Re: Strange sshd + /etc/nologin behaviour
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 08:21:10PM +0100, "Andr?? S." wrote: > Am I missing something? Is your user in the staff class? It has "ignorenologin" set by default. See login.conf(5) and /etc/login.conf.
Re: My thoughts on OpenBSD - is advocacy working ?
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 02:42:04PM +1000, john slee wrote: > VROOOM cars, meh.
Re: How does OpenBSD compare to Ubuntu Server?
> For starters, there is 100% consensus among developers that we'll never > use newfangled overengineered stuff like System V init. > You mean Upstart! or wait You mean systemd!
Re: Better security? Haha
On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 08:26:50AM +1000, Rod Whitworth wrote: > Better tha > iptables? > http://www.esecurityplanet.com/news/article.php/3934151/Fedora-15-Boosts > -Linux-Security.htm > maybe... Imagine the dynamic firewall technology in the cloud!
Re: irc
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:44:24AM +0200, David Steiner wrote: > thoughts? Some people don't like it when you make IRC logs publicly available.
Re: a GOOD idea to harden OpenSSH!
> Your right that there are other ways to still login. I meant "you're".
Re: a GOOD idea to harden OpenSSH!
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 07:54:13PM -0400, swilly wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 03:22, Alexander Schrijver > wrote: > > It's a great way to keep someone out of their own system. > > Huh? Wouldn't securely backing up the RSA keys prevent this? If you > are mindful enough to use keys in the first place and don't back up > such critical data, wouldn't you deserve to be locked out until > someone can cart over an IP KVM? > > -William That was meant as an addition to why it is a bad idea for that feature. I think it's a bad idea to disable ssh login while someone is bruteforcing your account. Your right that there are other ways to still login.
Re: a GOOD idea to harden OpenSSH!
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 03:00:18PM +0700, Edho P Arief wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 2:22 PM, Alexander Schrijver > wrote: > > It's a great way to keep someone out of their own system. > > > > Unless you enable root login... How does that help?
Re: a GOOD idea to harden OpenSSH!
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 10:06:14AM +0300, Gregory Edigarov wrote: > IMHO it is absolutelly useless, objections are: > 1. You can limit connections using firewall. > 2. You already have the feature by name "limiting the number of > retries" > 3. If you really want PROTECTION - you should turn off password > authentication completelly and use RSA key with passphrase. > > On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:54:06 +0300 > Mihai Militaru wrote: It's a great way to keep someone out of their own system.
Re: Firewall rules to block unwanted protocolls on given ports
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 06:05:49AM -0700, johhny_at_poland77 wrote: > Does somebody has an idea, that what kind of iptables/pf rule must i use to > achieve this?: > > i only want to allow these connections [on the output chain]: > > on port 53 output only allow udp - dns > on port 80 output only allow tcp - http > on port 443 output only allow tcp - https > on port 993 output only allow tcp - imaps > on port 465 output only allow tcp - smtps > on port 22 output only allow tcp - ssh > on port 20-21 output only allow cp - ftp > on port 989-990 output only allow tcp - ftps > on port 1194 output only allow udp - OpenVPN > > So that e.g.: OpenVPN on port 443 would be blocked, because only HTTPS is > allowed on port 443 outbound. > > Any ideas? :\ Your question is very ambiguous. On which layer do you want to do the filtering?
Re: Need help with logging fork() calls
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:07:48PM -0500, Amit Kulkarni wrote: > When we build a project using ./configure && make && make install, > inevitably there are invocations of all sorts of things. Is there a > utility which can log which process was created, its invocation > command, and then record it is destroyed? Basically, like > http://www.suse.de/~krahmer/exec-notify.c but for OpenBSD. accton(8)
Re: Please help me decide: OpenWrt vs. OpenBSD
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 04:32:21PM -0800, Scott Stanley wrote: > b. have been on this list for a while and totally disregarded the > culture you were within. grepping my mailbox it looks this is the case. Although he might be just a troll.
Re: Linux or OpenBSD
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 01:50:09PM +0100, Toni Mueller wrote: > nope. I regularly see hardware which is supposed to be good, and which > gives no problems under Linux, which causes a lot of problems under > OpenBSD. I'm just about to throw away a bunch of recent machines that > worked fine with older OpenBSDs, but horribly crash with later > releases, up to the point that they even refuse to boot. Why don't you run linux on them? You aren't being very environmentally aware are you?
