Re: Powered by obsd stickers and other stuff
It is: http://inigo.homeunix.net/art/art.tgz I think it's /files/art/art.tgz ? In any case - those are impressive pics. Would it be possible to provide the same ones but in 1680x1050? I could put great use to those on multiple computers running OpenBSD, though wouldn't want to do any injustice to them by modifying (poorly at that) them attempting to get a clean resize that's not distorted. Sean -- PGP/GnuPG Public Key: http://mpec.net/gsd.asc
Re: google team and the DIY way of life
Why? (...why bother sending that to this list? fyi: this isn't a google list.) Just curious, not intending to spark anything negative. On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 10:31:11AM +0100, xavier brinon wrote: from the Official Google Blog Posted by Reza Behforooz, Software Engineer In my first month at Google, I complained to a friend on the Gmail team about a couple of small things that I disliked about Gmail. I expected him to point me to the bug database. But he told me to fix it myself, pointing me to a document on how to bring up the Gmail development environment on my workstation. The next day my code was reviewed by Gmail engineers, and then I submitted it. A week later, my change was live. I was amazed by the freedom to work across teams, the ability to check in code to another project, the trust in engineers to work on the right thing, and the excitement and speed of getting things done for our users. Engineers across our offices (and across projects) have access to the same code; I didn't have to ask for anyone's permission to work on this. I know, it's obvious that it's works if you share your code and let others submit their diffs. Just a reminder... See Google ? they shut up and code !
Re: google team and the DIY way of life
On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 11:16:51AM -0600, Jacob Yocom-Piatt wrote: Nick Guenther wrote: On Nov 10, 2007 5:00 AM, Sean Darby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 10:31:11AM +0100, xavier brinon wrote: from the Official Google Blog Posted by Reza Behforooz, Software Engineer In my first month at Google, I complained to a friend on the Gmail team about a couple of small things that I disliked about Gmail. I expected him to point me to the bug database. But he told me to fix it myself, pointing me to a document on how to bring up the Gmail development environment on my workstation. I know, it's obvious that it's works if you share your code and let others submit their diffs. Just a reminder... See Google ? they shut up and code ! Why? (...why bother sending that to this list? fyi: this isn't a google list.) Just curious, not intending to spark anything negative. Because Google Shuts Up And Codes. Of course, this is off the googlepropaganda, so we don't know how much we can trust it... this is likely some kind of effort on part of google or an independent effort on part of one of its employees to cast google in a better light here after that moron contacted theo through misc. it's nice to see that kind of principle in place at google but is mostly irrelevant outside the context of baiting devs to work for google ;). at least google is trying to hire from the non-MS pool so their software is not written like shite. Good point. If anybody from the OpenBSD team ever works for Google, it will certainly be a very wise move on behalf of Google for hiring them.
Re: mutt + reply-to
Thank you! :^) So would I do this: 1. cd /etc/mail/ 2. cp submit.cf openbsd-submit.cf 3. ...add this to openbsd-submit.cf: define(`confCT_FILE', `-o MAIL_SETTINGS_DIR`'trusted-users')dnl FEATURE(`use_ct_file')dnl 4. make openbsd-submit.cf (while in /etc/mail/) 5. cp openbsd-submit.cf sendmail.cf (while in /etc/mail/) (6. ...redo the steps when I upgrade to OpenBSD 4.2.) I hope I'm not leaving anything out.
Re: mutt + reply-to
I went ahead and made a backup of /etc/mail/submit.cf and copied it into (replacing) /etc/mail/submit.cf. Correction: I copied the newly created openbsd-submit.cf into/replacing /etc/mail/submit.cf.
