Re: OpenBSD as a laptop OS
On 18 Jun, 2010, at 11:38 AM, Peter N. M. Hansteen wrote: The only thing I've pretty much given up on is flash. No big loss since removing the flashplayer plugin means firefox will crash slightly less often and you're spared a lot of the less useful ads. Slightly? I can't think of the last time I had a browser crash that didn't involve Flash... -- Casey Allen Shobe ca...@shobe.info
Re: Mailing list headers
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 did just find that list:misc@openbsd.org appears to work though (d'oh!), although according to the documentation, it's not terribly precise, as it looks for that anywhere in the headers, sent to or from this list. It seems to work well enough for my needs though, sorry for not seeing that before. Cheers, -- Casey Allen Shobe ca...@shobe.info
Mailing list headers
Why do the OpenBSD lists have no List-ID header? With the existing set of headers, it's impossible to filter the mail in gmail and other lame mail clients that don't allow arbitrary headers to be entered. I know, the world doesn't revolve around GMail, much as Google might like that to be the case. But in the interest of those of us who use it, could they please be added? Cheers, -- Casey Allen Shobe ca...@shobe.info
Re: Mailing list headers
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
Re: Why I left OpenBSD
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Samuel Baldwin recursive.for...@gmail.comwrote: Those who taste the de Raadt wrath, however, always run in the end. A friend of mine once incurred his ire by asking the wrong question at the wrong time, and Theo de Raadt hacked his router and remotely remapped his keyboard! hahahahahaha, slander? Hilarious either way. Haha, keyboard remapping abuse! That was the most hilarious part of the whole post, indeed. One time, I E-Mailed Richard Stallman about a fetchmail question, and he hacked into my box and deleted everything not GPL-licensed! Cheers, -- Casey Allen Shobe ca...@shobe.info
Re: Why I left OpenBSD
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 8:28 AM, Dexter Tomisson dexterto...@gmail.comwrote: http://www.trollaxor.com/2010/06/why-i-left-openbsd.html It's always funny when somebody ends up leaving for their own good, that they need to write a lot about it and try to convince many others to agree with their notions. Develop/use whatever you want - there are pros and cons to every open source project out there. You can fault find with Theo, or Stallman, or anyone else. But these individuals don't matter so much as overall project usefulness, licensing/openness, etc. What matters is simply that you find something you feel rewarding to work on. There is absolutely no reason to try to drag others along with you. For someone critical of Theo running other developers off, you sure seem to be trying to do the same thing with your post and by sharing it here. Think before you rant, -- Casey Allen Shobe ca...@shobe.info
Re: pkg_add problems after 4.7 upgrade (source of problem found)
On 30 May, 2010, at 1:55 AM, Denny White wrote: If you're comfortable with it, you could try disabling pf just long enough to see if your ftp works without it. If so you could supply your pf.conf since there have been syntax changes and possibly you have something outdated in it. If you've got good backups you could try doing a fresh install on just one box and see what happens. If the problem goes away you'll know something got screwed up during the upgrades. No pf here - the NAT device is actually an old WatchGuard Firefox outside of my control and choice, but it hasn't been touched in years... I also upgraded my home machine (on a public IP) from 4.6 to 4.7 and did not run into the same problems. I can also try a fresh install of 4.7 on the work network - it won't take long. I'll also do a fresh install of 4.6, to verify that it is something that changed in the release, rather than a network- or machine-specific issue. I've been poking around a little bit since my last E-mail, and have found that using `ftp -A` on OpenBSD 4.7 works, whereas usual `ftp` does not. This seems backwards to me as it seems like if one is going to work, it ought to be passive... I also noticed that the working `ftp` on Debian (from netkit) is a fair bit different from the one on OpenBSD - it's man page implies that it uses active FTP by default, and needs a -p argument for passive. But whether I just do `ftp ftp.openbsd.org` or `ftp -p ftp.openbsd.org ` - from Debian, they both work. I can also manually toggle passive on and off from within netkit-ftp, and either way, I can get a directory listing without problem. I installed tnftp on Debian, and it failed to work in either active or passive mode, so I quickly gave up on that. I also installed wget on one of the OpenBSD machines, and it is able to happily download from FTP sites whether --passive-ftp or --no- passive-ftp is given, and it's nicely verbose about when PASV or PORT are actually used so it's not just a matter of hoping the man page is current. HOWEVER, I did notice one difference watching tcpdump...the clients that work correctly use PASV, the ones that don't use EPSV. Indeed, tnftp on Debian had been clearly telling me that it was trying Extended passive and EPRT, but I didn't know that was anything different from PASV/PORT. So apparently the E___ commands exist for IPv6 compatibility. The tnftp that Debian packages uses EPSV/EPRT per default. It supposedly falls back to PASV/PORT if the server fails to recognize the command, but I don't really know any ancient FTP servers to test with. `ftp` in OpenBSD 4.6 happily used PASV/PORT. In OpenBSD 4.7, `ftp` now