On 2011-12-12, Pavel Shvagirev pavel.shvagi...@gmail.com wrote:
You are right. The more better way would be buying a bigger storage,
or writing a concatenation backend for softraid(4).
softraid_raid0.c would be a good starting point.
that's interesting
raises a couple of questions: is softraid to have functions found in
generic volume managers such as zfs and lvm? the answer doesn't really
matter because it's a fact that crypto isn't a raid discipline
given that, is softraid a poor name for what it offers?
On Mon, Dec 12,
tried something like this? While I'm
sure it works technically, I'd imagine the performance would be abysmal.
Obviously, an optimal solution would be concatenation. Since that does not
exist, the closest matching solution without ccd(4) is RAID0. And no, I
haven't tried it; what I wrote
?P8QP5Q:
Obviously, an optimal solution would be concatenation. Since that does not
exist, the closest matching solution without ccd(4) is RAID0. And no, I
haven't tried it; what I wrote was nothing more than a thought experiment.
--
Best regards,
Pavel Shvagirev
skype: pavel.shvagirev
On 2011-12-08 20.11, Josh Grosse wrote:
Pavel Shvagirev pavel.shvagirev at gmail.com writes:
Thank you for the reply. Unfortunately RAID0 is not exactly what I was
looking for 'cause it does not really concatenate disks - it stripes as
you've mentioned. And two disks, 80 and 120 Gb, that were
Hello everyone.
I have faced problem with ccd(4) on OpenBSD 5.0 i386 GENERIC#43
When I try to serially concatenate two IDE disks with ccd(4), every
time I get system not responding at all.
I do setup strictry following the man pages. Both disks are connected to
one IDE port on mother board via
what can be used instead?
softraid(4) will not go since it can not concatenate disks... only a
kind of RAID0/1 or crypto...
08.12.2011 20:36, Amit Kulkarni P?P8QP5Q:
nobody has worked on ccd for long time...In fact ccd has been removed post 5.0
--
Best regards,
Pavel Shvagirev
cell: +7 903
Pavel Shvagirev pavel.shvagi...@gmail.com wrote:
what can be used instead?
softraid(4) will not go since it can not concatenate disks... only a
kind of RAID0/1 or crypto...
08.12.2011 20:36, Amit Kulkarni P?P8QP5Q:
nobody has worked on ccd for long time...In fact ccd has been removed post
5.0
to concatenate other than via ccd(4)
that is no longer supported and buggy on my machine as well =]
08.12.2011 22:20, Josh Grosse P?P8QP5Q:
The RAID 0 discipline provides full capacity with no redundancy. It is
striping rather than concatenation, but it may meet your needs.
--
Best regards,
Pavel
Pavel Shvagirev pavel.shvagirev at gmail.com writes:
Thank you for the reply. Unfortunately RAID0 is not exactly what I was
looking for 'cause it does not really concatenate disks - it stripes as
you've mentioned. And two disks, 80 and 120 Gb, that were to be
concatenated will never give
Very good idea! Why didn't I think of that before?..
Thank you very much! Will try.
08.12.2011 23:11, Josh Grosse P?P8QP5Q:
Sure they will. Just factor the size. In your example, use 5 x 40GB
partitions:
--
Best regards,
Pavel Shvagirev
cell: +7 903 195-2807
skype: pavel.shvagirev
Pavel Shvagirev pavel.shvagi...@gmail.com wrote:
Very good idea! Why didn't I think of that before?..
Thank you very much! Will try.
08.12.2011 23:11, Josh Grosse P?P8QP5Q:
Sure they will. Just factor the size. In your example, use 5 x 40GB
partitions:
--
Best regards,
Pavel Shvagirev
cell: +7
Hello,
theo@ doomed ccd - http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvsm=131805777910632w=2 -
and Michal asked what could be replacement for ccd and got no reply -
- http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvsm=131805777910645w=2.
Do devs want to put ccd-like spanning volume feature into softraid or
what would be similar
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 03:23:16PM -0400, Jiri B wrote:
theo@ doomed ccd - http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvsm=131805777910632w=2 -
and Michal asked what could be replacement for ccd and got no reply -
- http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvsm=131805777910645w=2.
