Re: How to customise the OS update process
Hi Rubén， on Sat, 6 Apr 2024 12:12:00 + Rubén Llorente wrote: > An option I can think about is downloading the upgrade kernel and > booting from it, instead of using sysupgrade. The upgrade process will > let you select which sets you want to install and which ones you want > to exclude. I see. However, manual installation was a background that 'has never been done well, so we want to avoid it'. > In practice, I think you are better off just installing all the sets > and being done with it. Stuart also mentioned it and found it easy and appropriate. From now on I will use it with all the packages in it. Thank you very much. Sincerely yours, --- WATANABE, Takeo t...@kasaneiro.jp > WATANABE Takeo wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> The most common way to upgrade OpenBSD is to use "sysupgrade". >> However, I do not want to install certain packages (e.g. game). >> # When the host is built, it is not installed, because the >> Is there any way to upgrade to fulfil these wishes? >
Re: How to customise the OS update process
Hi Sturt,
on Sat, 6 Apr 2024 12:02:24 - (UTC)
Stuart Henderson wrote:
> sysupgrade -n
> rm /home/_sysupgrade/{x,game}*.tgz
> reboot
That's right.
I did not read the "man" very carefully about "syspgrade".
It was a good learning experience. Thank you.
> Though I wouldn't bother unless very constrained on storage space.
> A lot of time has been wasted by developers over the years when people
> have not installed xbase (or worse, installed an old one but not updated
> it) and run into problems with packages.
So that's how it happened.
I understand it well now.
These are the packages that you have to install and then
I will install all these packages and put them into operation.
Thank you so much.
Sincerely yours
---
WATANABE, Takeo
t...@kasaneiro.jp
> On 2024-04-06, WATANABE Takeo wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> The most common way to upgrade OpenBSD is to use "sysupgrade".
>>
>> However, I do not want to install certain packages (e.g. game).
>> # When the host is built, it is not installed, because the
>>
>> Is there any way to upgrade to fulfil these wishes?
>>
>> I wrote "/auto_upgrade.conf" and
>> I tried "sysupgrade" with the following in "/auto_upgrade.conf",
>> but all packages were installed.
>>
>> ---
>> Location of sets = disk
>> Pathname to the sets = /home/_sysupgrade/
>> Set name(s) = -x*
>> Set name(s) = -game*
>> Set name(s) = done
>> Directory does not contain SHA256.sig. Continue without verification = yes
>> ---
>>
>> If you have found errors in this method or know of other methods,
>> please let us know.
>>
>> Sincerely yours.
>>
>> ---
>> WATANABE, Takeo
>> t...@kasaneiro.jp
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Please keep replies on the mailing list.
>
How to customise the OS update process
Hi everyone, The most common way to upgrade OpenBSD is to use "sysupgrade". However, I do not want to install certain packages (e.g. game). # When the host is built, it is not installed, because the Is there any way to upgrade to fulfil these wishes? I wrote "/auto_upgrade.conf" and I tried "sysupgrade" with the following in "/auto_upgrade.conf", but all packages were installed. --- Location of sets = disk Pathname to the sets = /home/_sysupgrade/ Set name(s) = -x* Set name(s) = -game* Set name(s) = done Directory does not contain SHA256.sig. Continue without verification = yes --- If you have found errors in this method or know of other methods, please let us know. Sincerely yours. --- WATANABE, Takeo t...@kasaneiro.jp
Re: Problem with nsd not being reloaded.