Re: mutt + reply-to
Hi, Thank you for correcting me. I did as you noted, placed those lines in openbsd-submit.mc (at the bottom). Here's the 'make' step, from /usr/share/sendmail/cf/, it had an error: $ sudo make openbsd-submit.cf rm -f openbsd-submit.cf ( cd /usr/share/sendmail/cf /usr/bin/m4 /usr/share/sendmail/cf/../m4/cf.m4 op enbsd-submit.mc /usr/share/sendmail/cf/openbsd-submit.cf ) *** ERROR: FEATURE() should be before MAILER() echo ### openbsd-submit.mc ### openbsd-submit.cf sed -e 's/^/# /' /usr/share/sendmail/cf/openbsd-submit.mc openbsd-submit.cf chmod 444 openbsd-submit.cf $ ls openbsd-submit. openbsd-submit.cf openbsd-submit.mc Perhaps the error was because there wasn't an openbsd-submit.cf to 'rm' in the first place? I'm not sure. Either way, it created it still, from the 'ls'. I went ahead and made a backup of /etc/mail/submit.cf and copied it into (replacing) /etc/mail/submit.cf. Should I be concerned about that error that popped up on the 'make' command above? On 11/3/07, Stuart Henderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2007/11/03 05:59, Sean Darby wrote: 1. cd /etc/mail/ You are confused between /etc/mail (dir holding config files used by sendmail) and /usr/share/sendmail/cf (dir holding files used to *build* these config files). cd /usr/share/sendmail/cf copy submit.mc to openbsd-submit.mc and add these lines: define(`confCT_FILE', `-o MAIL_SETTINGS_DIR`'trusted-users')dnl FEATURE(`use_ct_file')dnl type 'make openbsd-submit.cf' and copy the resulting file to /etc/mail/submit.cf (not sendmail.cf as I originally wrote; typo, sorry and thanks ajacoutot for pointing it out). -- Phone: 217.766.1312
mutt + reply-to
Hello, I realize this isn't directly OpenBSD-related, though believe I came across a message in misc a while back that discussed including a reply-to field in mutt. Lately I have been having difficulty getting my mutt mail to successfully deliver to several addresses. Google mail doesn't accept it, Yahoo mail automatically puts it in the spam/bulk folder. I checked the full headers and found: X-Authentication-Warning: (myhostname): sean set sender to (alternateaddress) using -f My guess is due to that warning other accounts block or spamify the email upon delivery, not really sure. In any case, maybe I could fix that by just placing my actual account email address in the set from field of the .muttrc and put my alternate address in some type of reply to field. I don't know if that would solve the so-called spam problem though. It'd be nice if the emails I send to family, friends, colleagues, are successfully delivered. Thank you for any advice on this! Sean
mutt + reply-to
Hello, I realize this isn't directly OpenBSD-related, though believe I came across a message in misc a while back that discussed including a reply-to field in mutt. Lately I have been having difficulty getting my mutt mail to successfully deliver to several addresses. Google mail doesn't accept it, Yahoo mail automatically puts it in the spam/bulk folder. I checked the full headers and found: X-Authentication-Warning: (myhostname): sean set sender to (alternateaddress) using -f My guess is due to that warning other accounts block or spamify the email upon delivery, not really sure. In any case, maybe I could fix that by just placing my actual account email address in the set from field of the .muttrc and put my alternate address in some type of reply to field. I don't know if that would solve the so-called spam problem though. It'd be nice if the emails I send to family, friends, colleagues, are successfully delivered. Thank you for any advice on this! Sean -- PGP/GnuPG Public Key: http://mpec.net/gsd.asc
Re: mutt + reply-to
Hi Stuart, Thank you very much for the info! I appreciate it a lot. I've now updated my /etc/mail/trusted-users file with my [EMAIL PROTECTED] address (which is what I currently have in my from: field in my muttrc). Regarding the link you provided (on cvs.openbsd.org...) How would I use that? (Sorry, I'm not a computer guru and that page was a little confusing for me.) Thanks! Sean On 11/2/07, Stuart Henderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2007/11/02 17:38, Sean Darby wrote: I checked the full headers and found: X-Authentication-Warning: (myhostname): sean set sender to (alternateaddress) using -f this can be fixed with something like http://cvs.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/query-pr-wrapper?full=yesnumbers=4951 (and add yourself to /etc/mail/trusted-users) My guess is due to that warning other accounts block or spamify the email upon delivery, not really sure. Divining spam filtering at large sites is a black art.