Do devs want to put ccd-like spanning
[+misc@, for users not subscribed to tech@]
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Matthew Dempsky matt...@dempsky.org wrote:
What should be done about ccd(4) and raid(4)? They both seem
superseded in functionality by softraid(4), which also has much more
developer interest and active development
Hi,
I'm trying to concatenate 2 disks using ccd. With an interleave factor
of 0, as described by the man page of ccd(4), it doesn't work. An
interleave factor of 1 works, though. Also, the fstype is 4.2BSD in my
example, but there's no difference if I set it to CCD.
This resembles a bug
:
http://www.linux.com/articles/52713
good luck :)
On 9/12/07, Steve Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jake Conk wrote:
Hello,
I've searched hi and low for hours on how to setup my system of a RAID
1 and basically what it comes down to is ccd and/or Raid Frame. I've
and low for hours on how to setup my system of a RAID
1 and basically what it comes down to is ccd and/or Raid Frame. I've
found helpful docs on using some of the commands and where to put my
configurations but nothing seems complete enough for me to figure it
out.
I have OpenBSD
On 2007/09/13 10:10, Raimo Niskanen wrote:
By the way, I recall rumours about some other RAID implementation coming
in OpenBSD 4.2. Does anyone know, just rumours?
It's there, but not in GENERIC. Note the CAVEATS.
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=softraid
Hello,
I've searched hi and low for hours on how to setup my system of a RAID
1 and basically what it comes down to is ccd and/or Raid Frame. I've
found helpful docs on using some of the commands and where to put my
configurations but nothing seems complete enough for me to figure it
out.
I have
or if there is a way to configure my disks for ccd and
mirror them to the second disk then I'm willing to do that also.
Basically I don't know how to get this ball rolling
I'm very new to OBSD and BSDs in general, coming from Debian Linux
(which now does raid1 from the installer). I notice that both OBSD
Jake Conk wrote:
Hello,
I've searched hi and low for hours on how to setup my system of a RAID
1 and basically what it comes down to is ccd and/or Raid Frame. I've
found helpful docs on using some of the commands and where to put my
configurations but nothing seems complete enough for me
what it comes down to is ccd and/or Raid Frame. I've
found helpful docs on using some of the commands and where to put my
configurations but nothing seems complete enough for me to figure it
out.
I have OpenBSD 4.1 installed on one disk and I have an exact duplicate
disk where i want
Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jake Conk wrote:
Hello,
I've searched hi and low for hours on how to setup my system of a RAID
1 and basically what it comes down to is ccd and/or Raid Frame. I've
found helpful docs on using some of the commands and where to put my
configurations
to repair this kind of damage?
Or does somebody know a extraction methode to reassemble the file?
And I forgot to say: It`s a private Server but even privat can have
some value sometimes (and it was too big to backup. bigger HDDs are
planed to replace the CCD (later..)).
Kind regards,
Sebastian
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Sebastian Rother wrote:
And I forgot to say: It`s a private Server but even privat can have
some value sometimes (and it was too big to backup. bigger HDDs are
planed to replace the CCD (later..)).
IMO the data cannot be valuable if you don't have backups for it.
PS
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 04:08:25AM +0100, Sebastian Rother wrote:
Hello everybody,
I`ve a ccd wich contains sensetiv data.
The Server crashed for technical reasons.
After it booted up again it told me to do a fsck.
I did and the data is gone now.
--
fsck /dev/ccd0c
** /dev/ccd0c
On 3/12/07, Sebastian Rother [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello everybody,
I`ve a ccd wich contains sensetiv data.
The Server crashed for technical reasons.
After it booted up again it told me to do a fsck.
I did and the data is gone now.
I think I shouldn`t have done it is there ANY way
Hello everybody,
I`ve a ccd wich contains sensetiv data.
The Server crashed for technical reasons.
After it booted up again it told me to do a fsck.
I did and the data is gone now.
--
fsck /dev/ccd0c
** /dev/ccd0c
** Phase 1 ..
..
..
..
..
** Phase 5 - Check Cyl groups
1 files, 1 used
On 3/12/07, Sebastian Rother [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello everybody,
I`ve a ccd wich contains sensetiv data.
The Server crashed for technical reasons.
After it booted up again it told me to do a fsck.
I did and the data is gone now.
I think I shouldn`t have done it is there ANY way
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Sebastian Rother wrote:
Hello everybody,
I`ve a ccd wich contains sensetiv data.
The Server crashed for technical reasons.
After it booted up again it told me to do a fsck.
I did and the data is gone now.
--
fsck /dev/ccd0c
** /dev/ccd0c
** Phase 1
Hello everybody,
I made a misstake during setting up a ccd.
