So i have reproducible steps and also solve my problem.
If I create my dataset via napp-it. It seems like it applies special
permissions. LX will complain that other and group should not have write
permissions on the zone directory. So I remove these via chmod o-w and
chmod g-w.
At this point
> On Jan 9, 2017, at 10:01 PM, Mini Trader wrote:
>
> Just to reiterate on a fresh install of 20 I got no error. Different
> hardware too.
WEIRD. (Sorry I didn't catch that earlier. Juggling other balls concurrently!)
Okay, thanks for the update. Not sure if
# zonecfg -z lx0
create
set zonepath=/main/zones/lx0
set brand=lx
set autoboot=false
set ip-type=exclusive
add net
set physical=vmxnet3s2
add property (name=gateway,value="10.255.0.1")
add property (name=ips,value="10.255.0.16/24")
add property (name=primary,value="true")
end
add attr
set
> On Jan 9, 2017, at 9:51 PM, Mini Trader wrote:
>
> 2. Setup the LX System The same way I tested before.
>
I want that setup! I want:
- zonecfg input (modulo IP addresses)
- image you used
I can test it on 020 and bloody, to see if it's a problem
So I tried the following.
1. Update my system from LTS to stable.
2. Setup the LX System The same way I tested before.
3. Download the program again
It failed.
Basically I have a successful run off of a fresh install and a failed run
off of a non fresh install.
Will try a fresh install of LTS,
One thing that is weird.
I am seeing that after installing the zone. I get the following error when
shutting down or rebooting. Often followed by a kernel panic.
showmount: hostname: RPC: Program Not registered
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Dan McDonald wrote:
>
> > On
> On Jan 9, 2017, at 8:09 PM, Mini Trader wrote:
>
> I can't reproduce this evening :) I started with a fresh install off the CD
> instead of upgrading from LTS. Will continue and get back to you.
That should be a NOP, you'll land on the same r151020 bits.
Share
I can't reproduce this evening :) I started with a fresh install off the
CD instead of upgrading from LTS. Will continue and get back to you.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Dan McDonald wrote:
>
> > On Jan 9, 2017, at 3:22 PM, Mini Trader
>
> On Jan 9, 2017, at 3:22 PM, Mini Trader wrote:
>
> I also used Debian 8.6 and when I did a backup. The first one worked but a
> second call to same directory with no changes did not.
Still bloody, the Ubuntu 16 zone, and it works with multiple followups:
I tested on 1520.
I also used Debian 8.6 and when I did a backup. The first one worked but a
second call to same directory with no changes did not.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 3:08 PM Dan McDonald wrote:
>
>
> > On Jan 9, 2017, at 2:58 PM, Mini Trader
> On Jan 9, 2017, at 2:58 PM, Mini Trader wrote:
>
> It's a single binary. That can be downloaded.
>
Oh that's not so bad.
You saw my other note.
What I neglected to mention, however, is that my tests were on OmniOS bloody,
which has more fixes from Joyent than
> On Jan 9, 2017, at 12:36 PM, Mini Trader wrote:
>
> The above was tested with Debian 8.6 SmartOS image.
Hmmm... I wonder if there's a debian image problem or some other sort of issue.
Perhaps the wrong kernel revision?
Here it is on my CentOS 6.8:
[root@lx0 ~]#
It's a single binary. That can be downloaded.
I don't think the author is available to generate the test case. My
question was as an end user how can we determine why the software is not
working on LX.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 2:34 PM Dan McDonald wrote:
> On Jan 9, 2017,
Hi Dale,
Thanks for your input.I am now clear on the OmniOS position.
I have downloaded proftpd-1.3.5b and it compiles and runs fine for me
simple test :-)
Dale Ghent wrote:
> in.ftpd was removed in 2014 (ref: https://www.illumos.org/issues/5069). This
> coincided with the 151014 LTS release of
> On Jan 9, 2017, at 2:31 PM, Mini Trader wrote:
>
> The test case was in my previous post.
Does this require a whole wad of installation?
I was hoping you (or the hashbackup folks) would be able to produce a smaller,
easy-to-compile, test case of some sort. They
The test case was in my previous post.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 1:53 PM Jerry Jelinek
wrote:
> A simple test case would be great, or at least we'll need details on what
> you are running and how to reproduce the problem. You could also check the
> known bug list at
The responder to that thread was mistaken - It was OI/hipster that introduced a
proftpd package, which he confused with illumos-proper replacing wu-ftpd with
proftpd. We elected to not ship a replacement FTP daemon in OmniOS, mainly
because we saw no need to in light of SFTP being available,
Hi Dale,
Where is the proftpd package?