Re: Enough is enough!
On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 04:18:08AM -0400, bsdmas...@hushmail.com wrote: > FTP server down, amd64 snapshot packages way out of sync with > latest libc bump... What the hell! > > If you guys don't get your sh*t together, I'm done. > > Yeah, you read that right. > > If this whole situation is not cleared in the next 24 hours, I'm > switching to ArchLinux (www.archlinux.org). > > You've been warned. Your threat doesn't seem to be working. Maybe you should threaten with something worse, like Ubuntu.
Re: Same shit all over again
>Absolutely, the U.S. Navy will know precisely where you are if you use >TOR, but no one else will. >Sincerely, >IR I meant that your IP address isn't the only thing you should try to hide. There are a lot of very noisy protocols which can give your location or identity away.
Re: Same shit all over again
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 05:45:22PM +, Internet Retard wrote: > Wow... just wow... that is slick and *so* simple! Just like OpenBSD. > > So you sent that tinyurl link to the email account created by the imaginary, > anonymous, disgruntled OpenBSD developers and the person who created the > account *actually* clicked on the link. Has he never heard of tor. I think > it's in ports. > Tor doesn't magically fix this problem. There is a lot more shit which can give you away.
Re: OpenBSD users.
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 01:07:12AM +0200, Mateusz Gierblinski wrote: > I'm just wondering. Where are you OpenBSD users from? The Netherlands!
Re: Mailing list headers
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 02:36:41AM -0400, Casey Allen Shobe wrote: > On Wednesday 23 June 2010 02:10:56 am Alexander Schrijver wrote: > > I use the Sender: header. > > How is it that you manage to filter on that in gmail? Because it's not > documented anywhere that I can find, and the only undocumented parameters I > could find are replyto, deliveredto, and listid. A search for > sender:misc@openbsd.org returns nothing, so that isn't it. I use fdm(1) (http://fdm.sourceforge.net/). I didn't read your original message properly, you're looking for a solution in the gmail web interface. I tried looking into that once but their filtering is weird. I found that you can use the search filtering language from the message search in the filtering rules. I'm not sure if that is supposed to be a bug or a feature.
Re: Mailing list headers
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 01:16:38AM -0400, Casey Allen Shobe wrote: > On Tuesday 22 June 2010 11:11:59 pm you wrote: > > I use gmail and I filter on: > > > > Matches: to:(misc@openbsd.org) > > A mail that is sent to misc@openbsd.org, and CC to my personal address, > should > have the mailing list copy filtered to my misc folder, and the personal copy > deliverede to my inbox. Filtering by To or CC breaks this, hence why proper > mailing list filtering is never done using To, CC, or Subject. > > Cheers, > -- > Casey Allen Shobe > ca...@shobe.info > I use the Sender: header.
Re: Editing C with...
Real men use butterflies. On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 02:15:19PM -0400, bofh wrote: > Real men use ed. > > > > On 5/3/08, Jordi Espasa Clofent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yes, I know, it's completely a dumb question; but I'm curious about it. > > > > I'm just learning C applied in networking area and I wonder what editor > > is preferred by OpenBSD developers. > > > > At present moment I use vim. > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > Jordi Espasa Clofent > > > > > > -- > Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com > > http://www.glumbert.com/media/shift > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHNNOLnCk > "This officer's men seem to follow him merely out of idle curiosity." > -- Sandhurst officer cadet evaluation. > "Securing an environment of Windows platforms from abuse - external or > internal - is akin to trying to install sprinklers in a fireworks > factory where smoking on the job is permitted." -- Gene Spafford > learn french: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1G-3laJJP0&feature=related
Re: How to HIDE "OpenBSD" as user-agent?
On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 09:38:01PM +1000, Sunnz wrote: > 2008/4/30 macintoshzoom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > "" > > # block nmap OS detection scans somewhat (-O) > > block in quick proto tcp flags FUP/WEUAPRSF > > block in quick proto tcp flags WEUAPRSF/WEUAPRSF > > block in quick proto tcp flags SRAFU/WEUAPRSF > > block in quick proto tcp flags /WEUAPRSF > > block in quick proto tcp flags SR/SR > > block in quick proto tcp flags SF/SF > > "" > > > > Any tips for a full pf.conf settings ? > > > > Well since the OP wanted to block ALL user agents from absolutely > everywhere and don't mind security by obscurity, may I suggest the > following: > > block in quick all > block out quick all > > That's as secure as you can get by going for obscurity, without > turning off the computer! > I think unplugging the network cable(s) would be more secure.
