most user data, but not of the system configuration (and maybe even not the databases). This is of course pretty stupid. In the future, I will not rely on RAID 5 as a foolproof solution? RAID 5 is a fine solution, but you have learned a very valuable lesson, one which I will enclose in asterisks to make it crystal clear: ***RAID DOES NOT REPLACE BACKUPS***. Repeat this mantra over and over until you accept it. :-) -- | Jeremy Chadwickjdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB | ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RAID 5 - serious problem
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 10:14:42AM +0100, Dieter wrote: FreeBSD 7.0-Release Intel D975XBX2 motherboard (Intel Matrix Storage Technology) 3 WD Raptor 74 GB in a RAID 5 array 1 WD Raptor 150 GB as a standalone disk / and /var mounted on the standalone,, /usr on the RAID 5 I believe what happened was that one of the disks didn't respond for such a long time, that is was marked bad. And afterwards the same thing happened for the other disks. When I try to boot the system, all three disks are marked Offline. I am very desperate not to lose my data, In that case, step one is to use dd(1) to make a bit-for-bit copy of the three drives to some trusted media. Since they are marked bad/offline, you might need to move them to a controller that doesn't know anything about RAID. (Note that there is risk here, and in almost anything you do at this point.) Once you have this bit-for-bit backup, you can run any experiment you like to attempt to recover your data. If the experiment goes bad, you can dd the exact original contents back using dd, then try a different experiment. While you're at it, make a normal backup using dump(8) or whatever you normally use, of / and /var. Once you have *everything* backed up, you can do risky experiments like booting linux. My personal approach to avoiding data loss is (a) avoid buggy things like inthell and linux. Interesting, being as we have another thread going as of late that seems to link transparent data loss with AMD AM2-based systems with certain models of Adaptec and possibly LSI Logic controller cards. I like Intel as much as I like AMD -- but it's important to remember that it's becoming more and more difficult to provide flawless stability on things as the complexities increase. And I have no idea what your beef is with Linux. If the OP is successfully able to bring his array on-line using Linux, I would think that says something about the state of things in FreeBSD, would you agree? Both OSes have their pros and cons. (b) FFS with softdeps and the disk write cache turned off, This has been fully discussed by developers, particularly Matt Dillon. I can point you to a thread discussing why doing this is not only silly, but a bad idea. And if you'd like, I can show you just how bad the performance is on disks with WC disabled using UFS2 + softupdates. When I say bad, I'm serious -- we're talking horrid. And yes, I have tried it -- see PR 127717 for evidence that I *have* tried it. :-) There *may* be advantages to disabling a disk's write cache when using a hardware RAID controller that offers its own on-board cache (DIMMs, etc.), but that cache should be battery-backed for safety reasons. (c) full backups. I'm curious what your logic is here too -- this one is debatable, so I'd like to hear your view. I don't have enough ports to run RAID. :-( The downside is that FreeBSD doesn't have NCQ support yet (when? when? when?) so writes are slow. :-( NCQ will not necessarily improve write performance. There have been numerous studies done proving this fact, and I can point you to those as well. TCQ, on the other hand, does offer performance benefits when there are a large number of simultaneous transactions occurring (think: it's more like SCSI's command queueing). I believe Andrey Elsukov is working on getting NCQ support working when AHCI is in use (assuming I remember correctly). -- | Jeremy Chadwickjdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB | ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RAID 5 - serious problem
My personal approach to avoiding data loss is (a) avoid buggy things like inthell and linux. Interesting, being as we have another thread going as of late that seems to link transparent data loss with AMD AM2-based systems with certain models of Adaptec and possibly LSI Logic controller cards. This is the SCSI with = 4 GiB thread? Sounds like an address map problem. I like Intel as much as I like AMD That is your right. Inthell has a long history of buggy products, attempting to hide/ignore bugs, poor customer support, outright theft, etc. AMD isn't perfect, but the list of bad things is far far shorter. And there are other companies to consider besides just inthell and AMD. -- but it's important to remember that it's becoming more and more difficult to provide flawless stability on things as the complexities increase. Computers are complex devices and always have been. Yes this makes it difficult to get everything right. Yet it is possible to achieve very high levels of reliability, better than 5 9s. And I have no idea what your beef is with Linux. The quality is crap. Endless problems, including scrambled data. If the OP is successfully able to bring his array on-line using Linux, I would think that says something about the state of things in FreeBSD, would you agree? Both OSes have their pros and cons. It says linux got something right that FreeBSD got wrong. I never said that BSD gets *everything* right, or that linux gets *everything* wrong. (b) FFS with softdeps and the disk write cache turned off, This has been fully discussed by developers, particularly Matt Dillon. I can point you to a thread discussing why doing this is not only silly, but a bad idea. And if you'd like, I can show you just how bad the performance is on disks with WC disabled using UFS2 + softupdates. When I say bad, I'm serious -- we're talking horrid. And yes, I have tried it -- see PR 127717 for evidence that I *have* tried it. :-) I am WELL aware of how bad write performance is on disks with the write cache turned off. I get only about 10% of what the hardware can do, and with large files that is very noticeable. :-( But data integrity is important. (c) full backups. I'm curious what your logic is here too -- this one is debatable, so I'd like to hear your view. Things go wrong, and when they do backups are useful. The obvious problem is that a backup quickly becomes out of date as data changes. RAID stays current, but doesn't help with accidental file deletions, in cases where the entire machine dies (fire. flood, etc.), and so on. A proper RAID (that actually helps reliability rather than hurting it) plus off site backups gets you pretty close. A RAID with an off site mirror plus off site backups would be about as reliable as you can get. But if the rate of data changes is high the communication charges could be prohibitive. It all comes down to how important your data is and how much money is available. NCQ will not necessarily improve write performance. I doubt it will help if you have the disk's write cache turned on. I'm pretty sure it will help with write cache turned off. I believe Andrey Elsukov is working on getting NCQ support working when AHCI is in use (assuming I remember correctly). I look forward to having NCQ available. Write performance without it is really pathetic. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RAID 5 - serious problem
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 01:28:43PM +0100, Dieter wrote: My personal approach to avoiding data loss is (a) avoid buggy things like inthell and linux. Interesting, being as we have another thread going as of late that seems to link transparent data loss with AMD AM2-based systems with certain models of Adaptec and possibly LSI Logic controller cards. This is the SCSI with = 4 GiB thread? Sounds like an address map problem. It's the am2 MBs - 4g + SCSI wipes out root partition thread. I like Intel as much as I like AMD That is your right. Inthell has a long history of buggy products, attempting to hide/ignore bugs, poor customer support, outright theft, etc. AMD isn't perfect, but the list of bad things is far far shorter. And there are other companies to consider besides just inthell and AMD. I'd rather not debate this, as it's off-topic. We can take it up privately if you desire, but keep in mind that my ideal system would be an AMD processor on an Intel chipset board -- but I'll probably be dead by the time that ever happens. Both companies could have much to learn from one another. And I have no idea what your beef is with Linux. The quality is crap. Endless problems, including scrambled data. I'm not even going to touch this one. If the OP is successfully able to bring his array on-line using Linux, I would think that says something about the state of things in FreeBSD, would you agree? Both OSes have their pros and cons. It says linux got something right that FreeBSD got wrong. I never said that BSD gets *everything* right, or that linux gets *everything* wrong. I don't really consider it an issue of right or wrong; a very different, and unique viewpoint you have! (And I do mean that sincerely) (b) FFS with softdeps and the disk write cache turned off, This has been fully discussed by developers, particularly Matt Dillon. I can point you to a thread discussing why doing this is not only silly, but a bad idea. And if you'd like, I can show you just how bad the performance is on disks with WC disabled using UFS2 + softupdates. When I say bad, I'm serious -- we're talking horrid. And yes, I have tried it -- see PR 127717 for evidence that I *have* tried it. :-) I am WELL aware of how bad write performance is on disks with the write cache turned off. I get only about 10% of what the hardware can do, and with large files that is very noticeable. :-( But data integrity is important. Your 10% claim is about right. Here's some actual tests I just did (filesystem layer is in the way, but you get the idea): atapci0: Intel ICH5 SATA150 controller port 0x1f0-0x1f7,0x3f6,0x170-0x177,0x376,0xf000-0xf00f irq 18 at device 31.2 on pci0 ata0: ATA channel 0 on atapci0 ata0: [ITHREAD] ad0: 114473MB Seagate ST3120026AS 3.05 at ata0-master SATA150 testbox# ./atacontrol cap ad0 | grep write write cacheyes yes testbox# dd if=/dev/zero of=/usr/testfile bs=1m count=1024 1024+0 records in 1024+0 records out 1073741824 bytes transferred in 20.199726 secs (53156257 bytes/sec) testbox# ./atacontrol wc ad0 off testbox# ./atacontrol cap ad0 | grep write write cacheyes no testbox# dd if=/dev/zero of=/usr/testfile bs=1m count=1024 1024+0 records in 1024+0 records out 1073741824 bytes transferred in 155.745314 secs (6894216 bytes/sec) That's about 13% of the full capability. No administrator in their right mind is going to disable WC unless the disks are behind some form of controller that does caching. (For NCQ stuff, see below.) As for the reading material: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2008-September/045495.html http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2008-September/045542.html (c) full backups. I'm curious what your logic is here too -- this one is debatable, so I'd like to hear your view. Things go wrong, and when they do backups are useful. The obvious problem is that a backup quickly becomes out of date as data changes. RAID stays current, but doesn't help with accidental file deletions, in cases where the entire machine dies (fire. flood, etc.), and so on. A proper RAID (that actually helps reliability rather than hurting it) plus off site backups gets you pretty close. A RAID with an off site mirror plus off site backups would be about as reliable as you can get. But if the rate of data changes is high the communication charges could be prohibitive. It all comes down to how important your data is and how much money is available. Ah sorry, I misinterpreted what you wrote! For some reason I thought you were advocating *not* performing full level-0 backups. :-) NCQ will not necessarily improve write performance. I doubt it will help if you have the disk's write cache turned on. I'm pretty sure it will help with write cache turned off. One thing I haven't tested or experimented with is disabling write
Re: RAID 5 - serious problem
I like Intel as much as I like AMD That is your right. Inthell has a long history of buggy products, attempting to hide/ignore bugs, poor customer support, outright theft, etc. AMD isn't perfect, but the list of bad things is far far shorter. And there are other companies to consider besides just inthell and AMD. I'd rather not debate this, as it's off-topic. We can take it up privately if you desire, but keep in mind that my ideal system would be an AMD processor on an Intel chipset board -- but I'll probably be dead by the time that ever happens. Both companies could have much to learn from one another. Inthell apparently has some good fab people. If they were a designless fab house they might not be on my black list. No administrator in their right mind is going to disable WC unless the disks are behind some form of controller that does caching. (For NCQ stuff, see below.) The only setup I have found that doesn't lose data is FFS+softdep+WC off. So you think I am insane for wanting to not lose data? NCQ will not necessarily improve write performance. I doubt it will help if you have the disk's write cache turned on. I'm pretty sure it will help with write cache turned off. One thing I haven't tested or experimented with is disabling write caching on a drive that has NCQ. Since FreeBSD lacks NCQ right now, we could test this on Linux to see what the I/O difference is (I'm talking purely from a dd or bonnie++ perspective). The filesystem may be significant, and last time I looked, linux didn't support FFS r/w. I read something indicating that recent disks do NCQ much better than earlier ones, so NCQ support isn't binary. This, and people testing NCQ with the write cache on, could explain the results where NCQ doesn't help. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RAID 5 - serious problem