One of the HDDs was not unmounted but ccd didn`t told me
during using cddconfig.
My problem looks like:
Script started on Fri Feb 9 01:46:05 2007
# mount
/dev/sd0a on / type ffs (local, softdep)
/dev/sd0g on /crypto/home type ffs
I am currently experimenting with ccd(4) and although it appears to
work, I am uncomfortable with one point.
I have configured 2 partitions as a JBOD (interleave 0). However, the
first of these partitions is partition 'a' of one disk. So the first
effect I had was that ccd0 appeared to have
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
I am currently experimenting with ccd(4) and although it appears to work, I am
uncomfortable with one point.
I have configured 2 partitions as a JBOD (interleave 0). However, the first of
these partitions is partition 'a' of one disk. So
On Sunday 28 January 2007 11:02, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
I am currently experimenting with ccd(4) and although it appears to
work, I am uncomfortable with one point.
I have configured 2 partitions as a JBOD (interleave 0). However, the
first of these partitions is partition 'a' of one disk
On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 12:14:00PM +0100, christian widmer wrote:
On Sunday 28 January 2007 11:02, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
I am currently experimenting with ccd(4) and although it appears to
work, I am uncomfortable with one point.
I have configured 2 partitions as a JBOD (interleave 0
On Sunday 28 January 2007 15:19, Kenneth R Westerback wrote:
On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 12:14:00PM +0100, christian widmer wrote:
On Sunday 28 January 2007 11:02, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
I am currently experimenting with ccd(4) and although it appears to
work, I am uncomfortable with one
sure the a partitions starts
after the first track. Just run fdisk -i on a new (ccd) disk. It
takes care of that.
I am talking about the physical disk, not the ccd disk.
In this case, the physical disk is wd1, which has been initialized by
fdisk -i. I then created wd1a and wd1b. wd1's
part of the
JBOD.
I think you misread. It's enough to make sure the a partitions starts
after the first track. Just run fdisk -i on a new (ccd) disk. It
takes care of that.
I am talking about the physical disk, not the ccd disk.
In this case, the physical disk is wd1, which has
Otto Moerbeek wrote:
How are we supposed to help if you omit all relevant info? dmesg,
disklabels, fdisk info...
A good start would be to read my post, all the information is there.
Except for dmesg, which is not useful in this case.
-pu
christian widmer wrote:
man ccd:
Note that the `raw' partitions of the disks should not be combined. Each
component partition should be offset at least one cylinder from the beginning
of the component disk.
What is a raw partition in that case? In the examples I found, the
members
Patrick Useldinger wrote:
Does the name really matter?
Yes.
Whether your partition is called 'a' or 'd', doesn't the disklabel
get stored into the beginning of the first
partition anyway?
No.
Actually, you have 16 partitions stored in the disklabel.
This is OpenBSD not DOS.
.
I think you misread. It's enough to make sure the a partitions starts
after the first track. Just run fdisk -i on a new (ccd) disk. It
takes care of that.
I am talking about the physical disk, not the ccd disk.
In this case, the physical disk is wd1, which has been initialized
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
Otto Moerbeek wrote:
How are we supposed to help if you omit all relevant info? dmesg,
disklabels, fdisk info...
A good start would be to read my post, all the information is there. Except
for dmesg, which is not useful in this case.
1. I
.
The value of the dmesg was already demonstrated (see KRW's post).
CCD works great as you are trying to use it. BTW: This message is
coming to you from a computer with a ccd stripped /usr partition. It
works. I used the man page documentation to implement it. It works.
Your attitude is completely
On 1/28/07 11:09 PM, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
Guys,
this is all turning to complete bullshit, and it's not only my fault.
If anyone actually cared reading my post, my question was simple:
== where is the disklabel stored, and what is its size? ==
If you don't know the answer you don't know
On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 11:09:17PM +0100, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
Guys,
this is all turning to complete bullshit, and it's not only my fault.
If anyone actually cared reading my post, my question was simple:
== where is the disklabel stored, and what is its size? ==
Being that I'm a ccd
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
Guys,
this is all turning to complete bullshit, and it's not only my fault.
If anyone actually cared reading my post, my question was simple:
== where is the disklabel stored, and what is its size? ==
Strange that nobody distilled that form
On 2007/01/28 23:09, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
== where is the disklabel stored, and what is its size? ==
The question was generic, and I wanted a generic answer.