Re: How to HIDE "OpenBSD" as user-agent?
Write your own TCP/IP stack. But please read all the other replies before you do so. On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 6:30 PM, macintoshzoom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > seen some pf.conf settings against remote OS detection at > http://nmap.org/misc/defeat-nmap-osdetect.html#OPENBSD: > > ""The OpenBSD packet filter can also be configured to try to defeat remote > OS Fingerprint.."" > > and at http://hackepedia.org/?title=Pf : > > "" > # block nmap OS detection scans somewhat (-O) > block in quick proto tcp flags FUP/WEUAPRSF > block in quick proto tcp flags WEUAPRSF/WEUAPRSF > block in quick proto tcp flags SRAFU/WEUAPRSF > block in quick proto tcp flags /WEUAPRSF > block in quick proto tcp flags SR/SR > block in quick proto tcp flags SF/SF > "" > > Any tips for a full pf.conf settings ? > > On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 06:18:38 -0600 > > macintoshzoom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > How to HIDE "OpenBSD" as user-agent? > > > > For security reasons it is sometimes interesting to hide GLOBALLLY th > > O.S. you are running on AGAINST GIVING ANY CLUE TO HACKERS ABOUT HOW TO > > ATTACK YOU. > > > > Not only browsing but globally. > > > > Thanks for any tip about this.
Re: How to HIDE "OpenBSD" as user-agent?
IIRC privoxy does what you want. On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 2:18 PM, macintoshzoom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How to HIDE "OpenBSD" as user-agent? > > For security reasons it is sometimes interesting to hide GLOBALLLY th > O.S. you are running on AGAINST GIVING ANY CLUE TO HACKERS ABOUT HOW TO > ATTACK YOU. > > Not only browsing but globally. > > Thanks for any tip about this.
Re: [Invitation] Almighty GOD never forsake his people @ Fri Apr 4 05:00 - 06:00 ()
Who needs god? We have daemon(3).
Re: Sed or perl subsitutions - in place
>sed 's/$OLD/$NEW/' $file <-I know this will only > search and replace but how do I do in in-place so that the file itself is > modified.* sed -a 's/old/new/wfilename' filename It is explained in: cd /usr/share/doc/usd/15.sed/; make paper.txt; less paper.txt Why dont you use the date as the serial?
Re: About Squid port for OpenBSD 4.2
On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Comhte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks but that doesn't help me, could you explain please ? > > Alexander Schrijver a icrit : > > > > openldap includes are installed in /usr/local/include/ and libraries > > in /usr/local/lib/. > > > I dont know how autoconf works which squid uses, except for basic compiling. but this should probably work: export LDFLAGS="-L -L/usr/local/lib/" export CFLAGS="-I/usr/local/include" ./configure etc Or if you want to make a package you should patch I believe it is configure.in, to include these options with the default LDFLAGS/CFLAGS. But you should probably read the autoconf docs before doing that.
Re: About Squid port for OpenBSD 4.2
openldap includes are installed in /usr/local/include/ and libraries in /usr/local/lib/.
Re: Limiting CPU to a process or process group?