2008/10/15 Nejc Skoberne [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello, the drives to the other machine and try to make them online again. Do you think I should try? If I were you, I would first buy/get a XXX GB SATA drive, create a filesystem there and copy all three disks block-by-block as three separate files (which will be the size of the disks). This way you'll still have the backup of your screwed up drives somewhere in case something goes even more wrong. However, I don't think your data is *physically* lost. I am almost sure that it is still on that drives, only the metadata could be fscked up. Now how to get the data back is another thing. In worst case scenario you could analyze the specification of the metadata format for you controller and then write a C program which would somehow put the bits together again using syscalls. Bye, Nejc Hi again, There are a lot of interesting statements and arguments in this thread. I am impressed. But you have to understand that I am not a very advanced user of FreeBSD and especially Linux. So I have to try to keep it simple. Thanks to the low dollar course and the technological development, I think it is reasonable for me to buy an extra disk just to try to fix my problems. Actually, a 300 GB Raptor will do. And then I can install some Linux flavour (which one should I prefer) to copy the contents of my sick disks bit-by-bit. And then I can somehow try to bring the disks back online again. Could you please spell it out for me, which tools I should use for that? My board has both the Intel controller and a Marvell one. Can I just keep the disks on the Intel one and disregard the offline status (if I understand you right, I might lose all metadata if I try to change anything)? AFAIK, the discussion of hardware vs. software RAID has been going on for a very long time. And it really seems to be complicated. I recognise the argument of having to stick with the same hardware. At the same time, it seems at little pessimistic that a lot of people will end up with lots of useless disks because the vendors decide to cut backward compatability. I don't know. Best regards, Jon ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: serious problems
Hi Michael, While running make installworld my computer crashed. (FreeBSD 6.2-p9 kernel) At this moment the system misses some of the elf libs. Running in single user mode and running make installworld again gives all kind of errors Right out of the handbook. 23.4.14.6. What do I do if something goes wrong? Make absolutely sure your environment has no extraneous cruft from earlier builds. This is simple enough. # chflags -R noschg /usr/obj/usr # rm -rf /usr/obj/usr # cd /usr/src # make cleandir # make cleandir Yes, make cleandir really should be run twice. Due to the fact that the elf libraries are gone ?!?!? I cann't loging normally and I cannot run these commands. Tonight I try to get in single user and I'll retry what the handbook says Jack ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: serious problems
Hello Jack: On Nov 29, 2007, at 10:48 PM, Jack Raats wrote: Hi While running make installworld my computer crashed. (FreeBSD 6.2-p9 kernel) At this moment the system misses some of the elf libs. Running in single user mode and running make installworld again gives all kind of errors Any leads to solve this problem?? Jack Right out of the handbook. 23.4.14.6. What do I do if something goes wrong? Make absolutely sure your environment has no extraneous cruft from earlier builds. This is simple enough. # chflags -R noschg /usr/obj/usr # rm -rf /usr/obj/usr # cd /usr/src # make cleandir # make cleandir Yes, make cleandir really should be run twice. Then restart the whole process, starting with make buildworld. /quote Regards, Mike ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: serious problems
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 07:48:30AM +0100, Jack Raats wrote: Hi While running make installworld my computer crashed. (FreeBSD 6.2-p9 kernel) At this moment the system misses some of the elf libs. Running in single user mode and running make installworld again gives all kind of errors Any leads to solve this problem?? It would be helpful to know what errors you are seeing. -- Daniel Bye _ ASCII ribbon campaign ( ) - against HTML, vCards and X - proprietary attachments in e-mail / \ pgpjPTEkgiCJh.pgp Description: PGP signature
serious problems
Hi While running make installworld my computer crashed. (FreeBSD 6.2-p9 kernel) At this moment the system misses some of the elf libs. Running in single user mode and running make installworld again gives all kind of errors Any leads to solve this problem?? Jack ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release
SOFTWARE defects that are specific to hardware that are not documented in the PR database generally do not get fixed. You usually don't document hardware defects in the PR database since by definition these generally cannot be corrected by fixes in the FreeBSD code. Ted - Original Message - From: Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Ted Mittelstaedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 2:45 AM Subject: Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release Ted, On 16/02/07, Ted Mittelstaedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know where your getting the impression that I said this was a hardware bug. Umm, quoted from you above: Defects that are specific to hardware that are not documented in the PR database generally do not get fixed. If I didn't know this is simply the way you are at times I would think you have gone mad. Ted Frem. ___ 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: **questions** Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release
- Original Message - From: Steven H. Baeighkley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 9:50 AM Subject: Re: **questions** Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release If bugs is the correct list then that's where we'll send it. However we were not initially thinking it was a bug. We were thinking it was a configuration error on our part. We certainly weren't expecting kernel patches, just advice on where next to proceed. Thanks for the send-pr suggestion. We have verbose dmesg logs for all of our testing, I didn't want to send them initially because they are large and we have 12 of them. If you have 4 CPU's and FreeBSD is only seeing 2 of them then I'd say it's a bug! You can always post a link to where the logs are. Ted ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release
- Original Message - From: Greg Barniskis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Steven H. Baeighkley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 10:12 AM Subject: Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: questions isn't for bugs. I don't mean to be rude but you won't get the problem fixed by bitching about it on this mailing list. Good gravy. They're not asking -questions for a fix, they're asking for guidance on how to isolate the root cause of the problem. Quoth the OP: *what are we missing?* That is perfectly germane for -questions and only /after/ that question is answered Then, post some steps and quit metadiscussing. would it be appropriate to use send-pr. Using send-pr to submit a poorly defined problem (too much load) is not going to result in a project committer magically finding and fixing an unknown OS bug. The original post was not poorly defined. Certainly not compared to the average PR. The only things missing were BIOS and board revisions and the diagnostic log. Steven H. Baeighkley wrote: If bugs is the correct list then that's where we'll send it. However we were not initially thinking it was a bug. We were thinking it was a configuration error on our part. That's a reasonable assumption actually. Sorry I don't have any specific suggestions for you except to second the motion that you ignore Ted's assertion that you should give up on -questions. It's entirely possible that there's a tunable knob or app compilation option that will help you out. If you would care to suggest something I'm sure the OP would be all ears. So far you have only posted sheer speculation. Ted ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: **questions** Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release
- Original Message - From: Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Steven H. Baeighkley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 10:28 AM Subject: Re: **questions** Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 10:50:18AM -0700, Steven H. Baeighkley wrote: If bugs is the correct list then that's where we'll send it. However we were not initially thinking it was a bug. We were thinking it was a configuration error on our part. We certainly weren't expecting kernel patches, just advice on where next to proceed. Thanks for the send-pr suggestion. We have verbose dmesg logs for all of our testing, I didn't want to send them initially because they are large and we have 12 of them. bugs isn't correct either, that's only for automated mailing of problem reports. I'd recommend either freebsd-stable or freebsd-performance, those are technical lists read by developers. Kris P.S. I second the recommendation to ignore Ted :-) Oh, your answer is then to just send him to another list? So, I'm wrong for telling him to get out of here and go to send-pr, and your right for telling him to get out of here and go to another mailing list. Uh huh. Ted ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release
- Original Message - From: Freminlins To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 11:14 AM Subject: Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release Please sort out your formatting. It looks horrible. funny how nobody else that quoted it seemed to have a problem. I've snipped your assumption that this is a hardware problem because it is misleading at this stage. It could well be a configuraiton issue. I'll quote then from the OP's post: ...This is a supermicro superserver 6022c dual 2.0 Xeon with 2GB RAM. These CPUs do support hyperthreading ...If we disable hyperthreading in the bios and have it disabled in the OS then FreeBSD sees one physical and one logical processor (from dmesg) and only uses processor 0 Disabling or enabling hyperthreading on a dual-Xeon BIOS has nothing to do with the number of physical CPU's FreeBSD sees. If there are 2 physical CPU's on the motherboard and both CPU's are enabled (regardless of whether hyperthreading is turned on or off in BIOS) then FreeBSD should be seeing 2 physical CPUs. The fact that it is not is a kernel bug that is very related to hardware. I don't know where your getting the impression that I said this was a hardware bug. Clearly it is not a hardware bug if -other- operating systems are seeing and using both CPUs. The hardware is operating as it was designed to do. The problem is that FreeBSD has a defect in that it cannot properly detect and setup for this hardware. If you object to the use of the word defect then substitute lack of code instead. I never siad that the OP's SuperMicro motherboard adhered to any industry standard for SMP systems. I myself have had mixed luck with SuperMicro motherboards back in the early days of FreeBSD SMP, both uniprocessor and SMP boards. Unfortunately, these problems are usually only fixed by getting a sample of the motherbord in the hands of a developer. I assume this particular board is no longer in production, so most likely the OP won't ultimately be able to get it fixed unless he parts with one of his machines - although a number of folks with hardware/software problems like this have been able to get developers to fix them by putting their hardware online and giving the developer remote access. Ted ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release
Ted, On 16/02/07, Ted Mittelstaedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know where your getting the impression that I said this was a hardware bug. Umm, quoted from you above: Defects that are specific to hardware that are not documented in the PR database generally do not get fixed. If I didn't know this is simply the way you are at times I would think you have gone mad. Ted Frem. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release