There isn't a generic answer, this OS runs on 17 supported platforms
and it varies. On some of them, disklabel -v -r disk will tell
On Sunday 28 January 2007 17:47, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
christian widmer wrote:
man ccd:
Note that the `raw' partitions of the disks should not be combined.
Each component partition should be offset at least one cylinder from the
beginning of the component disk.
What is a raw
I'm trying to get CCD working correctly, but it just doesn't want to.
I have two identical 300GB disks that I'm trying to interleave.
Here's exactly what I'm doing:
# fdisk -i wd1
# fdisk -i wd3
# disklabel -E wd1
- creating one partition of type ccd spaning entire disk
# disklabel -E wd3
first:
YOU WROTE: - creating one partition of type ccd spanning entire disk
i take you're word then you should have a close look at 'man ccd'
Note that the `raw' partitions of the disks should not be combined. Each
component partition should be offset at least one cylinder from
I've read that. That's why I began the offset using disklabel's default
setting, which is 63. Sorry, that's why I said you can ask for
clarification.
As for the second part, it wasn't so clear, but with FreeBSD's ccd you
create the file system on /dev/ccd0c so I assumed it was the same
began the offset using disklabel's default
setting, which is 63. Sorry, that's why I said you can ask for clarification.
As for the second part, it wasn't so clear, but with FreeBSD's ccd you create
the file system on /dev/ccd0c so I assumed it was the same. If you use
disklabel -E ccd0
setting, which is 63. Sorry, that's why I said you can ask for
clarification.
As for the second part, it wasn't so clear, but with FreeBSD's ccd you
create the file system on /dev/ccd0c so I assumed it was the same. If you
use disklabel -E ccd0 it can't get the approrpriate geometry.
On Wed
a partition on ccd0, you must use ccd0c.
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Chris Mika wrote:
I've read that. That's why I began the offset using disklabel's default
setting, which is 63. Sorry, that's why I said you can ask for
clarification.
As for the second part, it wasn't so clear, but with FreeBSD's ccd
what makes you thing so. but it's wrong.
from the FAQ - 14.18.1 - CCD:
Just use disklabel on it like you normally would to make the partition or
partitions you want to use. Again, don't use the 'c' partition as an actual
partition that you put stuff on.
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Chris Mika wrote
Hi,
today I ran into trouble while upgrading the system using the current
snapshots bsd.rd.
On this system /usr, /var and /home are mirrored and /tmp is striped
over both disks using ccd.
When trying to update, the updater complains because of those entries in
fstab and wants me to manuelly
On 2006/10/16 15:16, Michael wrote:
Anyone got an idea how I can upgrade the system anyway without having to
compile the kernel and everything else from source while the system is
running?
untar (with the p flag) the distribution *.tgz on the running system.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 02:36:53PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2006/10/16 15:16, Michael wrote:
Anyone got an idea how I can upgrade the system anyway without having to
compile the kernel and everything else from source while the system is
running?
untar (with the p flag) the
Peter Philipp wrote:
If devices are missing there is always the /dev/MAKEDEV file.
to add any missing wd1 devices you'd do,
cd /dev/
sh MAKEDEV wd1
that should do it.
You then want to mount the root drive (wd0a?) in order to configure the
ccd devices...
/mnt/sbin/ccdconfig -C
On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 03:16:39PM +0200, Michael wrote:
Hi,
today I ran into trouble while upgrading the system using the current
snapshots bsd.rd.
On this system /usr, /var and /home are mirrored and /tmp is striped
over both disks using ccd.
When trying to update, the updater
Those are intermittent errors that are not relevant to your failure. I did fix
those in -current.
You simply have a dying HDD.
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 06:09:11PM +0200, Hans van Leeuwen wrote:
Hello misc,
I run a server with two harddiscs running as a software RAID1 using ccd.
Yesterday
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 06:09:11PM +0200, Hans van Leeuwen wrote:
Hello misc,
I run a server with two harddiscs running as a software RAID1 using ccd.
Erm... search the archives for why you shouldn't use ccd to mirror and
then think you have a RAID.
Yesterday I started to import a large
trying to get ccd going on openbsd 3.9 i386 with no interleave
(concatenation). I have wd1 and wd2 which are different sized disks.
I did fdisk reinit on both drives, then ran disklabel and set up an
'a' partition (inside the 'c' partition) on both disks offset 1
cylinder from the beginning
On 7/25/06, Nathan Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
trying to get ccd going on openbsd 3.9 i386 with no interleave
(concatenation). I have wd1 and wd2 which are different sized disks.