On Jan 14, 2008 2:34 PM, Andreas Kahari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 14/01/2008, Alexander Schrijver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jan 14, 2008 1:30 PM, Andreas Kahari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 14/01/2008, Alexander Schrijver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Jan 14, 2008 11:52 AM, Andreas Kahari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > Is there a way of limiting the amount of CPU given to a particular > > > > > process or process group? For example, I would want the build of the > > > > > qt4 port to use a maximum of 25% of the available CPU, leaving the CPU > > > > > 75% idle if nothing else is happening on the machine. > > > > > > > > > > I know about 'nice', but it doesn't fulfil the criteria that the > > > > > machine is left otherwise idle if nothing else runs on it. > > > > > > > > > > I don't have a real reason for why I would want to do this, I'm mainly > > > > > curious as to if it's possible. > > > [cut] > > > > > > > > I have never done this myself, but I believe this is possible by > > > > creating a login class in /etc/login.conf and set the cputime option. > > > > See login.conf(5) for a better description. > > > > > > Hi Alexander, > > > > > > I believe that the cputime resource limit will limit the maximum > > > amount of CPU time that the user may use in a session, which is not > > > really what I asked for. I'd like the process or process group to run > > > for as long as it needs to run, but that it only ever uses a fraction > > > of the CPU power. > > > > > > It's like limiting the network bandwidth for a particular type of > > > traffic, only this is about time on the CPU. > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > Andreas > > > > > > -- > > > Andreas Kahari > > > Somewhere in the general Cambridge area, UK > > > > > > > Yes, you are right. It is also possible to set a priority for a > > process in a login class. > > > > From login.conf(5) > > priority number Initial priority (nice) > > level. > > > > This is not exactly what you want, but it is pretty close. I am > > curious why do you want to set an exact limit and not let the > > scheduler do this for you? > > > > As I said, I don't have a good reason for wanting to do this. It just > seemed like something someone might want to do. But let me dream up > three examples: Sometimes firefox (or whatever program) goes a bit > haywire and brings the machine to a crawl. It would be nice to limit > firefox's CPU to a maximum of, say, 50% so that I'm guaranteed to have > 50% of the machine to work with. > > Another example: Let's say I'm rebuilding the kernel, base system, and > all my packages after a major update from CVS after a long time away. > I'm not worried about how long this takes so I'm quite happy to run > the build at 5% of the CPU while I get on with my work. > What you describe here is exactly what you can accomplish with either nice or the priority option in login.conf. Also, I am not exactly sure what you mean with percent of CPU. Do you mean the difference of cpu time scheduled between a 'normal' process? > Third example, similar to the last one: I'm running a distributed.net > or SETI-at-home client in the background, but I don't ever want it to > run at 100% of the CPU, maybe because that would make the machine too > noisy during the night (due to the fans). I think this is a different issue. I don't know how this can be solved. An idea might be to underclock your cpu at night. > > Maybe no-one has these kind of requirements? > > > Andreas > > -- > Andreas Kahari > Somewhere in the general Cambridge area, UK
Re: Limiting CPU to a process or process group?
On Jan 14, 2008 1:30 PM, Andreas Kahari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 14/01/2008, Alexander Schrijver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jan 14, 2008 11:52 AM, Andreas Kahari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > Is there a way of limiting the amount of CPU given to a particular > > > process or process group? For example, I would want the build of the > > > qt4 port to use a maximum of 25% of the available CPU, leaving the CPU > > > 75% idle if nothing else is happening on the machine. > > > > > > I know about 'nice', but it doesn't fulfil the criteria that the > > > machine is left otherwise idle if nothing else runs on it. > > > > > > I don't have a real reason for why I would want to do this, I'm mainly > > > curious as to if it's possible. > [cut] > > > > I have never done this myself, but I believe this is possible by > > creating a login class in /etc/login.conf and set the cputime option. > > See login.conf(5) for a better description. > > Hi Alexander, > > I believe that the cputime resource limit will limit the maximum > amount of CPU time that the user may use in a session, which is not > really what I asked for. I'd like the process or process group to run > for as long as it needs to run, but that it only ever uses a fraction > of the CPU power. > > It's like limiting the network bandwidth for a particular type of > traffic, only this is about time on the CPU. > > > Regards, > Andreas > > -- > Andreas Kahari > Somewhere in the general Cambridge area, UK > Yes, you are right. It is also possible to set a priority for a process in a login class. >From login.conf(5) priority number Initial priority (nice) level. This is not exactly what you want, but it is pretty close. I am curious why do you want to set an exact limit and not let the scheduler do this for you?
Re: Limiting CPU to a process or process group?
On Jan 14, 2008 11:52 AM, Andreas Kahari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Is there a way of limiting the amount of CPU given to a particular > process or process group? For example, I would want the build of the > qt4 port to use a maximum of 25% of the available CPU, leaving the CPU > 75% idle if nothing else is happening on the machine. > > I know about 'nice', but it doesn't fulfil the criteria that the > machine is left otherwise idle if nothing else runs on it. > > I don't have a real reason for why I would want to do this, I'm mainly > curious as to if it's possible. > > Regards, > Andreas > > -- > Andreas Kahari > Somewhere in the general Cambridge area, UK > > I have never done this myself, but I believe this is possible by creating a login class in /etc/login.conf and set the cputime option. See login.conf(5) for a better description.