On 15/02/07, Steven H. Baeighkley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Greetings, We are having some bizarre performance problems on a freshly installed 6.2 Release server. This is a supermicro superserver 6022c dual 2.0 Xeon with 2GB RAM. These CPUs do support hyperthreading. We have done significant testing with both hyperthreading turned on and off in the bios and in the OS, to no avail. The server is configured as a web server with apache 2.2.4 php 5.2.0 and ZendOptimizer. We are running proftpd 1.3.1rc1 and perl 5.8.8. We have another server running 4.11 with the same exact hardware and software versions. We have updated to the newest bios that Supermicro provides. The trouble is that the 6.2 box performs significantly worse than the 4.11 server. The load on the 6.2 server is regularly between 2.0 and 6.0. The load on the 4.11 server is between .57 and 1 despite often servicing more connections. We began this process to upgrade into the 6 tree because 4 is EOL. We kept the old 4.11 drive from this machine and when replacing it into the box performance is excellent just like our other 4.11 box. We have tired multiple tuning variables as recommended by both FreeBSD and apache and tried the recommendations in the 6.2 errata as well. The 6.2 errata states that kern.ipc.nmbclusters=0 will help the kernel memory allocator properly deal with high network traffic. We tried this and initially thought that the box was showing wonderful performance, but then we realized that the box was not allowing much network access at all. A single ssh and proftpd connection were all it would accept. Apache wouldn't even start giving a MaxClients error. Removing this option returned it to functional though poor performance mode. Are we missing something with how to use this variable? IS this expected behavior? This particular hardware does display some oddities on both machines, running either 6.2 or 4.11. We know that FreeBSD has hyperthreading turned off by default. We have done some additional testing with hyperthreading turned on in the OS, but we wish for it to remain off due to security concerns. If we disable hyperthreading in the bios and have it disabled in the OS then FreeBSD sees one physical and one logical processor (from dmesg) and only uses processor 0. If we enable hyperthreading in the bios and leave it disabled in the OS it will show 4 CPUs but only use 0 and 2. Top will show that there is 50% idle CPU despite the fact that the box is 100% loaded, CPU 1 and 3 are idle. We would expect that FreeBSD would not see logical processors when hyperthreading was disabled in either the BIOS or the OS. This may just be a communication problem between the BIOS and FreeBSD, but we don't see this behavior on other supermicro servers with hyperthreading. VMSTAT, NETSTAT, NFSSTAT and FSTAT show similar numbers between both servers, certainly nothing that would explain why a single httpd process requires 20% of a CPU on the 6.2 box and only 5-7% on the 4.11, but we could easily be missing something. We suspected NFS or disk bottlenecks, but ran IOZONE tests and found that the 6.2 box is actually having better performance on nfs and disk access. We are running a slightly customized SMP kernel with device polling enabled. The only bottleneck apears to be CPU usage, which works fine on 4.11. From what we've read we should not be seeing these performance problems with 6.2. So what are we missing? We assume its something stupid that will fix this problem quickly and easily, but so far, despite all the resources, we have been unable to find a problem with enough in common with our own to suggest possible solutions. Please Help. thanks Steve B -- --- Steven H. Baeighkley - Systems Administrator Front Range Internet, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - (970) 212-0756 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I cant comment on why your cpu usage is different by so much other than freebsd 4 code is less bloated and more streamlined and I think freebsd 6 is designed in a way that efficency is lost in favour of scaling for better SMP support. kern.ipc.nmbclusters I have had problems with, I used to set to 65535 initially to help under DDOS but this reduced transfer speeds, I then tried setting to 0 as its reccomended here and is supposed to increase itself when needed but I found speeds plummeted, I was getting 20kB/sec over a lan. So now I just leave it autoset which seems the only way to get normal network performance. Chris ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release
please use send-pr and include a dmesg output with debugging turned on, and exact model of motherboard and bios revision. questions isn't for bugs. I don't mean to be rude but you won't get the problem fixed by bitching about it on this mailing list. Ted - Original Message - From: Steven H. Baeighkley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 4:09 PM Subject: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release Greetings, We are having some bizarre performance problems on a freshly installed 6.2 Release server. This is a supermicro superserver 6022c dual 2.0 Xeon with 2GB RAM. These CPUs do support hyperthreading. We have done significant testing with both hyperthreading turned on and off in the bios and in the OS, to no avail. The server is configured as a web server with apache 2.2.4 php 5.2.0 and ZendOptimizer. We are running proftpd 1.3.1rc1 and perl 5.8.8. We have another server running 4.11 with the same exact hardware and software versions. We have updated to the newest bios that Supermicro provides. The trouble is that the 6.2 box performs significantly worse than the 4.11 server. The load on the 6.2 server is regularly between 2.0 and 6.0. The load on the 4.11 server is between .57 and 1 despite often servicing more connections. We began this process to upgrade into the 6 tree because 4 is EOL. We kept the old 4.11 drive from this machine and when replacing it into the box performance is excellent just like our other 4.11 box. We have tired multiple tuning variables as recommended by both FreeBSD and apache and tried the recommendations in the 6.2 errata as well. The 6.2 errata states that kern.ipc.nmbclusters=0 will help the kernel memory allocator properly deal with high network traffic. We tried this and initially thought that the box was showing wonderful performance, but then we realized that the box was not allowing much network access at all. A single ssh and proftpd connection were all it would accept. Apache wouldn't even start giving a MaxClients error. Removing this option returned it to functional though poor performance mode. Are we missing something with how to use this variable? IS this expected behavior? This particular hardware does display some oddities on both machines, running either 6.2 or 4.11. We know that FreeBSD has hyperthreading turned off by default. We have done some additional testing with hyperthreading turned on in the OS, but we wish for it to remain off due to security concerns. If we disable hyperthreading in the bios and have it disabled in the OS then FreeBSD sees one physical and one logical processor (from dmesg) and only uses processor 0. If we enable hyperthreading in the bios and leave it disabled in the OS it will show 4 CPUs but only use 0 and 2. Top will show that there is 50% idle CPU despite the fact that the box is 100% loaded, CPU 1 and 3 are idle. We would expect that FreeBSD would not see logical processors when hyperthreading was disabled in either the BIOS or the OS. This may just be a communication problem between the BIOS and FreeBSD, but we don't see this behavior on other supermicro servers with hyperthreading. VMSTAT, NETSTAT, NFSSTAT and FSTAT show similar numbers between both servers, certainly nothing that would explain why a single httpd process requires 20% of a CPU on the 6.2 box and only 5-7% on the 4.11, but we could easily be missing something. We suspected NFS or disk bottlenecks, but ran IOZONE tests and found that the 6.2 box is actually having better performance on nfs and disk access. We are running a slightly customized SMP kernel with device polling enabled. The only bottleneck apears to be CPU usage, which works fine on 4.11. From what we've read we should not be seeing these performance problems with 6.2. So what are we missing? We assume its something stupid that will fix this problem quickly and easily, but so far, despite all the resources, we have been unable to find a problem with enough in common with our own to suggest possible solutions. Please Help. thanks Steve B -- --- Steven H. Baeighkley - Systems Administrator Front Range Internet, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - (970) 212-0756 ___ 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: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release
On 15/02/07, Ted Mittelstaedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: please use send-pr and include a dmesg output with debugging turned on, and exact model of motherboard and bios revision. questions isn't for bugs. I don't mean to be rude but you won't get the problem fixed by bitching about it on this mailing list. Ignore Ted. There is nothing wrong with your post to questions. There wasn't any bitching. Your post was very appropriate. Indeed, all you askedin the end was please help. You won't get that from Ted. Ted Frem. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release
- Original Message - From: Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 8:49 AM Subject: Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release On 15/02/07, Ted Mittelstaedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: please use send-pr and include a dmesg output with debugging turned on, and exact model of motherboard and bios revision. questions isn't for bugs. I don't mean to be rude but you won't get the problem fixed by bitching about it on this mailing list. Ignore Ted. There is nothing wrong with your post to questions. There wasn't any bitching. Your post was very appropriate. Indeed, all you askedin the end was please help. You won't get that from Ted. We are all ears for your suggestions to help him fix this, Frem. I'm sure we all expect to see some kernel patches from you any day now. Please review the charter of this list. If this was supposed to be fixed on a mailling list, freebsd-bugs would be at least a bit closer to the mark. To the Original Poster - no, what you are seeing is not appropriate behaviour for the operating system. Yes, it is a defect. No, you won't see any patches to fix the behavior from the yahoos that post here. As I said originally, you need to use send-pr. Defects that are specific to hardware that are not documented in the PR database generally do not get fixed. Ted ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: **questions** Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release
If bugs is the correct list then that's where we'll send it. However we were not initially thinking it was a bug. We were thinking it was a configuration error on our part. We certainly weren't expecting kernel patches, just advice on where next to proceed. Thanks for the send-pr suggestion. We have verbose dmesg logs for all of our testing, I didn't want to send them initially because they are large and we have 12 of them. thanks Steve B Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: - Original Message - From: Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 8:49 AM Subject: Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release On 15/02/07, Ted Mittelstaedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: please use send-pr and include a dmesg output with debugging turned on, and exact model of motherboard and bios revision. questions isn't for bugs. I don't mean to be rude but you won't get the problem fixed by bitching about it on this mailing list. Ignore Ted. There is nothing wrong with your post to questions. There wasn't any bitching. Your post was very appropriate. Indeed, all you askedin the end was please help. You won't get that from Ted. We are all ears for your suggestions to help him fix this, Frem. I'm sure we all expect to see some kernel patches from you any day now. Please review the charter of this list. If this was supposed to be fixed on a mailling list, freebsd-bugs would be at least a bit closer to the mark. To the Original Poster - no, what you are seeing is not appropriate behaviour for the operating system. Yes, it is a defect. No, you won't see any patches to fix the behavior from the yahoos that post here. As I said originally, you need to use send-pr. Defects that are specific to hardware that are not documented in the PR database generally do not get fixed. Ted ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- --- Steven H. Baeighkley - Systems Administrator Front Range Internet, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - (970) 212-0756 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: questions isn't for bugs. I don't mean to be rude but you won't get the problem fixed by bitching about it on this mailing list. Good gravy. They're not asking -questions for a fix, they're asking for guidance on how to isolate the root cause of the problem. Quoth the OP: *what are we missing?* That is perfectly germane for -questions and only /after/ that question is answered would it be appropriate to use send-pr. Using send-pr to submit a poorly defined problem (too much load) is not going to result in a project committer magically finding and fixing an unknown OS bug. Steven H. Baeighkley wrote: If bugs is the correct list then that's where we'll send it. However we were not initially thinking it was a bug. We were thinking it was a configuration error on our part. That's a reasonable assumption actually. Sorry I don't have any specific suggestions for you except to second the motion that you ignore Ted's assertion that you should give up on -questions. It's entirely possible that there's a tunable knob or app compilation option that will help you out. -- Greg Barniskis, Computer Systems Integrator South Central Library System (SCLS) Library Interchange Network (LINK) gregb at scls.lib.wi.us, (608) 266-6348 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: **questions** Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 10:50:18AM -0700, Steven H. Baeighkley wrote: If bugs is the correct list then that's where we'll send it. However we were not initially thinking it was a bug. We were thinking it was a configuration error on our part. We certainly weren't expecting kernel patches, just advice on where next to proceed. Thanks for the send-pr suggestion. We have verbose dmesg logs for all of our testing, I didn't want to send them initially because they are large and we have 12 of them. bugs isn't correct either, that's only for automated mailing of problem reports. I'd recommend either freebsd-stable or freebsd-performance, those are technical lists read by developers. Kris P.S. I second the recommendation to ignore Ted :-) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release