Re: mutt + reply-to
Hi Okan, Thank you for the info - very much appreciated. I'm still running OpenBSD 4.1, my mutt is at 1.4.2.2i (2006-07-14). Is there a way to get mutt 1.5.15+ while still on 4.1? (Hopefully without messing with any current emails/settings or 4.1settings.) I'm not a pro with computers but always open to reading up on necessary things. What can I find out about that smtp_url variable? (How to use it or similar.) Thank you very much! Sean On 11/2/07, Okan Demirmen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri 2007.11.02 at 22:50 +, Stuart Henderson wrote: On 2007/11/02 17:38, Sean Darby wrote: I checked the full headers and found: X-Authentication-Warning: (myhostname): sean set sender to (alternateaddress) using -f this can be fixed with something like http://cvs.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/query-pr-wrapper?full=yesnumbers=4951 (and add yourself to /etc/mail/trusted-users) or use the relatively new smtp_url variable (mutt 1.5.15+)
Re: mutt + reply-to
er, no. /usr/share/sendmail/README: names of users that will be ``trusted'', that is, able to set their envelope from address using -f without generating a warning message. In other words, you list your local Unix user in the file, not an email address. DS Okay. My local unix username is sean... I'll remove the email address and plug sean in place of it. Thanks for correcting me on that.
OpenBSD replacement for GnuPG
Hi, Is there an alternative PGP or OpenPGP-like program available other than PGP or GnuPG/GPG? Is there something along lines of a BSD-PG-type program (using BSD licensing/copyright and basically non-GNU)? Given the excellency OpenBSD has in the world of security, it would seem like the perfect thing to implement a *BSD* Privacy Guard, and the best place for it to come from would be the OpenBSD developers' community. I used to use PGP... have moved to GPG... would like to use a BSD-based encryption/decryption and signing/verifying application that has the same or similar functions (just not GNU-based). Thanks. Sean -- Public Key: http://mpec.net/gsd.asc
Re: OpenBSD replacement for GnuPG
I should add... there seems to be a NetBSD variant, BPG, though I am not sure of the reliability of that (does anyone here use it?). If there might be an OpenBSD-based program of this general type, I would much prefer using that over NetBSD's or any other. Thanks! On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 06:31:53PM -0500, Sean Darby wrote: Hi, Is there an alternative PGP or OpenPGP-like program available other than PGP or GnuPG/GPG? Is there something along lines of a BSD-PG-type program (using BSD licensing/copyright and basically non-GNU)? Given the excellency OpenBSD has in the world of security, it would seem like the perfect thing to implement a *BSD* Privacy Guard, and the best place for it to come from would be the OpenBSD developers' community. I used to use PGP... have moved to GPG... would like to use a BSD-based encryption/decryption and signing/verifying application that has the same or similar functions (just not GNU-based). Thanks. Sean -- Public Key: http://mpec.net/gsd.asc -- Gabriel Sean Darby Phone: 217.766.1312 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP/GnuPG Public Key: http://mpec.net/gsd.asc
Re: The Name: UNIX
Is OpenBSD UNIX, Unix, unix, unix-like, or ham sandwich on rye? ECHO Echo echo (echo-like)... In response to that, one person answered the question with a question. Does it matter? If answering a question with a question, it'd help to provide a thought-provoking (worthwhile) question in response. One could say, yes, of course it matters; or, it doesn't matter at all. To each there's a solid argument or counter, but does it matter? is a bit dry if you're going to just leave it at that. Reflect on it, please, else don't bother responding. I'm surprised that someone else found my question on UNIX and unix-like/etc. terminology disambiguation to be the first they've heard of it. The only distinction I refer to is that of UNIX and everything else (which includes, but is not limited to, terms like unix-like). Jon R.'s reply, including the tess2.uspto.gov link, was very helpful. I wasn't aware of U.S. Trademark law details and that was basically what my curiosity all narrowed down to. I suppose there is a truth in any potential confusion between Unix (etc.) and UNIX not being a concern of one random person (me) on this planet but others as well. In truth, it doesn't matter. In truth, it does matter. It's how each person chooses to see it. Right? Hmm... Well, the however bit is: it's also how the creators of one particular OS see it, and in this case - my question regards OpenBSD creator's thoughts. I would appreciate hearing from Theo de Raadt (albeit this is a trivial topic) his take on