I did fdisk reinit on both drives, then ran disklabel and set up an
'a' partition (inside the 'c' partition
On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 07:56:05AM +0100, Anthony Howe wrote:
This page http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq14.html#RAID briefly mentions
that ccd(4) could be used for mirroring.
OpenBSD 3.7-stable and later also includes mirroring as a
feature of the ccd(4) driver. This system
This page http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq14.html#RAID briefly mentions
that ccd(4) could be used for mirroring.
OpenBSD 3.7-stable and later also includes mirroring as a
feature of the ccd(4) driver. This system is built into the
GENERIC kernel and is in the bsd.rd kernel
On 2006/02/16 15:37, eric wrote:
I have a problem on a Dell 2850 machine when trying to use ccd(4) devices.
try having dd scribble /dev/zero over the start of the devices, or
maybe 'g d' in disklabel -E will help somewhere.
On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 22:02:45 +, Stuart Henderson proclaimed...
try having dd scribble /dev/zero over the start of the devices, or
maybe 'g d' in disklabel -E will help somewhere.
Good idea
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sd0g
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sd1g
Seems to have worked. Thanks.
Right, this is what I did as well. Tested. Works much better than the
previous config.
Any thoughts on monitoring the status of the ccd?
Bobby Johnson
On Wed, 2005-12-28 at 21:28 +0100, kami petersen wrote:
Nick Holland skrev:
(hint: you can do a CCD of just one disk).
(hint 2: you
Nick Holland skrev:
(hint: you can do a CCD of just one disk).
(hint 2: you can't use the same partition twice, it will generate an error).
(hint 3: Errors can be your friend, they are not always to be avoided)
warning, spoiler below:
#
# /etc/ccd.conf
# Configuration file for concatenated
A few questions in regards to the discussion between Robert Haarman and
mickey around Nov 24 on ccd mirroring. The conclusion is don't use c
for a usable partition in a ccd device.
This sounds fine until I try to recover from a disk failure. When I use
the c partition in a ccd mirror device I
Bobby Johnson wrote:
A few questions in regards to the discussion between Robert Haarman and
mickey around Nov 24 on ccd mirroring. The conclusion is don't use c
for a usable partition in a ccd device.
If conclusion is the right word in a discussion between someone who
didn't understand
outlined, or as
modified to have reading (or, better yet, heavy reading) being done
from the ccd mirror... As interesting as your results are, they
a) don't surprise me nor b) have much to do with the test in question.
Yes, I think this was worth doing.
Yes, ccd(4) mirroring is not for every
On Sun, Dec 04, 2005 at 03:58:26PM -0500, Nick Holland wrote:
up toasting them, far from the end of the world. I can give you a very
good explaination (or several) for why a disk powered down mid-write
could be dammaged, it is really odd how RARELY this actually happens in
real life. I come
Greg Oster wrote:
...
Here's what I'd encourage you (or anyone else) to do:
actually, I'd encourage you do try your own test. Results were interesting.
1) Create a ccd as you describe in the HOWTO and mount the filesystem.
used my own instructions, if you don't mind. :)
Softdeps
Nick Holland writes:
Greg Oster wrote:
...
Here's what I'd encourage you (or anyone else) to do:
actually, I'd encourage you do try your own test. Results were interesting.
Well... as we see, you did *your* version of the test, not mine ;)
1) Create a ccd as you describe in the HOWTO
it is that
things fail in a way where ccd actually helps
you. I was hoping someone
else would comment on that, but that doesn't seem
to have happened so
far.
When you do a shutdown -r, has the system ever
hung on you? Has
your system ever crashed/paniced/suffered a power
outage?
How does ccd
Greg,
Again, you raise some interesting issues. I wonder how likely the
catastrophic failures you describe are, versus how likely it is that
things fail in a way where ccd actually helps you. I was hoping someone
else would comment on that, but that doesn't seem to have happened so
far.