Steven H. Baeighkley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Greetings, We are having some bizarre performance problems on a freshly installed 6.2 Release server. This is a supermicro superserver 6022c dual 2.0 Xeon with 2GB RAM. These CPUs do support hyperthreading. We have done significant testing with both hyperthreading turned on and off in the bios and in the OS, to no avail. The server is configured as a web server with apache 2.2.4 php 5.2.0 and ZendOptimizer. We are running proftpd 1.3.1rc1 and perl 5.8.8. We have another server running 4.11 with the same exact hardware and software versions. We have updated to the newest bios that Supermicro provides. The trouble is that the 6.2 box performs significantly worse than the 4.11 server. The load on the 6.2 server is regularly between 2.0 and 6.0. The load on the 4.11 server is between .57 and 1 despite often servicing more connections. We began this process to upgrade into the 6 tree because 4 is EOL. We kept the old 4.11 drive from this machine and when replacing it into the box performance is excellent just like our other 4.11 box. We have tired multiple tuning variables as recommended by both FreeBSD and apache and tried the recommendations in the 6.2 errata as well. The 6.2 errata states that kern.ipc.nmbclusters=0 will help the kernel memory allocator properly deal with high network traffic. We tried this and initially thought that the box was showing wonderful performance, but then we realized that the box was not allowing much network access at all. A single ssh and proftpd connection were all it would accept. Apache wouldn't even start giving a MaxClients error. Removing this option returned it to functional though poor performance mode. Are we missing something with how to use this variable? IS this expected behavior? This particular hardware does display some oddities on both machines, running either 6.2 or 4.11. We know that FreeBSD has hyperthreading turned off by default. We have done some additional testing with hyperthreading turned on in the OS, but we wish for it to remain off due to security concerns. If we disable hyperthreading in the bios and have it disabled in the OS then FreeBSD sees one physical and one logical processor (from dmesg) and only uses processor 0. If we enable hyperthreading in the bios and leave it disabled in the OS it will show 4 CPUs but only use 0 and 2. Top will show that there is 50% idle CPU despite the fact that the box is 100% loaded, CPU 1 and 3 are idle. We would expect that FreeBSD would not see logical processors when hyperthreading was disabled in either the BIOS or the OS. This may just be a communication problem between the BIOS and FreeBSD, but we don't see this behavior on other supermicro servers with hyperthreading. VMSTAT, NETSTAT, NFSSTAT and FSTAT show similar numbers between both servers, certainly nothing that would explain why a single httpd process requires 20% of a CPU on the 6.2 box and only 5-7% on the 4.11, but we could easily be missing something. We suspected NFS or disk bottlenecks, but ran IOZONE tests and found that the 6.2 box is actually having better performance on nfs and disk access. We are running a slightly customized SMP kernel with device polling enabled. The only bottleneck apears to be CPU usage, which works fine on 4.11. From what we've read we should not be seeing these performance problems with 6.2. So what are we missing? We assume its something stupid that will fix this problem quickly and easily, but so far, despite all the resources, we have been unable to find a problem with enough in common with our own to suggest possible solutions. Wow. Let me step back for a moment to appreciate how good this post is; wonderful stuff to work with in trying to help... The first thing I would check would be whether the httpd software on both installations is the same. I know that I have had trouble remembering to migrate port configurations on system upgrades, so maybe other people have the problem too. Have you checked system processes? The '-S' option is the way to get top(1) to show them to you. That often gives a hint when resources are vanishing. What happens if you disable polling? And what kind of network interface are you using on the problematic machine? One thing that occurs to me is that a lack of DMA on the HTTP packets (to and/or from the NIC) could produce symptoms like this. I hope that something here is helpful for you. Good luck. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release
Ted, On 15/02/07, Ted Mittelstaedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are all ears for your suggestions to help him fix this, Frem. I'm sure we all expect to see some kernel patches from you any day now. Please sort out your formatting. It looks horrible. You didn't offer any help whatsoever. And who says this is a kernel problem anyway? Please review the charter of this list. If this was supposed to be fixed on a mailling list, freebsd-bugs would be at least a bit closer to the mark.. Please sort out your formatting. It still looks horrible. The original post is completely on topic. I suggest you go and read it again like I did. I've snipped your assumption that this is a hardware problem because it is misleading at this stage. It could well be a configuraiton issue. Ted Frem. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: serious performance problems with 6.2 Release
In response to Greg Barniskis [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Steven H. Baeighkley wrote: If bugs is the correct list then that's where we'll send it. However we were not initially thinking it was a bug. We were thinking it was a configuration error on our part. That's a reasonable assumption actually. Sorry I don't have any specific suggestions for you except to second the motion that you ignore Ted's assertion that you should give up on -questions. It's entirely possible that there's a tunable knob or app compilation option that will help you out. I didn't think I had anything to contribute before, but I just had a thought. If the problem seems centered around Apache, have you tried enable/disabling accept filters? -- Bill Moran Collaborative Fusion Inc. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
serious performance problems with 6.2 Release
Greetings, We are having some bizarre performance problems on a freshly installed 6.2 Release server. This is a supermicro superserver 6022c dual 2.0 Xeon with 2GB RAM. These CPUs do support hyperthreading. We have done significant testing with both hyperthreading turned on and off in the bios and in the OS, to no avail. The server is configured as a web server with apache 2.2.4 php 5.2.0 and ZendOptimizer. We are running proftpd 1.3.1rc1 and perl 5.8.8. We have another server running 4.11 with the same exact hardware and software versions. We have updated to the newest bios that Supermicro provides. The trouble is that the 6.2 box performs significantly worse than the 4.11 server. The load on the 6.2 server is regularly between 2.0 and 6.0. The load on the 4.11 server is between .57 and 1 despite often servicing more connections. We began this process to upgrade into the 6 tree because 4 is EOL. We kept the old 4.11 drive from this machine and when replacing it into the box performance is excellent just like our other 4.11 box. We have tired multiple tuning variables as recommended by both FreeBSD and apache and tried the recommendations in the 6.2 errata as well. The 6.2 errata states that kern.ipc.nmbclusters=0 will help the kernel memory allocator properly deal with high network traffic. We tried this and initially thought that the box was showing wonderful performance, but then we realized that the box was not allowing much network access at all. A single ssh and proftpd connection were all it would accept. Apache wouldn't even start giving a MaxClients error. Removing this option returned it to functional though poor performance mode. Are we missing something with how to use this variable? IS this expected behavior? This particular hardware does display some oddities on both machines, running either 6.2 or 4.11. We know that FreeBSD has hyperthreading turned off by default. We have done some additional testing with hyperthreading turned on in the OS, but we wish for it to remain off due to security concerns. If we disable hyperthreading in the bios and have it disabled in the OS then FreeBSD sees one physical and one logical processor (from dmesg) and only uses processor 0. If we enable hyperthreading in the bios and leave it disabled in the OS it will show 4 CPUs but only use 0 and 2. Top will show that there is 50% idle CPU despite the fact that the box is 100% loaded, CPU 1 and 3 are idle. We would expect that FreeBSD would not see logical processors when hyperthreading was disabled in either the BIOS or the OS. This may just be a communication problem between the BIOS and FreeBSD, but we don't see this behavior on other supermicro servers with hyperthreading. VMSTAT, NETSTAT, NFSSTAT and FSTAT show similar numbers between both servers, certainly nothing that would explain why a single httpd process requires 20% of a CPU on the 6.2 box and only 5-7% on the 4.11, but we could easily be missing something. We suspected NFS or disk bottlenecks, but ran IOZONE tests and found that the 6.2 box is actually having better performance on nfs and disk access. We are running a slightly customized SMP kernel with device polling enabled. The only bottleneck apears to be CPU usage, which works fine on 4.11. From what we've read we should not be seeing these performance problems with 6.2. So what are we missing? We assume its something stupid that will fix this problem quickly and easily, but so far, despite all the resources, we have been unable to find a problem with enough in common with our own to suggest possible solutions. Please Help. thanks Steve B -- --- Steven H. Baeighkley - Systems Administrator Front Range Internet, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - (970) 212-0756 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Serious Bind issue
Dear mailinglist members, I have an serious issue with bind. System information: Dual P3 1 GHz 6.1-RELEASE-p12 FreeBSD SMP kernel I'm running BIND 9.3.2 on this box (the one that is standard delivered with 6.1) And when the named is running for a copple of hours. Bind doesn't accept TCP connections and i see this in my /var/log/messages: Feb 8 06:44:13 gms01 named[417]: /usr/src/lib/bind/isc/../../../contrib/bind9/lib/isc/unix/socket.c:1876: unexpected error: Feb 8 06:44:13 gms01 named[417]: internal_accept: accept() failed: Invalid argument Feb 8 06:46:55 gms01 named[417]: /usr/src/lib/bind/isc/../../../contrib/bind9/lib/isc/unix/socket.c:1876: unexpected error: Feb 8 06:46:55 gms01 named[417]: internal_accept: accept() failed: Invalid argument Feb 8 06:47:43 gms01 named[417]: /usr/src/lib/bind/isc/../../../contrib/bind9/lib/isc/unix/socket.c:1876: unexpected error: Feb 8 06:47:43 gms01 named[417]: internal_accept: accept() failed: Invalid argument Feb 8 07:00:08 gms01 named[417]: /usr/src/lib/bind/isc/../../../contrib/bind9/lib/isc/unix/socket.c:1876: unexpected error: Feb 8 07:00:08 gms01 named[417]: internal_accept: accept() failed: Invalid argument Feb 8 07:00:13 gms01 named[417]: /usr/src/lib/bind/isc/../../../contrib/bind9/lib/isc/unix/socket.c:1876: unexpected error: Feb 8 07:00:13 gms01 named[417]: internal_accept: accept() failed: Invalid argument Does anybody knows what this is ? I have an exact copy this server running next to this one. But that server is not SMP and it doesn't have this problems. Kind regards, Steven Bens CEO Unix-Solutions www.Unix-Solutions.be ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Serious Bind issue
In the future, please don't cross post to both freebsd-questions, and another list at the same time. Thanks. Steven Bens wrote: Dear mailinglist members, I have an serious issue with bind. System information: Dual P3 1 GHz 6.1-RELEASE-p12 FreeBSD SMP kernel I'm running BIND 9.3.2 on this box (the one that is standard delivered with 6.1) And when the named is running for a copple of hours. Bind doesn't accept TCP connections In an ideal world you would upgrade to the latest RELENG_6 and pick up all the bug fixes in the OS, plus the latest version of BIND. If that's not possible for some reason, your best bet is to upgrade to the latest BIND from the ports, make sure that you build it WITHOUT threads, and see if that resolves the issue for you. If it doesn't resolve your issue, you'd be better off sending a message to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list. hth, Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Serious Bind issue
On Feb 8, 2007, at 3:46 PM, Doug Barton wrote: In the future, please don't cross post to both freebsd-questions, and another list at the same time. Thanks. Steven Bens wrote: Dear mailinglist members, I have an serious issue with bind. System information: Dual P3 1 GHz 6.1-RELEASE-p12 FreeBSD SMP kernel I'm running BIND 9.3.2 on this box (the one that is standard delivered with 6.1) And when the named is running for a copple of hours. Bind doesn't accept TCP connections In an ideal world you would upgrade to the latest RELENG_6 and pick up all the bug fixes in the OS, plus the latest version of BIND. If that's not possible for some reason, your best bet is to upgrade to the latest BIND from the ports, make sure that you build it WITHOUT threads, and see if that resolves the issue for you. FWIW, I was running BIND 9.3.2 for a while and in awe at the amount of memory it would use, and how it would go CPU bound after it hit any operating system imposed memory quotas. I went back to BIND 8.latest, and my problems went away. -jav ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Serious disk problems