uses EPSV/PORT. Strange that it's only a half-migration (an oversight or intentional?), but at least it doesn't break entirely. In theory, an old server should be gracefully handled with nice fallback to PASV/ PORT. However, since the FTP server is not saying 500 OMG WTF IS THAT, the client never falls back, and instead just times out eventually. Apparently our firewall device is too old and doesn't support NAT properly with the new E___ commands, and we're stuck with it until it dies (and then we just get a new version of the same junk). Ugh. Now let's all go read http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/ ipv6mess.html. Unless modern web browsers still haven't implemented EPSV/EPRT, they actually work as they should, because FTP browsing and downloads are never a problem from them on this same network, so I should think this isn't too hard to fix. I wouldn't have the slightest clue how though. In the meanwhile, this should probably be added to http://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade47.html - because this is a surprise that's not very fun to dig around at. Also, it's not really a bug per se, but if FTP times out after 60 seconds for any reason in general, shouldn't pkg_add say something nicer about it than No packages in PKG_PATH? Cheers, -- Casey Allen Shobe ca...@shobe.info
Re: pkg_add problems after 4.7 upgrade (source of problem found)
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 4:26 AM, Casey Allen Shobe ca...@shobe.info wrote: I also upgraded my home machine (on a public IP) from 4.6 to 4.7 and did not run into the same problems. I can also try a fresh install of 4.7 on the work network - it won't take long. I'll also do a fresh install of 4.6, to verify that it is something that changed in the release, rather than a network- or machine-specific issue. Alright, glad I tested this out, because I was wrong about this being a problem that showed up in 4.7 - it is the same in 4.6. I had PKG_PATH set in a .profile on every machine and was using HTTP before - didn't pay attention when I replaced it with a new FTP URL I guess, because I thought I was using FTP before...backups proved me wrong though. Sorry about mistaking the old path, but I guess it's good because had I not thought it to be a regression, I probably wouldn't have looked into it. The rest of the diagnosis should be sound though, I think. On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 8:34 AM, Stuart Henderson s...@spacehopper.orgwrote: [ reply-to set, please honour it (or change it to tech@), don't crosspost between misc and tech. ] Alright, will do - sorry, new to these mailing lists... On the one hand it's useful to know that the network connection is broken, but that's about the only advantage I can see, on the other hand if you're actually trying to fetch files (especially from a *server* behind a broken nat device that's not under your control) it's a real pain. Well, to play devil's advocate a bit, these aren't really servers except in the X11 sense - they're administrative workstations. But one thing I'd like to point out is that the NAT is not actually broken - it just doesn't take RFC2428 into consideration, which is pretty reasonable since that RFC came out in late 1998 and the NAT device we have I think came out the same year, or perhaps the next one. That's also two years after they originally predicted IPv6 becoming widely-used, heh... I'd happily replace it with an OpenBSD machine, but the powers that be won't have that (I work for an international non-profit with control issues that compliments their lack of actual security and best practices nicely). Our site is fine as we operate mostly-independently, but dealing with anyone up the chain is a horrendous experience best avoided. They also spent the money for a lifetime support option, so we *could*, for free, upgrade the software to be much newer and surely supporting EPSV/EPRT, but we don't have access to do that. Yet, that money wasted years ago is excuse for us to never replace the thing unless it sustains hardware failure. I'd be readying my bat...but our nonexistent recovery plan keeps me leery... ;) We mirror distfiles for some ports because of this... I'll be setting up a local mirror once time/bandwidth allow for it, which should be within the week. :) -- Casey Allen Shobe ca...@shobe.info
pkg_add problems after 4.7 upgrade
I upgraded six machines from 4.6 to 4.7 recently, using the CD to do so. I then updated PKG_PATH and tried to upgrade packages. It fails consistently on all six machines, indicating that it can't find anything in $PKG_PATH. So I tried setting PKG_PATH to the main openbsd mirror, with no luck. It also fails when I specify an explicit package path, which is odd because I'm able to access this exact URL from the same machines using ftp or links: # pkg_add -uvvv ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.7/packages/i386/ratpoison-1.4.4p0.tgz Problem finding ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.7/packages/i386/ratpoison-1.4.4p0.tgz No packages available in the PKG_PATH How can I resolve this or figure out more about what's going wrong? The -vvv options, per the man page, don't seem to do anything useful in this case. Cheers, -- Casey Allen Shobe ca...@shobe.info
Re: pkg_add problems after 4.7 upgrade