Re: Using PostgreSQL as an user database
On Nov 22, 2007 2:10 PM, Gilles Chehade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 05:35:00PM +0100, Alexander Schrijver wrote: > > Hi everybody, > > > > I am trying to configure a virtual hosting system on OpenBSD, and I am > > currently looking at the authentication and user lookup. I have > > already normalized a PostgreSQL database which stores the users > > amongst others. And i would like to use these users in OpenBSD. > > > > As I understand their really is only one possibility to configure such > > a setup and that is to select all the users from the PostgreSQL > > database and create a bdb hash using pwd_mkdb (or any other compatible > > tool). PostgreSQL has support for asynchronous notifications > > (http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/interactive/sql-listen.html) thus > > it is possible to create a bdb whenever the user database is updated. > > I was thinking about running the following scripts when postgreql > > sends such an asynchronous notification. > > $ script | pwd_mkdb /dev/stdin /etc/master.passwd > > > > The script will output all the users in the same format as master.passwd. > > > > Are there any other methods for doing this, or are there things I am > > overlooking with this configuration? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Alexander Schrijver > > > > Hi Alexander, > > I am not sure i understand exactly what you want, but if it involves > authenticating the users against the pgsql database, you may want to > take a look at this: > > http://www.evilkittens.org/~gilles/loginpgsql.tar.gz > > as well as to login.conf(5). I wrote this auth module for myself so > you'll need to edit the authenticate() function to set the proper > database informations. > > I have another piece of code which updates master.passwd whenever > the accounts table is updated but it would need a lot of cleanup > before it is useable outside of my configuration ;-) > > Gilles > > -- > Gilles Chehade > http://www.evilkittens.org/ > http://www.evilkittens.org/blog/gilles/ > Oops, I meant to sent this to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi Gilles, This is exactly what I was looking for thanks :) ! didnt even know this was possible. Also, I would like to have the functions getpwnam and getgrname etc. working with the users from postgres. Is this best method for doing this to simply update the master.passwd with the records from PostgreSQL? thanks, Alexander
Using PostgreSQL as an user database
Hi everybody, I am trying to configure a virtual hosting system on OpenBSD, and I am currently looking at the authentication and user lookup. I have already normalized a PostgreSQL database which stores the users amongst others. And i would like to use these users in OpenBSD. As I understand their really is only one possibility to configure such a setup and that is to select all the users from the PostgreSQL database and create a bdb hash using pwd_mkdb (or any other compatible tool). PostgreSQL has support for asynchronous notifications (http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/interactive/sql-listen.html) thus it is possible to create a bdb whenever the user database is updated. I was thinking about running the following scripts when postgreql sends such an asynchronous notification. $ script | pwd_mkdb /dev/stdin /etc/master.passwd The script will output all the users in the same format as master.passwd. Are there any other methods for doing this, or are there things I am overlooking with this configuration? Thanks, Alexander Schrijver
Re: Slow Sparc Ultra 5
On 9/16/05, BadMagic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I installed OpenBSD 3.7 (Sparc64) on my Ultra 5 and it's performance is not > what I'd expected. I'd recently had Solaris on there (using CDE) and it ran > quite quickly but with OpenBSD, when I do an 'ls -la', it takes forever for > the screen to scroll through the list and try it via ssh! Slow. I'm using it > as a Web server and it's noticably slower at serving pages than the old x86 I > had doing the job before was. > > Anyone know something about this? > > Regards, > sl > > Here's it's dmesg (This took forEVER): > /*8<- > > console is keyboard/display > Copyright (c) 1982, 1986, 1989, 1991, 1993 > The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. > Copyright (c) 1995-2005 OpenBSD. All rights reserved. http://www.OpenBSD.org > > OpenBSD 3.7 (RAMDISK) #344: Sun Mar 20 14:38:37 MST 2005 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/arch/sparc64/compile/RAMDISK > total memory = 134217728 > avail memory = 112893952 > using 819 buffers containing 6709248 bytes of memory > bootpath: /[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/[EMAIL PROTECTED],1/[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/[EMAIL > PROTECTED],0:f > mainbus0 (root): Sun Ultra 5/10 UPA/PCI (UltraSPARC-IIi 270MHz) > cpu0 at mainbus0: SUNW,UltraSPARC-IIi @ 270 MHz, version 0 FPU > cpu0: physical 32K instruction (32 b/l), 16K data (32 b/l), 256K external (64 > b/l) > psycho0 at mainbus0 addr 0xfffc4000 > SUNW,sabre: impl 0, version 0: ign 7c0 bus range 0 to 2; PCI bus 0 > DVMA map: c000 to e000 > IOTDB: 10bb4000 to 10c34000 > pci0 at psycho0 > ppb0 at pci0 dev 1 function 1 vendor 0x108e product 0x5000 rev 0x11 > pci1 at ppb0 bus 1 > ebus0 at pci1 dev 1 function 0 vendor 0x108e product 0x1000 rev 0x01 > auxio0 at ebus0 addr 726000-726003, 728000-728003, 72a000-72a003, > 72c000-72c003, 72f000-72f003 > power at ebus0 addr 724000-724003 ipl 37 not configured > SUNW,pll at ebus0 addr 504000-504002 not configured > sab0 at ebus0 addr 40-40007f ipl 43: rev 3.2 > sabtty0 at sab0 port 0 > sabtty1 at sab0 port 1 > comkbd0 at ebus0 addr 3083f8-3083ff ipl 41: layout 34 > wskbd0 at comkbd0: console keyboard > com0 at ebus0 addr 3062f8-3062ff ipl 42, mouse: ns16550a, 16 byte fifo > ecpp at ebus0 addr 3043bc-3043cb, 30015c-30015d, 70-7f ipl 34 not > configured > fdthree at ebus0 addr 3023f0-3023f7, 706000-70600f, 72-720003 ipl 39 not > configured > clock1 at ebus0 addr 0-1fff: mk48t59: hostid 809f8b30 > flashprom at ebus0 addr 0-f not configured > SUNW,CS4231 at ebus0 addr 20-2000ff, 702000-70200f, 704000-70400f, > 722000-722003 ipl 35 ipl 36 not configured > hme0 at pci1 dev 1 function 1 vendor 0x108e product 0x1001 rev 0x01: address > 08:00:20:9f:8b:30 > nsphy0 at hme0 phy 1: DP83840 10/100 PHY, rev. 1 > hme0: using ivec 3021 for interrupt > vgafb0 at pci1 dev 2 function 0 vendor 0x1002 product 0x4754 rev 0x9a > wsdisplay0 at vgafb0: console (std, sun emulation), using wskbd0 > pciide0 at pci1 dev 3 function 0 vendor 0x1095 product 0x0646 rev 0x03: DMA, > channel 0 configured to native-PCI, channel 1 configured to native-PCI > pciide0: using ivec 1820 for native-PCI interrupt > wd0 at pciide0 channel 0 drive 0: > wd0: 16-sector PIO, LBA, 4125MB, 8448300 sectors > wd0(pciide0:0:0): using PIO mode 4, DMA mode 2 > atapiscsi0 at pciide0 channel 1 drive 0 > scsibus0 at atapiscsi0: 2 targets > cd0 at scsibus0 targ 0 lun 0: SCSI0 > 5/cdrom removable > cd0(pciide0:1:0): using PIO mode 4, DMA mode 2 > ppb1 at pci0 dev 1 function 0 vendor 0x108e product 0x5000 rev 0x11 > pci2 at ppb1 bus 2 > pcons at mainbus0 not configured > No counter-timer -- using %tick at 270MHz as system clock. > rd0: fixed, 6144 blocks > root on rd0a > rootdev=0x500 rrootdev=0x3d00 rawdev=0x3d02 > > 8<--*/ > > I have no problems at all with pretty much the same system. The system is running Xorg with fluxbox, and it works just fine. I have also tried Solaris but that ran a lot slower, in some cases i was waiting 10 minutes for a a window to show up. - Alexander Here is the dmesg with at the bottom the time it took for the command to execute. console is keyboard/display Copyright (c) 1982, 1986, 1989, 1991, 1993 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Copyright (c) 1995-2005 OpenBSD. All rights reserved. http://www.OpenBSD.org OpenBSD 3.7 (GENERIC) #431: Sun Mar 20 14:10:02 MST 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/arch/sparc64/compile/GENERIC total memory = 134217728 avail memory = 110485504 using 819 buffers containing 6709248 bytes of memory bootpath: /[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/[EMAIL PROTECTED],1/[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/[EMAIL PROTECTED],0 mainbus0 (root): Sun Ultra 5/10 UPA/PCI (UltraSPARC-IIi 270MHz) cpu0 at mainbus0: SUNW,UltraSPARC-IIi @ 270 MHz, version 0 FPU cpu0: physical 32K instruction (32 b/l), 16K data (32 b/l), 256K external (64 b/l) psycho0 at mainbus0 addr 0xfffc4000 SUNW,sabre: imp