My power supply died and now my root file system seems to be having major problems. I run fsck -y on it and after complaining about dozens of sectors having problems being read and Unexpected soft updates, fsck ends with: fsck_ufs: cannot alloc 3962308096 bytes for inoinfo Can anything be done about this? -- Jonathan Arnold (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) Jiggle The Handle, a personal bloghttp://jiggle.anaze.us Some days, it's not even worth chewing through the restraints ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Serious disk problems
I would try moving the disk to another server and doing the fsck there. If you get the same error you can try increasing the memory limits. You could also try booting the live CD and run the fsck. If you do this you may need to us sysctl to raise the memory limits if you get that error. -Derek At 11:49 AM 7/25/2006, Jonathan Arnold wrote: My power supply died and now my root file system seems to be having major problems. I run fsck -y on it and after complaining about dozens of sectors having problems being read and Unexpected soft updates, fsck ends with: fsck_ufs: cannot alloc 3962308096 bytes for inoinfo Can anything be done about this? -- Jonathan Arnold (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) Jiggle The Handle, a personal bloghttp://jiggle.anaze.us Some days, it's not even worth chewing through the restraints ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Serious breach of copyright -- First post
--- Brett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/20/06, Danial Thom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: User manuals and how-tos don't generally get copyright notices, because there is nothing creative about it. Someone could write exactly the same thing (just about), and you'd have little claim to it because its just a procedural description. What, is the formatting of your index unique or something? Not at all. The entire procedure is unique. That's why it's helpful to others, hopefully. Check out the FreeBSD handbook. It's full of copyright notices. I don't think someone's going to come out with a FreeBSD handbook without images and claim that they wrote it, and then get away with it. And even then, the copyright notice is just a formality. But that aside, I was more amused by the subject serious breach of copyright, as if someone had taken your claim for writing War and Peace or something. They didn't even explicitly put a byline on it. Its just a how-to on a web page. And where are the credits for all of the how-tos you read to gain this knowledge? Why doesn't their work count? You should have a full bibliography. After all, credit is important! Like I said, who cares. DT Maybe we can get Ingrid to put your mailing address on there also so we can send you cards, gifts and cash donations. Can you make that about 2 points bigger also? We wouldn't want anyone to miss it. DT __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Serious breach of copyright -- First post
On 6/19/06, John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday 18 June 2006 19:49, David Hoffman wrote: * *It appears the page at http://www.houfug.org/help/install_freebsd.htmconstitutes a serious breach of copyright. The article, which was originally written and posted to the Internet by the owner of the account [EMAIL PROTECTED], is falsely attributed to the Houston FUG, whose members maliciously removed all reference to its original creator. On a related note, the FUG seems to be part of an organized group to convince all States to adopt English as an official language, a bigoted and misguided policy. Plagiarism should not be tolerated. Thanks. 1) Please go outdoors and ride a bike or something. You are apparently way, way overstressed. 2) Using terms like malicious without proof (and it appears the claim was completely false based on follow-ups since the user group in question added an attribute once they were notified) reduces your credibility immensely. If anything, if the HouFUG were anywhere as litiguous as you they could probably bring a civil suit of libel against you. :) In general it works better if one calmly works to resolve disputes instead of yelling and screaming and whipping out DMCA notices as the first action. 3) FreeBSD is not a political association and has no political ties. This should be rather obvious. On a general note, if you want to discuss issues, it is generally far more credible and useful to include some content in your argument besides elementary-school style name-calling. You seem to have done this twice in this e-mail for both issues. 4) You also violated FreeBSD mailing list etiquette by cross-posting to four mailing lists. FreeBSD-standards@' charter has to do with conformance to computer standards such as POSIX, etc. Please have the courtesy to make sure the lists you are mailing actually discuss what you think they discuss before posting in the future as most list readers have enough relevant e-mail to wade through as it is. -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ Power Users Use the Power to Serve = http://www.FreeBSD.org 2) What do you call removing all reference to the author of a copyrighted work, and then republishing it claiming it as your own? If not malicious, that's certainly an act of bad faith. Moreover, the fact that they added the notice only AFTER being caught red handed does not suggest they weren't being malicious when they stole the article in question. Also, why are you suggesting I'm litigious? I didn't once make reference to any lawsuit. 3) While you might want to refer to me as a name-caller, litigious, and puerile, it's far from clear that FreeBSD doesn't have political ties when the leaders of FreeBSD groups actively campaign for partially restricting people's ability to communicate in any language but English. Even if you ignored these extracuricular activities, though, you'd still be faced with the fact that FreeBSD is de jure politicized in favor of many things, including free software. 4) Discussions of copyright seem appropriate for freebsd-standard, since any reputable organization that publishes material with computers today makes a good faith effort to ensure they do not violate any copyright. It is therefore a de facto standard. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Fwd: Serious breach of copyright -- First post
David, I am a published author many times over with more commercial copyrights on material than I believe you will ever have, and I know much of copyright law, as any author does. I am requesting that you kindly blow this out your ass. In any infringement case it is the responsibility of the copyright holder to take infringement action against the infringer. It is not your responsibility as wannabe gadfly to attempt to insert yourself into this. This is between the author - which you have identified as Brett - and the infringer - which you have identified as houfug.org. Not yourself - unless you are indentifying yourself as copyright holder or infringer. As the other poster said this has nothing to do with the list and you need to drop it. I am sure Brett is thankful that you have identified an infringement against his copyright. Once you have done so it is time for you to step aside and let Brett decide what he wants to do about it. If Brett does not take the kind of action against the infringer that you wish, and the infringer does not respond in a fashion you wish, then that is too bad and you may kindly butt out. Ted -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of David Hoffman Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2006 6:21 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Fwd: Fwd: Serious breach of copyright -- First post -- Forwarded message -- From: David Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Jun 18, 2006 9:19 PM Subject: Re: Fwd: Serious breach of copyright -- First post To: Dennis Olvany [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED], thisdayislong [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 6/18/06, Dennis Olvany [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I had a look at http://www.houfug.org/help/install_freebsd.htm and I am afraid that you will find this article is not eligible for copyright. It constitutes neither an artistic nor literary work. The article conveys only facts and facts are not eligible for copyright. I'm afraid you're incorrect. The work in question is indeed copyrightable under the Berne Convention, which many countries have ratified, including the United States, where the content is hosted. The United States, as well as many other countries, also have national laws which allow this work to be copyrighted. It's also important to note that HouFUG clearly believes the work can be copyrighted, since they have included a copyright notice on the page. This implies tremendous bad faith: regardless of whether or not the article is copyrightable (it is), they have removed any reference to the true owner and have claimed it as their own. This is not acceptable behaviour. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.1/369 - Release Date: 6/19/2006 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Serious breach of copyright -- First post
Mr. Hoffman, I'm surprised this hasn't been said, and I'm probably overstepping my bounds by saying this, but I've been following this topic, and I have trouble seeing it as anything but trolling. The freeBSD groups have always been excessively helpful and friendly, and you've done alot to insult and antagonize them due to the actions of *ONE* local group, that is not even related to the general groups you posted this too. These people on the general freebsd have a nice group without the trolling and antagonizing seen all over other similar groups. Please be more considerate and respectful with your claims and requests so that their forums can stay that way. 3) While you might want to refer to me as a name-caller, litigious, and puerile, it's far from clear that FreeBSD doesn't have political ties when the leaders of FreeBSD groups actively campaign for partially restricting people's ability to communicate in any language but English. Even if you ignored these extracuricular activities, though, you'd still be faced with the fact that FreeBSD is de jure politicized in favor of many things, including free software. Interesting you put this here, from a previous post: I'm not directly attacking your group. If you're not political, and I'm arguing against something political, how could I possibly be 'attacking' your group? These two in conjunction, both from you, technically count as libel I believe, you are making comments towards a group, such as calling them biggots, and then saying you know it's not true. Also, calling someone something, when they are not is still offensive: If I called you a rabid dog, obviously a false statement, I am sure you would be offended. Also, as to the prohibiting people from communicating in languages other than english, partially or otherwise, I'm sorry, but... A 3/4ths blind guy who is impatient and doesn't like spending time searching for things can find mailing lists for DOZENS of of languages... Look harder. Now each of these /IS/ language specific - but that makes sense, the idea here is COMMUNICATION. Ich kann auf Deutch sprechen, aber hier Ich kann nicht auf Deutch Verbindung stehen. In english, I can speak in German, but I cannot communicate in German here - most here (not all) don't speak it. I wouldn't go to a German, French, Spanish, Japanese, Portugese, etc. etc. etc. mailing list and expect them to respond to me in English, or be anything but offended at my arrogance of posting there in English. 4) Discussions of copyright seem appropriate for freebsd-standard, since any reputable organization that publishes material with computers today makes a good faith effort to ensure they do not violate any copyright. It is therefore a de facto standard. But all groups at once? Just because they all fit the topic, doesn't change the fact that you are willingly and wontonly breaking the rule. Interestingly enough, I do agree with your first point that the copyright needed to be taken care of, but you could have handled this infinetly more effectively. Thank you, -Jim Stapleton ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Serious breach of copyright -- First post
--- Brett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/19/06, Christopher Weldon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brett wrote: Obviously, you have never spent days trying out a relatively undocumented procedure, finally getting it right, and then decided to help others out by writing a howto document. I am perfectly happy that Ingrid decided to host this document on her site, but credit was due. Some people do care about the stuff they create. Try writing something of value, and maybe then you'll be qualified to talk about copyright. True to the fact that credit was due, I think most everyone on this list has written at least 1 report (or many more) or created some form of work sometime in their lives incumbent of deserving copyright recognition. So, flaunting that someone is not qualified to talk about copyright is most certainly inadequate. Danial's comment, which was nothing short of, who cares who wrote that stupid article, was insulting and still more inadequate. User manuals and how-tos don't generally get copyright notices, because there is nothing creative about it. Someone could write exactly the same thing (just about), and you'd have little claim to it because its just a procedural description. What, is the formatting of your index unique or something? But that aside, I was more amused by the subject serious breach of copyright, as if someone had taken your claim for writing War and Peace or something. They didn't even explicitly put a byline on it. Its just a how-to on a web page. And where are the credits for all of the how-tos you read to gain this knowledge? Why doesn't their work count? You should have a full bibliography. After all, credit is important! Like I said, who cares. DT __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Serious breach of copyright -- First post