Hi. It was an elementary mistake. The following line was added to nsd.conf and now both nsd-control and rcctl work. /var/nsd/etc/nsd.conf - remote-control: control-enable: yes control-interface: /var/run/nsd.sock server-key-file: "/var/nsd/etc/nsd_server.key" server-cert-file: "/var/nsd/etc/nsd_server.pem" control-key-file: "/var/nsd/etc/nsd_control.key" control-cert-file: "/var/nsd/etc/nsd_control.pem" - Thank you very much for the valuable points you have raised. on Sat, 12 Aug 2023 11:49:45 - (UTC) Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2023-08-12, Pontus Stenetorp wrote: >> On Sat 12 Aug 2023, WATANABE Takeo wrote: >>> >>> I am using nsd, which runs by default on OpenBSD 7.2 amd64. >>> To update the zone file after changes have been made. >>> >>> # rcctl reload nsd >>> >>> would result in >>> >>> nsd(failed) >>> >>> and cannot be updated. >>> >>> As far as I could find, restarting the host seems to be >>> the only way to update the zone information. >>> >>> How can I use the rcctl command to reload the zo information, >>> as I am having trouble dealing with this? >>> >>> - >>> # more rc.conf.local >>> >>> nsd_flags= >>> smtpd_flags=NO >>> sshd_flags=NO >>> unbound_flags= >> >> No solution, but I am experiencing the same issue on OpenBSD 7.3. You >> do not need a restart though, you can just dig out the NSD PIDs with >> grep(1) and ps(1); then pass them to kill(1) and then use rcctl(8). Not >> pretty, but it works as I have not had the time to dig into what the >> underlying problem is. >> >> etc/rc.conf.local: >> >> nsd_flags= >> >> var/nsd/etc/nsd.conf: >> >> server: >> hide-version: yes >> verbosity: 1 >> database: "" >> >> remote-control: >> control-enable: yes >> control-interface: /var/run/nsd.sock >> >> ---8<--- >> >> > > No problems here with "rcctl reload nsd" on 7.3 or 2-week-old -current, > though typically I use "nsd-control reload " after a change. > > Any clues from rcctl -d reload nsd? Anything relevant in logs? If not > try bumping up the detail level e.g. "verbosity: 3" --- WATANABE, Takeo t...@kasaneiro.jp
Problem with nsd not being reloaded.
To Whom It May Concern I am using nsd, which runs by default on OpenBSD 7.2 amd64. To update the zone file after changes have been made. # rcctl reload nsd would result in nsd(failed) and cannot be updated. As far as I could find, restarting the host seems to be the only way to update the zone information. How can I use the rcctl command to reload the zo information, as I am having trouble dealing with this? - # more rc.conf.local nsd_flags= smtpd_flags=NO sshd_flags=NO unbound_flags= Yours faithfully, --- WATANABE, Takeo t...@kasaneiro.jp
groups update
0 C Japan P Niigata F 4 times a year O Echigo BSD Users Group M inqu...@ebug.jp U https://www.ebug.jp N *BSD
groups new
0 C Japan P Niigata (Echigo) F 4 times a year O Echigo BSD Users Group M inqu...@ebug.jp U https://www.ebug.jp N *BSD
Re: Minimum install size
on Sat, 29 Apr 2023 13:40:51 +0200 "Peter N. M. Hansteen" wrote: > On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 09:55:13PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: >> > > Do not assume "desireable" and "possible" are always the same. >> > >> > My point was whether the wording "installable on 512MB of storage" is >> > appropriate to put in the OpenBSD 7.3 FAQ, and whether "desirable" and >> > "possible" are the same is outside the discussion. >> >> No, it is optimistic oversell by the faq authors >> >> It should be realistic & accurate, or it should say nothing at all. > > If I rembember correctly, the 512MB number was somewhere in the "possible > but not comfortable" range way back when the text was originally written. > But that was before several space consuming things such as the relinking > at boot steps happened. > > A more realistic estimate looking a the various systems I have within reach > suggests "you can squeeze in a full install inside 1GB, but if you plan on > installing any packages or storing data locally, there is no point in setting > yourself up for the pain of running out of storage". If that is the case, then it is wrong to write "installable on 512MB of storage" in the FAQ webpage. At the very least, you should write a value that works without the installation of additional ports, etc., and if you can make it user-friendly, you should change it to the minimum value that can be used normally, excluding the user area. > You could probably find the absolute minimim (an actually quite useless > number) by > checking the uncompressed sizes of the *.tgz install sets, but the last time I > remember doing a "df -h" on a fresh install before installing any packages or > introducing any data, the total ran to somewhere in excess of 650MB. In my amd64 environment, with no additional software installed, the results of "df -h" were as follows. hoge# df -h Filesystem SizeUsedAvail Capacity Mounted /dev/sd0a 1.9G91.5M 1.8G 5% / /dev/sd0g 4.8G 18.0K 4.6G 1% /home /dev/sd0d 1.9G 6.0K 1.8G 1% /tmp /dev/sd0f 9.7G 1.3G 7.9G14% /usr /dev/sd0e 3.9G 8.0M 3.7G 1% /var Taking this as an example, this means that about 1.4 GB is being used. Of course, the data capacity required for any partition increases as it is used, so why not rewrite the FAQ as 1.5 GB as a minimum value (but not recommended for use as a comfortable environment)? --- WATANABE, Takeo t...@kasaneiro.jp