So
Robbert Haarman writes:
Greg,
Again, you raise some interesting issues. I wonder how likely the
catastrophic failures you describe are, versus how likely it is that
things fail in a way where ccd actually helps you. I was hoping someone
else would comment on that, but that doesn't seem
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
Greg Oster
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 12:26 PM
To: Robbert Haarman
Cc: misc@openbsd.org
Subject: Re: Updated CCD Mirroring HOWTO
Robbert Haarman writes:
Greg,
Again, you raise some
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Robbert Haarman writes:
Greg,
Again, you raise some interesting issues. I
wonder how likely the
catastrophic failures you describe are, versus
how likely it is that
things fail in a way where ccd actually helps
you. I was hoping someone
else would comment
In all these:
I'm going to take this thread for what I think it is... the old guard
telling us youngin's that our efforts are appreciated, but we've got a
bit more to learn about how things work, and how to write good
documentation, before we're really ready to jump into these things the
way we
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 01:58:04 +0100, frantisek holop [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
hmm, on Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 09:34:39AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said that
Yes, OpenBSD is the _only_ operating system that takes security as
seriously as it should be taken. Consider the why of OpenBSD's
this is a
Daniel Ouellet wrote:
In all these:
I'm going to take this thread for what I think it is... the old guard
telling us youngin's that our efforts are appreciated, but we've got a
bit more to learn about how things work, and how to write good
documentation, before we're really ready to jump
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OpenBSD claims to be done for the benefit of its developers and every
indication that I've seen says that they mean exactly what they say.
True and nothing wrong with that.
Concerns of users are secondary at best.
The developers will help you if you have something
a HOWTO that claims to be a short-cut way to set up
mirroring but actually provides the steps needed to possibly fry your
disks through misconfiguration.
Honestly, I think that's a stretch. I'm sure you can destroy your data
with ccd, but frying your disks with a pure software feature?
Actually I
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 17:52:51 +0100, Robbert Haarman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear list, especially Greg and Mickey,
I've updated the working copy of the CCD Mirroring HOWTO. In particular,
I've split off the comparison to software RAID into a separate section
and clarified that ccd does not do
Dear JCR,
Thank you for your informative message.
Things like HowTo documents, sites like openbsdsupport.org and lists
like openbsd-newbie@ are more often than not considered garbage. The
reason is simply because you are robbing the reader of the fundamental
and important details that the
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005, Robbert Haarman wrote:
The reason I wrote the HOWTO is that, in my opinion of course, the
manpages don't make it clear how to set things up. Searching the
archives for more information came up with some contradictory messages,
and some instances of people being misled
Robbert Haarman wrote:
If end-users are lazy and want to take the easy way out, they should
go back to using linux and MS-Windows. They are not welcome here.
That's a pity. I personally think OpenBSD is the _only_ operating system
that takes security as seriously as it should be taken,
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 09:34:39 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
J.C. Roberts wrote:
To the rest of list users; Please pardon another long email from me on
this. Helping reasonable people like Robbert understand why many people
consider HOWTO's to be harmful is hopefully worth the added noise and
J.C. Roberts wrote:
To the rest of list users; Please pardon another long email from me on
this. Helping reasonable people like Robbert understand why many people
consider HOWTO's to be harmful is hopefully worth the added noise and
bandwidth.
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 10:57:12 +0100, Robbert
J.C. Roberts wrote:
Both security and reliability are really nothing more than a byproduct
of correctness and well informed decisions.
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 09:34:39 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's the point.
Note the nothing more. And the byproduct.
If you throw away the
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 17:00:39 +, Michael Quaintance
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
JCR,
/Please/ don't loose your verbosity.
For newbies like me, your lengthy descriptions of why the OpenBSD
community thinks like it does are incredibly useful. Short, pithy
explanations like Tony's are great for
J.C. Roberts wrote:
Please do not mistake me and my opinions for the opinions of the OpenBSD
community in general. OpenBSD users and developers actually thrive on
the conflict of differing opinions; a reasonably friendly competition to
figure out and prove both what works and what works best.
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 19:25:16 +, Michael Quaintance
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
J.C. Roberts wrote:
[snip]
I'm just a normal user who doesn't contribute a great deal to the
project, so there is a *HUGE* difference between me and the people who
actually have both the expertise and dedication
J.C. Roberts wrote:
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 17:00:39 +, Michael Quaintance
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
JCR,
/Please/ don't loose your verbosity.
For newbies like me, your lengthy descriptions of why the OpenBSD
community thinks like it does are incredibly useful. Short, pithy
explanations
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 16:54:04 -0500, Chris Zakelj [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
J.C. Roberts wrote:
snip
I'm just a normal user who doesn't contribute a great deal to the
project, so there is a *HUGE* difference between me and the people who
actually have both the expertise and dedication needed to
1 - 100 of 148 matches
Mail list logo