--- Jim Stapleton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mr. Hoffman, I'm surprised this hasn't been said, and I'm probably overstepping my bounds by saying this, but I've been following this topic, and I have trouble seeing it as anything but trolling. The freeBSD groups have always been excessively helpful and friendly, and you've done alot to insult and antagonize them due to the actions of *ONE* local group, that is not even related to the general groups you posted this too. These people on the general freebsd have a nice group without the trolling and antagonizing seen all over other similar groups. Please be more considerate and respectful with your claims and requests so that their forums can stay that way. 3) While you might want to refer to me as a name-caller, litigious, and puerile, it's far from clear that FreeBSD doesn't have political ties when the leaders of FreeBSD groups actively campaign for partially restricting people's ability to communicate in any language but English. Even if you ignored these extracuricular activities, though, you'd still be faced with the fact that FreeBSD is de jure politicized in favor of many things, including free software. Interesting you put this here, from a previous post: I'm not directly attacking your group. If you're not political, and I'm arguing against something political, how could I possibly be 'attacking' your group? These two in conjunction, both from you, technically count as libel I believe, you are making comments towards a group, such as calling them biggots, and then saying you know it's not true. Also, calling someone something, when they are not is still offensive: If I called you a rabid dog, obviously a false statement, I am sure you would be offended. Also, as to the prohibiting people from communicating in languages other than english, partially or otherwise, I'm sorry, but... A 3/4ths blind guy who is impatient and doesn't like spending time searching for things can find mailing lists for DOZENS of of languages... Look harder. Now each of these /IS/ language specific - but that makes sense, the idea here is COMMUNICATION. Ich kann auf Deutch sprechen, aber hier Ich kann nicht auf Deutch Verbindung stehen. In english, I can speak in German, but I cannot communicate in German here - most here (not all) don't speak it. I wouldn't go to a German, French, Spanish, Japanese, Portugese, etc. etc. etc. mailing list and expect them to respond to me in English, or be anything but offended at my arrogance of posting there in English. Its not illegal or libelous to dictate an official language, nor is it to call someone a bigot or rascist, since its a subjective opinion that can't be proven one way or another. You can also freely call someone an idiot or a fool, which I do quite often. Most people are bigots, in that they prefer their own language, their favorite OS, their own race, etc. The world cup is prima-fascie evidence of bigotry in the world. Game on! DT __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Serious breach of copyright -- First post
On 6/20/06, Danial Thom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: User manuals and how-tos don't generally get copyright notices, because there is nothing creative about it. Someone could write exactly the same thing (just about), and you'd have little claim to it because its just a procedural description. What, is the formatting of your index unique or something? Not at all. The entire procedure is unique. That's why it's helpful to others, hopefully. Check out the FreeBSD handbook. It's full of copyright notices. I don't think someone's going to come out with a FreeBSD handbook without images and claim that they wrote it, and then get away with it. And even then, the copyright notice is just a formality. But that aside, I was more amused by the subject serious breach of copyright, as if someone had taken your claim for writing War and Peace or something. They didn't even explicitly put a byline on it. Its just a how-to on a web page. And where are the credits for all of the how-tos you read to gain this knowledge? Why doesn't their work count? You should have a full bibliography. After all, credit is important! Like I said, who cares. DT __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: Serious breach of copyright -- First post
Dennis Olvany [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I had a look at http://www.houfug.org/help/install_freebsd.htm and I am afraid that you will find this article is not eligible for copyright. It constitutes neither an artistic nor literary work. The article conveys only facts and facts are not eligible for copyright. You're on to something, but you didn't quite get it right. Copyright law does not care about artistic or literary qualities; and while plain facts are not copyrightable, as you point out, their expression certainly is. A Haynes workshop manual, for instance, is neither art nor literature, and it is full of facts, but it is definitely copyrightable. I can put up a web page describing how to change the starter motor on my brother's Citroën CX (bitch of a job, I'll have you know), but I have to use my own words and photos, not those from my brother's Haynes manual. DES -- Dag-Erling Smørgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fwd: Serious breach of copyright -- First post
-- Forwarded message -- From: David Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Jun 18, 2006 8:38 PM Subject: Re: Serious breach of copyright -- First post To: Brett [EMAIL PROTECTED] I think a formal apology should be issued by the infringers. Hasn't this gone on long enough? On 6/18/06, Brett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I have not received a response in regards to this article, and it still does not hold the proper references. I have posted a DMCA takedown notice, which is available for viewing at http://arbornet.org/~soup/dmca.htmlhttp://arbornet.org/%7Esoup/dmca.html. I urge the webmaster of the infringing site to add the copyright references as soon as possible. Thank you. Bonjour à tous, Je n'ai pas encore reçu de réponse au sujet de cet article, qui ne porte pas ses réferences éxigées. J'ai affiché un DMCA takedown notice (en anglais seulement) sur mon site, que l'on peut voir au http://arbornet.org/~soup/dmca.htmlhttp://arbornet.org/%7Esoup/dmca.html. Je demande cordialement au webmaître du site non-autorisé d'ajouter les références éxigées dans les plus brefs délais. Merci. On 6/18/06, David Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It appears the page at http://www.houfug.org/help/install_freebsd.htm constitutes a serious breach of copyright. The article, which was originally written and posted to the Internet by the owner of the account [EMAIL PROTECTED], is falsely attributed to the Houston FUG, whose members maliciously removed all reference to its original creator. On a related note, the FUG seems to be part of an organized group to convince all States to adopt English as an official language, a bigoted and misguided policy. Plagiarism should not be tolerated. Thanks. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: Serious breach of copyright -- First post
David Hoffman wrote: -- Forwarded message -- From: David Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Jun 18, 2006 8:38 PM Subject: Re: Serious breach of copyright -- First post To: Brett [EMAIL PROTECTED] I think a formal apology should be issued by the infringers. Hasn't this gone on long enough? On 6/18/06, Brett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I have not received a response in regards to this article, and it still does not hold the proper references. I have posted a DMCA takedown notice, which is available for viewing at http://arbornet.org/~soup/dmca.htmlhttp://arbornet.org/%7Esoup/dmca.html. I urge the webmaster of the infringing site to add the copyright references as soon as possible. Thank you. Bonjour à tous, Je n'ai pas encore reçu de réponse au sujet de cet article, qui ne porte pas ses réferences éxigées. J'ai affiché un DMCA takedown notice (en anglais seulement) sur mon site, que l'on peut voir au http://arbornet.org/~soup/dmca.htmlhttp://arbornet.org/%7Esoup/dmca.html. Je demande cordialement au webmaître du site non-autorisé d'ajouter les références éxigées dans les plus brefs délais. Merci. On 6/18/06, David Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It appears the page at http://www.houfug.org/help/install_freebsd.htm constitutes a serious breach of copyright. The article, which was originally written and posted to the Internet by the owner of the account [EMAIL PROTECTED], is falsely attributed to the Houston FUG, whose members maliciously removed all reference to its original creator. On a related note, the FUG seems to be part of an organized group to convince all States to adopt English as an official language, a bigoted and misguided policy. Plagiarism should not be tolerated. Thanks. ___ freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sorry if im being naive, but what does this have to do with the official FreeBSD project? and even more so, these lists? Ta, Joe signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
RE: Serious breach of copyright -- First post
I responded to Bretts email 6 minutes after he informed me there maybe a problem with this article. He did NOT bother to tell me he was the owner of it. All I knew is someone named Brett at [EMAIL PROTECTED] was letting me know there was a problem. I immediately went to arbornet.org to see where the original information was so I could find the originator's name and emailed him back, here is my reply. -Original Message- From: Ingrid Kast Fuller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2006 6:40 PM To: 'Brett' Subject: RE: concerned question I got the information from the freebsd-config mailing list which is referenced at the bottom. Do you know where the original information is on arbornet.org? I would not want to infringe on anyone's rights. Ingrid Kast Fuller CityScope Net 713-477-6161 3910 Fairmont Parkway #264 Pasadena, TX 77504-3076 http://www.cityscope.net -Original Message- From: Brett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2006 6:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: concerned question Hi. It has come to my attention that you have an article, located at http://www.houfug.org/help/install_freebsd.htm that is hosted on your fine site and yet is not referenced. It holds a copyright reference for houfug, who did not write the article. Please attribute the work to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Thank you, A concerned citizen ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Hou-freebsd] Serious breach of copyright -- First post
On 6/18/06, Ingrid Kast Fuller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If someone added it to the freebsd-config mailing list, they should not have mailed a copyritten piece on a mailing list for public use. This has been added to the bottom of the page since we are unsure of the originator: Things can be distributed on public mailing lists while still retaining their copyright. [EMAIL PROTECTED] did nothing to void his exclusive rights to the work in question. *We have been given the email address of: [EMAIL PROTECTED] as the original copyright person. Unfortunately, we have no way of confirming this as yet. We are trying to locate WHO originally wrote this. We took this off the freebsd-config mailing list which is a public mailing list.* You've been provided both with an archive of initial publication including [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s address as the author, as well as a URL to a DMCA takedown notice hosted in his webspace. This is sufficient. *It seems this David Hoffman is directly attacking our group. Because there are no references to HOUFUG being a part of an organized group to adopt English as the official language. HOUFUG does not have any political ties with anyone. We only have a FreeBSD mailing list to discuss FreeBSD issues. * I'm not directly attacking your group. If you're not political, and I'm arguing against something political, how could I possibly be 'attacking' your group? On a related note, the FUG seems to be part of an organized group to convince all States to adopt English as an official language, a bigoted and misguided policy. I personally have a link to the US English organization on my PERSONAL home page of www.ingridfuller.com. This has nothing to do with HOUFUG or FreeBSD at all. What I believe in is my business and my right as a citizen of the United States. This is NOT a misguided or bigoted policy. We've been speaking English since Day 1 and the International Language is ENGLISH. You certainly have a right to be misguided and bigoted. Americans have spoken English since 'Day 1', but they've also spoken several other languages since that time, and today speak even more. The lingua franca of the world today may be English, but it doesn't follow from that that it should be the official language of all states. *Ingrid Kast Fuller **CityScope Net 713-477-6161 3910 Fairmont Parkway #264 Pasadena, TX 77504-3076 **http://www.cityscope.net* http://www.cityscope.net/ -- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *David Hoffman *Sent:* Sunday, June 18, 2006 6:49 PM *To:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] *Cc:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] *Subject:* [Hou-freebsd] Serious breach of copyright -- First post **It appears the page at http://www.houfug.org/help/install_freebsd.htmconstitutes a serious breach of copyright. The article, which was originally written and posted to the Internet by the owner of the account [EMAIL PROTECTED], is falsely attributed to the Houston FUG, whose members maliciously removed all reference to its original creator. On a related note, the FUG seems to be part of an organized group to convince all States to adopt English as an official language, a bigoted and misguided policy. Plagiarism should not be tolerated. Thanks. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Serious breach of copyright -- First post