this subject. UNIX or unix-like or simply Unix (etc., it goes on), or just, I don't give a shit, just call it what you want, as long as you call it OpenBSD... That's my take on it, personally - so long as we give the respect of BSD and of course *Open*BSD. All of this play on names can be exhausting but we have to remember that there is a lot of meaning behind a name and potentially a lot of power in something so simple as just a name. I found Doug T.'s reply most helpful (thank you Doug)... Jon R.'s reply was very helpful too, I appreciate it. My intent was to seek enlightenment on proper UNIX association. Taking something like the name of a system like this and trying to narrow down an explanation, put in significant rhyme and reason behind it, and compress it down to a brief or concise message is, perhaps, nigh impossible. The explanation provided was quite helpful - notably the reference to RadioShack. The best answer I've seen, yet, was in Doug's mention of OpenBSD and UNIX: a direct descendant but it can't legally call itself UNIX; and calling itself UNIX would be seen (IMHO) as a branding issue infringing on Trade Mark. So are all the users going to call it this or that? Who cares right? Well, somebody cares. ;) Me? I don't lol... I'm simply curious as to some disambiguation between the two (UNIX and unix-like/etc.). I suppose the people that might really care would be those who have directly and personally experienced the side-effects of the lawsuit(s). I don't know (I don't care, simply because any such lawsuit has not directly altered my perspective), I'm just curious to know and to learn about these things. ;) Regarding the comment on chest-thumping over the best OS... I completely agree. If not for the ugly competition amongst the different systems, perhaps the leaders of the systems would have the capacity (or heart) to work together, even to a minimal degree, with a collaborative effort towards producing a non-prejudiced presentation looking at each system/service and how an end-user might put use to it. We know there's a blatant counter-argument, though despite it not being worth their time it would certainly be worth the time of the end-user to see the results of such a presentation. Take 4.2's cover art - the race of OSs - OpenBSD appears to be the tortoise/turtle rather than the hare/rabbit. Slow but steady wins the race. It seems to me like OpenBSD isn't even in the race but, rather, is taking Frost's road less traveled while the other systems get all finangled in a rat race. That's where you begin to see qualitative difference between what might be UNIX and unix-like - in one perspective - if bothering with looking at it in some way beyond just a name. It's clearly not just a name, and yet a distinction can be made by just that... the name. Use a Kleenex or a tissue, as long as it gets the job done, right? :) Or as long as you're happy with it. I use OpenBSD. I say it's Unix. I'm happy with it. Though that's not all that matters... being informed of disambiguations in something so supposedly trivial as proper titles is enlightening even if only to a small extent. Thank you for enlightening me :-p (to those who kindly provide it). The rude prigs, well, they can go on with their antics, in the mean time others will be considering how even the simple things in life can be fulfilling. -Sean -- Public Key: http://mpec.net/gsd.asc
Re: The Name: UNIX
Does OpenBSD = UNIX? Or, does OpenBSD = Unix? (or unix or unix-like or etc.)? my mother recently called it that Unisex thing you like, though am not sure of the capitalization :) mike I like that explanation best. :) -- Public Key: http://mpec.net/gsd.asc
The Name: UNIX
Hi all... In response to the recent easter egg in 4.2's song, I asked about some possible meaning behind the 11 1010101 bit and only ended up more confused as a result of what one individual provided in their replies. Could anybody enlighten me on proper UNIX association... here are the messages... In response to theraven's speculation over the song at: http://slashdot.org/~TheRaven64/journal/184027 me: Perhaps: Regarding ...these are ! and U... As in not equal to proprietary (UNIX vs unix/unix-like) Or in other words, free theraven: Could be, but considering the fact that GNU's Not UNIX, and the song is fairly anti-GNU in places, I'd guess not. Especially since OpenBSD is UNIX, it just isn't UNIX(TM). me: Okay... I didn't know OpenBSD was UNIX. I thought OpenBSD was Unix; and that UNIX was a registered trademark of The Open Group, with systems like UNIX 98 and UNIX 03. My bad. The GNU's Not Unix GNU bit makes sense, though I was simply referring to the difference between $ and free. I was under the impression that UNIX regarded $ and Unix = free. Oh well, no biggy. :-p theraven: UNIX was an operating system