Hi!
> Or run tcpdump for port 53; also curious if it might be an IPv4
> vs. IPv6 issue?
I did run tcpdump on port 53 on both the client and the
dns server for this, everything looked normal. It was no IPv6 issue.
I'll retest with more detail this evening.
--
p...@opsec.eu+49 171
In message <1439744220.242.87.ca...@freebsd.org>, Ian Lepore writes:
>
>
> --=-yOSDvPzQIQnw2oRARoLp
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> On Sun, 2015-08-16 at 08:10 +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> > On 15/08/2015 16:46, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>
On 07/25/2015 05:04 AM, Glen Barber wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 09:23:12PM -0400, Nikolai Lifanov wrote:
On 2015-07-24 17:27, Glen Barber wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 05:15:52PM -0400, Nikolai Lifanov wrote:
I noticed that in stable/10, /etc/pkg/FreeBSD.conf was switched from
using
latest
> On 16 Aug 2015, at 21:16 , Christian Kratzer wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 16 Aug 2015, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>>> It could be the classic fall back to TCP on SRV records problem on
>>> your upstream DNS forwarder if you're using one:
>>>
>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-po
Hi,
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
Hi!
It could be the classic fall back to TCP on SRV records problem on
your upstream DNS forwarder if you're using one:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2012-May/074801.html
If I query that same DNS resolver using the line from
the
Hi!
> It could be the classic fall back to TCP on SRV records problem on
> your upstream DNS forwarder if you're using one:
>
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2012-May/074801.html
If I query that same DNS resolver using the line from
the script, it works every time. It's a 10.1
Hi,
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015, Kimmo Paasiala wrote:
It could be the classic fall back to TCP on SRV records problem on
your upstream DNS forwarder if you're using one:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2012-May/074801.html
The cure would be to use your own caching DNS resolver (confi
On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 10:07 PM, Christian Kratzer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 16 Aug 2015, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
>
>>
>> We assumed that I have a DNS problem because of this line:
>>
>>> Looking up update.FreeBSD.org mirrors... none found.
>>
>>
>> This happens with this query inside the freebsd-upda
On 2015-08-16, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> Hmmm I suggest raising a PR with patches to revert the changes in
> the set of enabled clock drivers (or merge with the current list). It's
Yes.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=202362
> not going to get you a working DCF77 receiver i
Hi,
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
We assumed that I have a DNS problem because of this line:
Looking up update.FreeBSD.org mirrors... none found.
This happens with this query inside the freebsd-update script, at
line 950:
host -t srv _http._tcp.update.FreeBSD.org
If you prime yo
Hi!
[bob wrote]
> [ck wrote]
> > I have been trying to update several of my FreeBSD 10.1 amd64
> > VM to 10.2-RELEASE with freebsd-update and have been failing with
> > an incorrect hash error.
> FWIW I had the same issue yesterday on a couple of systems.
> Repeating freebsd-update worked after t
On 08/16/2015 19:47, Kimmo Paasiala wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
>> On 08/15/2015 20:47, Chris Anderson wrote:
>>> just upgraded from 10.1-RELEASE-p16 to 10.2-RELEASE using freebsd-update.
>>>
>>> after the upgrade, I began getting errors because pam_opie.s
On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
> On 08/15/2015 20:47, Chris Anderson wrote:
>> just upgraded from 10.1-RELEASE-p16 to 10.2-RELEASE using freebsd-update.
>>
>> after the upgrade, I began getting errors because pam_opie.so.5 has an
>> unsatisfied link to libopie.so.7 (m
On 08/15/2015 20:47, Chris Anderson wrote:
> just upgraded from 10.1-RELEASE-p16 to 10.2-RELEASE using freebsd-update.
>
> after the upgrade, I began getting errors because pam_opie.so.5 has an
> unsatisfied link to libopie.so.7 (my system only has libopie.so.8).
>
> I notice a fresh install of 1
Hi,
> On 16 Aug 2015, at 18:16, Christian Kratzer wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have been trying to update several of my FreeBSD 10.1 amd64 VM to
> 10.2-RELEASE with freebsd-update and have been failing with an incorrect hash
> error.
>
> This is what happens with a plain vanilla 10.1-RELEASE vm when
Hi,
I have been trying to update several of my FreeBSD 10.1 amd64 VM to
10.2-RELEASE with freebsd-update and have been failing with an incorrect hash
error.
This is what happens with a plain vanilla 10.1-RELEASE vm when I try to update
to 10.2-RELEASE
--snipp--
root@test10:~ck # uname -a
Fre
On Sun, 2015-08-16 at 08:10 +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 15/08/2015 16:46, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> > The ntp code is not very transparent, but I think the root cause
> > are the ntp/config.h changes that came with the 4.2.8p3 update. A
> > number of previously disabled obscure clock dri
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 14:51:49 +0200, Ronald Klop
wrote:
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 21:07:55 +0200, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:
On 08/14/2015 12:39 PM, Warren Block wrote:
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
I just built a 10.2 machine on a cloud-based VPS (Digital Ocean) that
has
512M of memory
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 21:07:55 +0200, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:
On 08/14/2015 12:39 PM, Warren Block wrote:
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
I just built a 10.2 machine on a cloud-based VPS (Digital Ocean) that
has
512M of memory and 1G of swap partition. I am seeing a ton of errors
li
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 09:44:06AM -0400, Roosevelt Littleton wrote:
> Hi,
> So, I can confirm with the attached patch. I have a working msk0 that
> hasn't failed for the past month. I considered this problem fix for me.
> Since, I have went a long time without any problems. Thanks!
I'm not sure w
Am 16. August 2015 09:10:41 MESZ, schrieb Matthew Seaman :
>On 15/08/2015 16:46, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>> The ntp code is not very transparent, but I think the root cause
>> are the ntp/config.h changes that came with the 4.2.8p3 update. A
>> number of previously disabled obscure clock dri
On 15/08/2015 16:46, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> The ntp code is not very transparent, but I think the root cause
> are the ntp/config.h changes that came with the 4.2.8p3 update. A
> number of previously disabled obscure clock drivers were enabled,
> but crucially CLOCK_RAWDCF was disabled, and
22 matches
Mail list logo