Hello I hope the DMCA copyright notice, found at http://arbornet.org/~soup/dmca.html , clears up any confusion. thank you! On 6/18/06, Ingrid Kast Fuller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I responded to Bretts email 6 minutes after he informed me there maybe a problem with this article. He did NOT bother to tell me he was the owner of it. All I knew is someone named Brett at [EMAIL PROTECTED] was letting me know there was a problem. I immediately went to arbornet.org to see where the original information was so I could find the originator's name and emailed him back, here is my reply. -Original Message- From: Ingrid Kast Fuller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2006 6:40 PM To: 'Brett' Subject: RE: concerned question I got the information from the freebsd-config mailing list which is referenced at the bottom. Do you know where the original information is on arbornet.org? I would not want to infringe on anyone's rights. Ingrid Kast Fuller CityScope Net 713-477-6161 3910 Fairmont Parkway #264 Pasadena, TX 77504-3076 http://www.cityscope.net -Original Message- From: Brett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2006 6:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: concerned question Hi. It has come to my attention that you have an article, located at http://www.houfug.org/help/install_freebsd.htm that is hosted on your fine site and yet is not referenced. It holds a copyright reference for houfug, who did not write the article. Please attribute the work to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Thank you, A concerned citizen ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Serious breach of copyright -- First post
It'll certainly be less confusing that what HouFUG is publishing. They've now noted on their site that it was written by you. However, they STILL claim they own the copyright. Have you waived any of your exclusive rights to the work? On 6/18/06, Brett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello I hope the DMCA copyright notice, found at http://arbornet.org/~soup/dmca.html , clears up any confusion. thank you! On 6/18/06, Ingrid Kast Fuller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I responded to Bretts email 6 minutes after he informed me there maybe a problem with this article. He did NOT bother to tell me he was the owner of it. All I knew is someone named Brett at [EMAIL PROTECTED] was letting me know there was a problem. I immediately went to arbornet.orgto see where the original information was so I could find the originator's name and emailed him back, here is my reply. -Original Message- From: Ingrid Kast Fuller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2006 6:40 PM To: 'Brett' Subject: RE: concerned question I got the information from the freebsd-config mailing list which is referenced at the bottom. Do you know where the original information is on arbornet.org? I would not want to infringe on anyone's rights. Ingrid Kast Fuller CityScope Net 713-477-6161 3910 Fairmont Parkway #264 Pasadena, TX 77504-3076 http://www.cityscope.net -Original Message- From: Brett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2006 6:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: concerned question Hi. It has come to my attention that you have an article, located at http://www.houfug.org/help/install_freebsd.htm that is hosted on your fine site and yet is not referenced. It holds a copyright reference for houfug, who did not write the article. Please attribute the work to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Thank you, A concerned citizen ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Serious breach of copyright -- First post
Update: their website now attributes copyright to both HouFUG AND Brett. This is despite the fact that Brett seems to be the sole owner of the work. I'm not sure why this community feels it can disregard rights to intellectual property, especially when it produces so much on its OWN to be proud of. Why steal other people's stuff? On 6/18/06, David Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It'll certainly be less confusing that what HouFUG is publishing. They've now noted on their site that it was written by you. However, they STILL claim they own the copyright. Have you waived any of your exclusive rights to the work? On 6/18/06, Brett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello I hope the DMCA copyright notice, found at http://arbornet.org/~soup/dmca.htmlhttp://arbornet.org/%7Esoup/dmca.html, clears up any confusion. thank you! On 6/18/06, Ingrid Kast Fuller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I responded to Bretts email 6 minutes after he informed me there maybe a problem with this article. He did NOT bother to tell me he was the owner of it. All I knew is someone named Brett at [EMAIL PROTECTED] was letting me know there was a problem. I immediately went to arbornet.org to see where the original information was so I could find the originator's name and emailed him back, here is my reply. -Original Message- From: Ingrid Kast Fuller [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2006 6:40 PM To: 'Brett' Subject: RE: concerned question I got the information from the freebsd-config mailing list which is referenced at the bottom. Do you know where the original information is on arbornet.org? I would not want to infringe on anyone's rights. Ingrid Kast Fuller CityScope Net 713-477-6161 3910 Fairmont Parkway #264 Pasadena, TX 77504-3076 http://www.cityscope.net -Original Message- From: Brett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2006 6:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: concerned question Hi. It has come to my attention that you have an article, located at http://www.houfug.org/help/install_freebsd.htm that is hosted on your fine site and yet is not referenced. It holds a copyright reference for houfug, who did not write the article. Please attribute the work to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Thank you, A concerned citizen ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fwd: Fwd: Serious breach of copyright -- First post
-- Forwarded message -- From: David Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Jun 18, 2006 9:19 PM Subject: Re: Fwd: Serious breach of copyright -- First post To: Dennis Olvany [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED], thisdayislong [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 6/18/06, Dennis Olvany [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I had a look at http://www.houfug.org/help/install_freebsd.htm and I am afraid that you will find this article is not eligible for copyright. It constitutes neither an artistic nor literary work. The article conveys only facts and facts are not eligible for copyright. I'm afraid you're incorrect. The work in question is indeed copyrightable under the Berne Convention, which many countries have ratified, including the United States, where the content is hosted. The United States, as well as many other countries, also have national laws which allow this work to be copyrighted. It's also important to note that HouFUG clearly believes the work can be copyrighted, since they have included a copyright notice on the page. This implies tremendous bad faith: regardless of whether or not the article is copyrightable (it is), they have removed any reference to the true owner and have claimed it as their own. This is not acceptable behaviour. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: Fwd: Serious breach of copyright -- First post
...facts are not eligible for copyright. I'm afraid you're incorrect. The work in question is indeed copyrightable under the Berne Convention, which many countries have ratified, including the United States, where the content is hosted. The United States, as well as many other countries, also have national laws which allow this work to be copyrighted. At best, the article may be considered a derivative work of the described software/hardware and therefore the intellectual property of the respective manufacturers. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Hou-freebsd] Serious breach of copyright -- First post
On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 19:44:02 -0500 Ingrid Kast Fuller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If someone added it to the freebsd-config mailing list, they should not have mailed a copyritten piece on a mailing list for public use. This has been added to the bottom of the page since we are unsure of the originator: Viewing the page, it does seem to have the email address listed, with a name. Now, I haven't checked the name, mainly because I have not emailed this person; however, regardless of the issues discussed, the FreeBSD doesn't control user groups. The so called issue should be taken up with the user group in question. -- Tom Rhodes ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: portsnap failing ... maybe more serious issue with RAID?
Meh... I tried deleting the portsnap files again and it worked :-S Took a long time when it got to 97% of the snapshot but it worked this time. Bloody computers... Still I have yet to see whether it'll work later when I (or cron) run portsnap to fetch the patches. Ashley ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
serious 3ware 9500 problem on 5-stable and 6-stable
hi list, i have a 3ware 9500-8 with 4x 400gb drives in a raid5 configuration running FreeBSD 5.4-stable (as of last week) on amd64. during a recent update, we try to mount the 1.1TB partition, and we can see the first few directory listings and so on, but when we try to `cd direectory` on a dir, the computer just reboots. is this a known problem? and everytime i run fsck on the raid5, it says that it cannot read superblock info and that some negatve sectors could not be read.. THE FOLLOWING DISK SECTORS COULD NOT BE READ: -2003455344, -2003455343, -2003455342, -2003455341, -2003455340, -2003455339, -2003455338, -2003455337, -2003455336, -2003455335, -2003455334, -2003455333, -2003455332, -2003455331, -2003455330, -2003455329, .. anyone ran into thsi before? any hel pwoudl be appreciated. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nvi for serious hacking
At 1:25 PM -0600 10/17/05, M. Warner Losh wrote: In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: :vi was the first screen/cursor-based editor in computer :history. Are you sure about this? I was using screen oriented editors over a 1200 baud dialup line in 1977 on a PDP-11 running RSTS/E on a Behive BH-100. Seems like one year from vi to being deployed at Berkeley to a completely different video editor being deployed on a completely different os in the schools that I used this in seems fast. So I did some digging. vi started in about 1976[1] as a project that grew out of the frustration taht a 200 line Pascal program was too big for the system to handle. These are based on recollections of Bill Joy in 1984. It appears that starting in 1972 Carl Mikkelson added screen editing features to TECO[2]. In 1974 Richard Stallman added macros to TECO. I don't know if Carl's work was the first, but it pre-dates the vi efforts. Other editors may have influanced Carl. Who knows. I arrived in RPI in 1975. In December of 1975, we were just trying out a mainframe timesharing system called Michigan Terminal System, or MTS, from the university of Michigan. The editor was called 'edit', and was a Command Language Subsystem (CLS) in MTS. That meant it had a command language of it's one. One of the sub-commands in edit was 'visual', for visual mode. It only worked on IBM 3270-style terminals, but it was screen-based and cursor-based. The editor would put a bunch of fields up on the screen, some of which you could modify and some you couldn't. The text of your file was in the fields you could type over. Once you finished with whatever changes you wanted to make on that screen, you would hit one of 15 or 20 interrupt-generating keys on the 3270 terminal (12 of which were programmable function keys, in a keypad with a layout similar to the numeric keypad on current keyboards). The 3270 terminal would then tell the mainframe which fields on the screen had been modified, and what those modifications were. The mainframe would update the file based on that info. I *THINK* the guy who wrote that was ... Bill Joy -- as a student at UofM. I can't find any confirmation of that, though. The closest I can come is the web page at http://www.jefallbright.net/node/3218 , which is an article written by Bill. In it he mentions: By 1967, MTS was up and running on the newly arrived 360/67, supporting 30 to 40 simultaneous users. ... By the time I arrived as an undergraduate at the University of Michigan in 1971, MTS and Merit were successful and stable systems. By that point, a multiprocessor system running MTS could support a hundred simultaneous interactive users, ... But he doesn't happen to mention anything about editors or visual mode. My memory of his connection to MTS's visual-mode could very well be wrong, since I didn't come along until after visual-mode already existed. I just remember his name coming up in later discussions. However, I also think there was someone named Victor who was part of the story of 3270 support in MTS. And Dave Twyver at University of British Columbia was the guy who wrote the 3270 DSR (Device Support Routine), as mentioned on the page at: http://mtswiki.westwood-tech.com/mtswiki-index.php/Dave%20Twyver In any case, I *am* sure that MTS had a visual editor in December of 1975, which puts before vi if vi started in 1976. Unfortunately, all of the documentation of MTS lived in the EBCDIC world, and pretty much disappeared when MTS did (in the late 1990's). In my case, the first visual editor that worked under Unix was DED from the Australian Distro. it only worked on a VT100, but that's was what i had :-), then came emacs, so im one of the few that doesn't know vi. danny ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nvi for serious hacking