I've tried a few mirrors with the same results - this was the last one I tried: export PKG_PATH=ftp://obsd.cec.mtu.edu/pub/OpenBSD/4.7/packages/i386/ ...or as I was trying last as indicated below: export PKG_PATH=ftp://openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.7/packages/i386/ On 29 May, 2010, at 4:54 PM, Jacob Meuser wrote: On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 01:45:13PM -0400, Casey Allen Shobe wrote: I upgraded six machines from 4.6 to 4.7 recently, using the CD to do so. I then updated PKG_PATH and tried to upgrade packages. It fails consistently on all six machines, indicating that it can't find anything in $PKG_PATH. So I tried setting PKG_PATH to the main openbsd mirror, with no luck. It also fails when I specify an explicit package path, which is odd because I'm able to access this exact URL from the same machines using ftp or links: # pkg_add -uvvv ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.7/packages/i386/ratpoison-1.4.4p0.tgz Problem finding ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.7/packages/i386/ratpoison-1.4.4p0.tgz No packages available in the PKG_PATH How can I resolve this or figure out more about what's going wrong? The -vvv options, per the man page, don't seem to do anything useful in this case. a piece of info is missing here: what do you have PKG_PATH set to, exactly? -- jake...@sdf.lonestar.org SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org
Re: pkg_add problems after 4.7 upgrade
On 29 May, 2010, at 9:19 PM, Jacob Meuser wrote: On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 08:57:28PM -0400, Casey Allen Shobe wrote: I've tried a few mirrors with the same results - this was the last one I tried: export PKG_PATH=ftp://obsd.cec.mtu.edu/pub/OpenBSD/4.7/packages/i386/ ...or as I was trying last as indicated below: export PKG_PATH=ftp://openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.7/packages/i386/ ^^ of course that one won't work ... maybe that's a typo but that's kinda the point. Sorry, what's the typo? Why won't it work? since you're using ftp, 'ftp $PKG_PATH' should put you in the right directory. does it? Well, I tried `links $PKG_PATH ` before - that worked. But with `ftp $PKG_PATH`, it appears to log in correctly, but ls never returns anything. This seems to happen with ANY ftp server actually (just tried a bunch), and is odd because I did use the commandline ftp utility frequently on 4.6 without any issue... So the problem lies with the 'ftp' utility? Cheers, -- Casey Allen Shobe ca...@shobe.info
Re: pkg_add problems after 4.7 upgrade
On 30 May, 2010, at 12:15 AM, Denny White wrote: Not really sure what happened with ftp://obsd.cec.mtu.edu/pub/OpenBSD/4.7/packages/i386/ since it worked fine for me including 'ls'. As for the 2nd one you tried which didn't work: ftp://openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.7/packages/i386/ Try this: ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.7/packages/i386/ Well, I've found that using an HTTP mirror works. However, this is concerning because all of these machines were able to use FTP properly before, some Debian machines on the same network can use FTP mirrors correctly (plus `ftp` to the same OpenBSD mirrors works from Debian), and the links browser on the OpenBSD machines seems to do FTP correctly too. One way or the other, the 'ftp' utility seems to have gotten broken since 4.6. I'd hazard to guess that it might not be supporting passive FTP anymore, since active FTP does not work from the network and this is reminiscent of what would happen if I tried using active FTP from behind a firewall in the past... I've worked around the immediate problem with HTTP for now...but is there any more useful information that I can provide from my end? Cheers, -- Casey Allen Shobe ca...@shobe.info
GDM times out waiting for X11 startup on slow machines (and an OpenBSD GDM theme!)
Hello, I recently set up a couple Pentium MMX 233 machines with OpenBSD 4.5 for the purpose of running gdm, ratpoison, vncviewer, rdesktop, and xterm. I found gdm to be the best option for a login manager, both because it loads quite fast and is very configurable (I've included below an OpenBSD theme I created for it). However, by default, it is impossible to run on hardware this slow. In order to keep gdm from killing itself timing out waiting for X to start, I found I needed to add the following in /etc/X11/gdm/custom.conf, within the [daemon] section: GdmXserverTimeout=60 Without that, gdm will sometimes successfully launch if I load it by hand after already starting and stopping X, but never the first time, never on boot, and not reliably even when circumstances are favorable. Here is a GDM theme for OpenBSD. Unpack it into /usr/local/share/gdm/themes. I have only tried it using 1024x768 screen resolution - so testing on other monitor sizes would be appreciated! http://casey.shobe.info/software/gdm-theme-openbsd-0.1.tar.gz Cheers, -- Casey Allen Shobe ca...@shobe.info
Re: GDM times out waiting for X11 startup on slow machines (and an OpenBSD GDM theme!)
On Apr 13, 2010, at 3:27 PM, Christiano F. Haesbaert wrote: Why not xdm ? Considering gdm is much much much heavier. XDM does not have as configurable of an interface, at least of what I know of it (would be happy to learn otherwise though, as GDM depends on a lot of useless junk). Wanted something pleasing to users. It's mostly used by Windows admins to access Windows machines. GDM does not really load any noticeably slower than XDM. It's simply that X11 takes a little bit to start and show up with the grey X11 default background (btw is that changeable? It makes my LCD flicker horribly). Then either XDM or GDM kick in after perhaps 3 seconds of that. Since it wasn't horribly slower (as KDM was), and I was able to figure out how to configure it to load ratpoison by default faster, that's what I used. I may fiddle more around with XDM now that there is a working/ configured login manager in place. Cheers, -- Casey Allen Shobe ca...@shobe.info