released by ATT in the late '70s. Some guys at Berkeley added a load of stuff to it, and called their version the Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD). Since it was based on the ATT code, you needed a license from ATT to use it. They gradually replaced the ATT code with their own, and in 4.2BSD-lite, there was no ATT code, allowing the whole system to be distributed for free (and Free). OpenBSD is based on 4.2BSD-lite, and so contains no original UNIX code, but can trace its evolution back to the original UNIX. The Open Group owns the UNIX trademark (although they are very careful not to test it in court, where it would probably be determined to be a generic term and not subject to trademarks). They can say that something is UNIX(tm) or not; all you have to do is pass a conformance test and pay them a large heap of money. OpenBSD is derived from the original UNIX sources, but has not passed this conformance testing and paid TOG a heap of money, so it is not UNIX(tm). The alternate capitalisation, Unix, is not very common. A few proprietary UNIXes used it, but none of the well-known ones. For a bit more history, take a look at the UNIX timeline [levenez.com]. That's it... now at this point I just give up (when someone refers me to that UNIX timeline, which I've seen and read before and honestly that page doesn't answer my question, so their responses really didn't help any at all.) I'm positive my original guess is wrong (how !U is not propietary) but that's not the point anymore... it's this: Does OpenBSD = UNIX? Or, does OpenBSD = Unix? (or unix or unix-like or etc.)? I didn't need theraven giving me some preschool explanation UNIX was an operating system released by ATT in the late '70s..eventually BSD-lite (etc.), I was looking for a simple and direct response - hopeful for explanation *directly related* to that direct response - not a history lesson. I've studied the history of UNIX and unix-like branches, at least on a basic level, this is simply a question of one specific system (OpenBSD) and proper use of terminology (aka UNIX the trademark, all caps, title), not a question of generic history of the system concept in such an over-generalized and poorly explained fashion as what theraven provided. Thank you for you help in clearing me of my confuzzlement! Sean P.S.- Someone please tell me theraven's, The alternate capitalisation, Unix, is not very common. is incorrect! I see Unix EVERY day, regardless of if propietary or free. Their statement, or claim, in that quote is starting to get into ridiculous speculations as pertaining to general usage of terms in everyday English language and falling off topic of what it is *specifically* in reference to. If I'm wrong in the Unix bit, oh well - no biggy - but still am confused about OpenBSD = UNIX or Unix or Unix-like or unix-like or unix or ham sandwich on rye. Thanks! -- Public Key: http://mpec.net/gsd.asc
Re: 4.2 song
Perhaps: Regarding ...these are ! and U... As in not equal to proprietary (UNIX=$? unix=free?) Or in other words, free (I'm a newbie in the Unix-world so my apologies if I'm confusing free vs $ with UNIX vs unix/unix-like.) [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type APPLICATION/DEFANGED which had a name of Message 367.21814DEFANGED-eml]
Re: Thank you developers... 4.2 arrived in the mail today
On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 03:20:27PM -0600, Bob Beck wrote: Okay, well fresh from an install on my Sun X2100M2 my daughter wanted to check it out http://balius.com/openbsd.4.2.jpg Ok, that's a cool picture. Thanks daniel :) -Bob I second that, definitely a cool picture! :)
Instant Messenger (CLI-based multi-protocol)
Hi, I have been wanting to switch from a GUI meta-type chat (uses Yahoo, AIM, etc.) to terminal/CLI-based. I came across centericq (apparently it works with multiple protocols) though when trying to install it I get... $ sudo make === centericq-4.9.11p0 is marked as broken: requires update but new version has issues. I'm not a computer guru... don't really know how to resolve that issue. I'm running OpenBSD 4.1 and that install attempt was straight out of 4.1's unaltered ports tree. ( /usr/ports/net/centericq ) I'm wondering if I have somehow messed up my ports (not sure how, I set them up exactly as instructed) :( or perhaps the actual application in the 4.1 ports just comes like that, broken. I hope not. Is there a better program out there somewhere that is CLI-based for using chat with Yahoo, AIM, MSN, ICQ, IRC, and Jabber? (Or is there a way to get centericq to install/work?) Better yet... one with encryption options? Thank you very much for your help! Sean
Instant Messenger (CLI-based multi-protocol)