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 01:25:32PM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : vi was the first screen/cursor-based editor in computer : history. Are you sure about this? I was using screen oriented editors over a 1200 baud dialup line in 1977 on a PDP-11 running RSTS/E on a Behive BH-100. Seems like one year from vi to being deployed at Berkeley to a completely different video editor being deployed on a completely different os in the schools that I used this in seems fast. So I did some digging. vi started in about 1976[1] as a project that grew out of the frustration taht a 200 line Pascal program was too big for the system to handle. These are based on recollections of Bill Joy in 1984. It appears that starting in 1972 Carl Mikkelson added screen editing features to TECO[2]. In 1974 Richard Stallman added macros to TECO. I don't know if Carl's work was the first, but it pre-dates the vi efforts. Other editors may have influanced Carl. Who knows. You're probably right. I didn't know the diff between a computer and a washing machine until I was past 30; found out in 1977 and haven't looked back! My first editor was ed on V6, followed by ex, followed by vi circa June, 1978. Bill used to haul around print outs of the src to vi and csh (c). I'd be hacking in FORTRAN and Bill would be working in things that we lightyears beyond me. Ideas inspire new ideas; concepts build upon one another. This integration and cross-fertilization helps all of us. OT, but that is why I see software patents as being not only selfish but self-defeating in the longer scope of things. Let me amend my prev-statement to read that vi was among the first screen/cursor-based editors gary -- Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.thought.org Public service Unix ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nvi for serious hacking
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 02:46:56AM +0400, Oleg Petrov wrote: Hello, FreeBSD people. First thing to mention is that I'm very experienced Emacs user. I was using it for 4-5 years or so. But sometime ago i began to feel myself so uncomfortable with it for some reasons: first, i use many different systems and emacs isn't default application for FreeBSD or any other *BSD\Linux distribution. Second, remote machines aren't powerful enough to start Emacs fast. I tried many small Emacs clones like jed, joe, uemacs and several others i just can't remember. But for different reasons i disliked all of them. Later I noticed default `nvi' editor, that has some nice features: it comes with FreeBSD by default and according to documentation it has powerful editing mechanism. So, my question goes to all FreeBSD hackers who uses `nvi' as their general editor. Is it possible to do serious hacking with it? More accurate: I'd say s/nvi/vim (see http://www.vim.org/) if you want to really do everything with your Vi. Marc ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nvi for serious hacking
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : vi was the first screen/cursor-based editor in computer : history. Are you sure about this? I was using screen oriented editors over a 1200 baud dialup line in 1977 on a PDP-11 running RSTS/E on a Behive BH-100. Seems like one year from vi to being deployed at Berkeley to a completely different video editor being deployed on a completely different os in the schools that I used this in seems fast. So I did some digging. vi started in about 1976[1] as a project that grew out of the frustration taht a 200 line Pascal program was too big for the system to handle. These are based on recollections of Bill Joy in 1984. It appears that starting in 1972 Carl Mikkelson added screen editing features to TECO[2]. In 1974 Richard Stallman added macros to TECO. I don't know if Carl's work was the first, but it pre-dates the vi efforts. Other editors may have influanced Carl. Who knows. Warner [1] http://www.cs.pdx.edu/~kirkenda/joy84.html [2] http://www.emacswiki.org/cgi-bin/wiki/EmacsHistory ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nvi for serious hacking
At 1:25 PM -0600 10/17/05, M. Warner Losh wrote: In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : vi was the first screen/cursor-based editor in computer : history. Are you sure about this? I was using screen oriented editors over a 1200 baud dialup line in 1977 on a PDP-11 running RSTS/E on a Behive BH-100. Seems like one year from vi to being deployed at Berkeley to a completely different video editor being deployed on a completely different os in the schools that I used this in seems fast. So I did some digging. vi started in about 1976[1] as a project that grew out of the frustration taht a 200 line Pascal program was too big for the system to handle. These are based on recollections of Bill Joy in 1984. It appears that starting in 1972 Carl Mikkelson added screen editing features to TECO[2]. In 1974 Richard Stallman added macros to TECO. I don't know if Carl's work was the first, but it pre-dates the vi efforts. Other editors may have influanced Carl. Who knows. I arrived in RPI in 1975. In December of 1975, we were just trying out a mainframe timesharing system called Michigan Terminal System, or MTS, from the university of Michigan. The editor was called 'edit', and was a Command Language Subsystem (CLS) in MTS. That meant it had a command language of it's one. One of the sub-commands in edit was 'visual', for visual mode. It only worked on IBM 3270-style terminals, but it was screen-based and cursor-based. The editor would put a bunch of fields up on the screen, some of which you could modify and some you couldn't. The text of your file was in the fields you could type over. Once you finished with whatever changes you wanted to make on that screen, you would hit one of 15 or 20 interrupt-generating keys on the 3270 terminal (12 of which were programmable function keys, in a keypad with a layout similar to the numeric keypad on current keyboards). The 3270 terminal would then tell the mainframe which fields on the screen had been modified, and what those modifications were. The mainframe would update the file based on that info. I *THINK* the guy who wrote that was ... Bill Joy -- as a student at UofM. I can't find any confirmation of that, though. The closest I can come is the web page at http://www.jefallbright.net/node/3218 , which is an article written by Bill. In it he mentions: By 1967, MTS was up and running on the newly arrived 360/67, supporting 30 to 40 simultaneous users. ... By the time I arrived as an undergraduate at the University of Michigan in 1971, MTS and Merit were successful and stable systems. By that point, a multiprocessor system running MTS could support a hundred simultaneous interactive users, ... But he doesn't happen to mention anything about editors or visual mode. My memory of his connection to MTS's visual-mode could very well be wrong, since I didn't come along until after visual-mode already existed. I just remember his name coming up in later discussions. However, I also think there was someone named Victor who was part of the story of 3270 support in MTS. And Dave Twyver at University of British Columbia was the guy who wrote the 3270 DSR (Device Support Routine), as mentioned on the page at: http://mtswiki.westwood-tech.com/mtswiki-index.php/Dave%20Twyver In any case, I *am* sure that MTS had a visual editor in December of 1975, which puts before vi if vi started in 1976. Unfortunately, all of the documentation of MTS lived in the EBCDIC world, and pretty much disappeared when MTS did (in the late 1990's). -- Garance Alistair Drosehn= [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Programmer or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rensselaer Polytechnic Instituteor [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
nvi for serious hacking
Hello, FreeBSD people. First thing to mention is that I'm very experienced Emacs user. I was using it for 4-5 years or so. But sometime ago i began to feel myself so uncomfortable with it for some reasons: first, i use many different systems and emacs isn't default application for FreeBSD or any other *BSD\Linux distribution. Second, remote machines aren't powerful enough to start Emacs fast. I tried many small Emacs clones like jed, joe, uemacs and several others i just can't remember. But for different reasons i disliked all of them. Later I noticed default `nvi' editor, that has some nice features: it comes with FreeBSD by default and according to documentation it has powerful editing mechanism. So, my question goes to all FreeBSD hackers who uses `nvi' as their general editor. Is it possible to do serious hacking with it? More accurate: * What programming features it support? (Does it have something like etags? Does it have interface to gdb? And such other things..) * Is it possible to use it comfortable with Dvorak layout? (I noticed some bindings that relies on keys arrangement) * How to setup it to standard FreeBSD C code indentation? And don't use tabs as well. It's hard choice for me to switch old good Emacs to something new, so please give me your opinions. I'm not subscribed to list, so please CC me. Thanks! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nvi for serious hacking
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 02:46:56AM +0400, Oleg Petrov wrote: Hello, FreeBSD people. First thing to mention is that I'm very experienced Emacs user. I was using it for 4-5 years or so. But sometime ago i began to feel myself so uncomfortable with it for some reasons: first, i use many different systems and emacs isn't default application for FreeBSD or any other *BSD\Linux distribution. Second, remote machines aren't powerful enough to start Emacs fast. I tried many small Emacs clones like jed, joe, uemacs and several others i just can't remember. But for different reasons i disliked all of them. Later I noticed default `nvi' editor, that has some nice features: it comes with FreeBSD by default and according to documentation it has powerful editing mechanism. So, my question goes to all FreeBSD hackers who uses `nvi' as their general editor. Is it possible to do serious hacking with it? More accurate: * What programming features it support? (Does it have something like etags? Does it have interface to gdb? And such other things..) * Is it possible to use it comfortable with Dvorak layout? (I noticed some bindings that relies on keys arrangement) * How to setup it to standard FreeBSD C code indentation? And don't use tabs as well. It's hard choice for me to switch old good Emacs to something new, so please give me your opinions. I'm not subscribed to list, so please CC me. vi was the first screen/cursor-based editor in computer history. Written by Bill Joy when he was in his early 20's. I've been using vi almost since Bill released his first draft; my fingers know it by default. And even after almost 30years there are still things I don't know. Nutshell, I've hacked hundreds of thousands of line using vi; millions of words of prose. I've used *tags, debuggers, and other tools with it. Have tried *emacs; just can't get the hang of it. With tools like [n]vi and ctags, plus a debugger you've got your own IDE. Since you've learned emacs, you'll learn vi in a flash. gary kline -- Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.thought.org Public service Unix ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: serious note(s) [WAS: Linux move to FreeBSD]
hello, On a more serious note, am I the only one who has been getting hiccups of freebsd-questions mail from last year? I just got a bunch of traffic (including one of the previous incarnations of this abysmal Beastie logo non-debate) from late December, all posts that I had seen before. Thanks for your note. No, you're not the only one. As I have occasionally re-read (other) stuff by mistake, I made a point of noting the Dec 2004 dates too. I wondered if Kmail, shawmail, or some other as-yet-unnamed network glitch caused the hiccups. And then, within a day or so, the list digest feed(s) seemed to dry up for a day and half. I'm used to scanning two or three freebsd-questions' digests/day, and noticed I suddenly had all this extra time. :c) The digests resumed again overnight [two dated 'Today' at 3:35 5:00 am, if anyone's interested], but the volume of traffic still seems severely reduced. I hope this info is of some use. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