I'm not sure if my message (below) went through, it didn't seem to post. Attempting again. Sorry if duplicated. Subject: Instant Messenger (CLI-based multi-protocol) Hi, I have been wanting to switch from a GUI meta-type chat (uses Yahoo, AIM, etc.) to terminal/CLI-based. I came across centericq (apparently it works with multiple protocols) though when trying to install it I get... $ sudo make === centericq-4.9.11p0 is marked as broken: requires update but new version has issues. I'm not a computer guru... don't really know how to resolve that issue. I'm running OpenBSD 4.1 and that install attempt was straight out of 4.1's unaltered ports tree. ( /usr/ports/net/centericq ) I'm wondering if I have somehow messed up my ports (not sure how, I set them up exactly as instructed) :( or perhaps the actual application in the 4.1 ports just comes like that, broken. I hope not. Is there a better program out there somewhere that is CLI-based for using chat with Yahoo, AIM, MSN, ICQ, IRC, and Jabber? (Or is there a way to get centericq to install/work?) Better yet... one with encryption options? Thank you very much for your help! Sean
Re: Microsoft gets the Most Secure Operating Systems award
Many people are in agreement over this. Is it possible for someone in charge of the list to either ban or somehow stop The One [EMAIL PROTECTED] from continuing this particular thread/subject? Thank you! On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 11:36:34AM +0800, Lars Hansson wrote: On 9/20/07, The One [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry but I am just disagreed with Theo saying that OS X is buggy and insecure. Who gives a shit? This tread is more then FIVE months old and didnt even belong here in the first place. Just stop. --- Lars Hansson -- http://mpec.net/gsd.asc
Re: 1440x900 resolution problem
I'm no pro, and anyone please correct me if I'm wrong, but this might work... in xorg.conf under section monitor... paste this before endsection: Modeline1440x900 134.52 1440 1536 1688 1936 900 901 904 939 Modeline1440x900 132.71 1440 1536 1688 1936 900 901 904 939 Modeline1440x900 130.75 1440 1536 1688 1936 900 901 904 938 up above it where you have horiz vert, you might try: HorizSync31-81 VertRefresh 56-76 ...or maybe... HorizSync 30-92 (I might be off on that) VertRefresh 60-170 (I might be off on that too) And in section screen under subsection display you might want to update to something like... SubSection Display Depth 16 Modes 1440x900 1280x960 1366x768 1280x800 1152x864 1280x768 1024x768 1280x600 1024x600 800x600 768x576 640x480 EndSubSection SubSection Display Depth 24 Modes 1440x900 1280x960 1366x768 1280x800 1152x864 1280x768 1024x768 1280x600 1024x600 800x600 768x576 640x480 EndSubSection SubSection Display Depth 8 Modes 1440x900 1280x960 1366x768 1280x800 1152x864 1280x768 1024x768 1280x600 1024x600 800x600 768x576 640x480 EndSubSection Again, apologies in advance if my inexperience has provided incorrect information. I've adjusted my 1680x1050 resolution settings similarly to that above and it worked. Though it might be different for you depending on what all you are using, I'm not sure. -Sean On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 09:44:14PM +0300, Marius ROMAN wrote: Hi misc, I can't get the 1440x900 resolution on my Samsung 940BW flat panel screen to work. I searched the lists but found nothing that could help me. Xorg.0.log says something like this : (II) ATI(0): Not using mode 1440x900 (no mode of this name) Using gtf (gtf 1440 900 60) I have added : Modeline 1440x900_60.00 106.47 1440 1520 1672 1904 900 901 904 932 -HSync +Vsync to the Monitor section on xorg.conf. Any ideas ? /var/log/Xorg.0.log = (--) checkDevMem: using aperture driver /dev/xf86 (--) Using wscons driver on /dev/ttyC4 in pcvt compatibility mode (version 3.32) (WW) xf86AcquireGART: AGPIOC_ACQUIRE failed (Device not configured) (WW) GARTInit: AGPIOC_INFO failed (Device not configured) X Window System Version 6.9.0 (for OpenBSD) Release Date: 21 December 2005 X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0, Release 6.9 Build Operating System: OpenBSD 4.1 i386 [ELF] Current Operating System: OpenBSD localhost 4.1 GENERIC#1450 i386 Build Date: 07 March 2007 Before reporting problems, check http://wiki.X.Org to make sure that you have the latest version. Module Loader present Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default setting, (++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational, (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown. (==) Log file: /var/log/Xorg.0.log, Time: Tue Sep 18 21:14:49 2007 (==) Using config file: /etc/X11/xorg.conf (==) ServerLayout X.org Configured (**) |--Screen Screen0 (0) (**) | |--Monitor Monitor0 (**) | |--Device Card0 (**) |--Input Device Mouse0 (**) |--Input Device Keyboard0 (**) FontPath set to /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/misc/,/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/TTF/,/usr/X11R6/lib/ X11/fonts/Type1/,/usr/X11R6/lib/X11 /fonts/CID/,/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi/,/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi/ (**) RgbPath set to /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/rgb (**) ModulePath set to /usr/X11R6/lib/modules (II) Module ABI versions: X.Org ANSI C Emulation: 0.2 X.Org Video Driver: 0.8 X.Org XInput driver : 0.5 X.Org Server Extension : 0.2 X.Org Font Renderer : 0.4 (II) Loader running on openbsd (II) LoadModule: bitmap (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/fonts/libbitmap.so (II) Module bitmap: vendor=X.Org Foundation compiled for 6.9.0, module version = 1.0.0 Module class: X.Org Font Renderer ABI class: X.Org Font Renderer, version 0.4 (II) Loading font Bitmap (II) LoadModule: pcidata (II) Loading /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/libpcidata.so (II) Module pcidata: vendor=X.Org Foundation compiled for 6.9.0, module version = 1.0.0 ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 0.8 (II) PCI: PCI scan (all values are in hex) (II) PCI: 00:00:0: chip 1166,0009 card , rev 06 class 06,00,00 hdr 80 (II) PCI: 00:00:1: chip 1166,0009 card , rev 06 class 06,00,00 hdr 80 (II) PCI: 00:02:0: chip 8086,1229 card 1028,009b rev 08 class 02,00,00 hdr 00 (II) PCI: 00:06:0: chip 125d,1969 card 125d, rev 01 class 04,01,00 hdr 00 (II) PCI: 00:0e:0: chip 1002,4752 card 1028,00ce rev 27 class 03,00,00 hdr 00 (II) PCI: 00:0f:0: chip 1166,0200 card 1166,0200 rev 50 class 06,01,00 hdr 80 (II) PCI: 00:0f:1: chip 1166,0211 card , rev 00 class 01,01,8a hdr 80 (II) PCI: 00:0f:2: chip 1166,0220 card 1166,0220 rev 04 class 0c,03,10 hdr 80 (II) PCI: 01:02:0: chip 9005,00cf card 1028,00ce rev 01 class 01,00,00 hdr 80 (II) PCI: 01:02:1: chip
Thank You OpenBSD
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello fellows from the OpenBSD community, I just wanted to stop and smell the roses. I occasionally play around with other systems, of the Unix variety and, for the sake of seeing things through the looking glass, taking an outside perspective, the occasional logging into MS Windows. The use of MS Windows and so many Linux systems definitely puts me into perspective. So much of it is, for lack of a better word, crap. I suppose you can say I'm still a lot like a Linux guy except I have kissed girls. ;) I focus on the glass being half full rather than half empty (love Unix more than hate MS Windows). I'm simply writing this message to say that I am thankful for OpenBSD. Of the various systems we have to choose from - a few wonderful and powerful ones and many that are frightening and senseless - it helps to remind oneself of things like, secure by default and... Free, Functional, and Secure. Security was the original reason for my change to OpenBSD but I have since discovered there is so much more than that. There are so many features, one can quickly become overwhelmed. It shocked me to discover all of the supported architectures/platforms. Use of PF is, simply putting it: wow! And OpenSSH... how much better can it get?! It just keeps getting better! What else is there? A lot! I don't even know all of the greatness in it. (Thought I'd be glad to be enlightened of even more tasty features.) I'm learning that it seems pointless to be shocked at the amazing features: for OpenBSD has established a higher standard than the rest. These high standards are only to be expected, and that's certainly something to be thankful for. I'm no programmer but can tell that this system has the famously claimed high quality code. No doubt about it. I'm just an average guy who is working on the final stages of his doctorate in music. It feels good to know that I'm running a system that I can fully trust and depend on. With the reputation of the system and if that continues, I will certainly continue to use OpenBSD throughout my entire career on at least one of my computers. Going back to those three words, I am honored to use a system that is secure, functional and *free*! It's hard to say which of the three I like having more, I don't think I could do without any of them. Was it Benjamin Franklin who said this general message? They that can give up liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Question: Is it true there was a developer's comment line in the Linux kernel that said, Does this belong here? Thank you OpenBSD. - -- Gabriel Sean Darby Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFG7Gn6TyBbgn+aIvwRAkvbAKC6RtJn1Mot1ilxfT5cJ0olTsJj5QCfdf/t sfV7BJd9YNU9pKm+RVGpeeU= =1Plq -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Questions: Upgrade + Port Tree
Thank you to all for the excellent input. I'm now officially upgraded. It feels good, nice and... fresh! I've started reading/learning about CVS. Again, thank you all! Sean Joachim Schipper wrote: On Sun, Aug 26, 2007 at 04:17:57PM -0500, Sean Darby wrote: 1. Would it be possible to address the issue of new port tree in some more detail after system upgrade in the FAQ? I suppose it would be, but you're the first to ask this. (Somewhat surprisingly.) I have followed the steps provided on the site's FAQ for upgrading my system (I have 4.0 now, going to 4.1). (...) I will follow the provided steps for the upgrade including the final steps (upgrading /etc and individual packages). I figured that if I'll be making any possible manual upgrades on packages after the system is upgraded, I might as well up the ports too. I presently have the default /usr/ports/* that comes with 4.0, I'd like to up that to the /usr/ports/* that comes with 4.1. What would be a safe process in doing that? The fastest solution is to just use `cvs up'. (Or cvs -qd your_favourite_anoncvs_mirror up -P /usr/ports, as the case may be.) The easiest solution is probably to delete your ports tree and untar ports.tar.gz from 4.1. I'm aware of individual/manual updates of packages, as with pkg_add -u (app), though am aiming for updating/upgrading the entire port tree structure (not download everything, just the tree that points me in the right direction within which the potentially new versions of apps would be available in 4.1). I see in the site's FAQ 15.3.2, Fetching the ports tree, basics like: $ ftp ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.1/ports.tar.gz However, the basic warning, Before continuing, you must read the section about NOT mixing up your OpenBSD system and ports tree. ...leads to the section talking about crazy errors (doesn't really help much beyond linking back onto itself). The important part to remember is that after a system upgrade, none of your ports is guaranteed to work until you upgrade them (although OpenBSD goes to great lengths to make sure they do keep working, and pretty much anything that does not interact directly with the kernel keeps working - things like pfstat and OpenAFS might break). In particular, just having a 4.0 port installed on the system should not be a problem. On the other hand, trying to install 4.0 ports on a 4.1 system, or the other way around, can lead to `weird problems'. This is what is meant by `mixing up your OpenBSD system and ports tree', and since quite a few people try to do so (`I want that -current port, so let's update the ports tree on my -stable system and install it - hey, it doesn't work!'), the FAQ makes an effort to make sure people `get this'. My usual upgrade involves updating the base system, rebooting, pkg_add -ui, and then updating whatever else I need (/usr/src, /usr/ports, ...). Joachim
Questions: Upgrade + Port Tree
Thank you in advance for you input on this. I have some questions pertaining to getting the new ports after an upgrade, though first perhaps this would be fitting since those managing OpenBSD's FAQ pages on the website might receive this: 1. Would it be possible to address the issue of new port tree in some more detail after system upgrade in the FAQ? I have followed the steps provided on the site's FAQ for upgrading my system (I have 4.0 now, going to 4.1). I created a CD for the upgrade (ports excluded). I will follow the provided steps for the upgrade including the final steps (upgrading /etc and individual packages). I figured that if I'll be making any possible manual upgrades on packages after the system is upgraded, I might as well up the ports too. I presently have the default /usr/ports/* that comes with 4.0, I'd like to up that to the /usr/ports/* that comes with 4.1. What would be a safe process in doing that? I'm aware of individual/manual updates of packages, as with pkg_add -u (app), though am aiming for updating/upgrading the entire port tree structure (not download everything, just the tree that points me in the right direction within which the potentially new versions of apps would be available in 4.1). I see in the site's FAQ 15.3.2, Fetching the ports tree, basics like: $ cd /tmp $ ftp ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.1/ports.tar.gz $ cd /usr $ sudo tar xzf /tmp/ports.tar.gz However, the basic warning, Before continuing, you must read the section about NOT mixing up your OpenBSD system and ports tree. ...leads to the section talking about crazy errors (doesn't really help much beyond linking back onto itself). I'm not running -current - I'm sticking to what is provided on the site via FTP for both 4.0 and 4.1. Basically, can I just download the 4.1/ports.tar.gz and tar it into /usr (after I finish my 4.1 upgrade and /etc upgrade)? (Overwrite or remove the old port tree?) Again, thank you in advance for your input. Sean