Dale Ghent wrote:
> in.ftpd was removed in 2014 (ref: https://www.illumos.org/issues/5069). This
> coincided with the 151014 LTS release of OmniOS.
>
> ref:
> http://lists.omniti.com/pipermail/omnios-discuss/2014-September/003136.html
>
> /dale
>
>
>>
in.ftpd was removed in 2014 (ref: https://www.illumos.org/issues/5069). This
coincided with the 151014 LTS release of OmniOS.
ref: http://lists.omniti.com/pipermail/omnios-discuss/2014-September/003136.html
/dale
> On Jan 9, 2017, at 12:42 PM, Richard Skelton wrote:
>
Hi.
I don't see that :-(
# pkg publisher
PUBLISHER TYPE STATUS P LOCATION
omnios origin online F
http://pkg.omniti.com/omnios/r151018/
ms.omniti.com origin online F
http://pkg.omniti.com/omniti-ms/
# pkg search omnios/network/ftp
#
On Mon, 09 Jan 2017 17:42:42 +
Richard Skelton wrote:
> Hi,
> I need an ftp server for a quick test and can't find the pkg
> On Solaris 11 it's part of network/ftp
>
Lots of hits doing your search here but maybe you are looking for this?
pkg search omnios/network/ftp
Hi,
I need an ftp server for a quick test and can't find the pkg
On Solaris 11 it's part of network/ftp
Cheers
Richard
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss
The above was tested with Debian 8.6 SmartOS image.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 12:35 PM Mini Trader
wrote:
> The program is from hashbackup.com it's a backup utility that allows you
> to backup to backblaze
>
> To reproduce create a directory with some files. And instruct
And for the morbidly curious:
http://kebe.com/~danmcd/webrevs/kill-26/
Dan
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss
Can you talk more about the program you're having issues with, how you're using
it and how this problem is manifesting itself?
/dale
> On Jan 9, 2017, at 11:25 AM, Mini Trader wrote:
>
> I have a program that is behaving differently in an LX environment.
>
Hello!
We're moving forward with our removal of Python2.6 from OmniOS. Internal tests
show that the ability to upgrade appears to work, even when some installable
components aren't using Python2.7 yet. These components are all part of the
installer packages:
system/install
> On Jan 9, 2017, at 11:25 AM, Mini Trader wrote:
>
> I have a program that is behaving differently in an LX environment.
> Specifically something about permission issues. I've corresponded with the
> author and they believe the issue could take place if the system
> > On Jan 9, 2017, at 11:13 AM, Chris Siebenmann wrote:
> >
> > The answer to my question turns out to be 'yes'. If you do:
> > rmdir /.zfs/snapshot/
> >
> > and ZFS accepts this, there is no entry made in 'zpool history'; the
> > snapshot is silently deleted.
>
> Now
> On Jan 9, 2017, at 11:13 AM, Chris Siebenmann wrote:
>
> The answer to my question turns out to be 'yes'. If you do:
> rmdir /.zfs/snapshot/
>
> and ZFS accepts this, there is no entry made in 'zpool history'; the
> snapshot is silently deleted.
Now I wonder if
I have a program that is behaving differently in an LX environment.
Specifically something about permission issues. I've corresponded with the
author and they believe the issue could take place if the system was
falsely reporting the status of a file e.g. file open instead of closed.
Regardless
I wrote, about our mysteriously disappearing snapshots:
> [...] For example, is there some way where snapshots can be removed
> without that being logged in 'zpool history'?
The answer to my question turns out to be 'yes'. If you do:
rmdir /.zfs/snapshot/
and ZFS accepts this, there
> I wonder if the scrub has something to do with it? Are you in the
> middle of the scrub when noticing missing snapshots? Do they reappear
> after the scrub is done? The scrub seems like it's relevant. I take
> it you're doing a cron-driven scrub? If so, with what frequency?
We scrub
> On Jan 6, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Chris Siebenmann wrote:
>
> The @Fri-15 snapshot has since vanished from the pool. The full
> 'zpool history' output since the first /h/105@Fri-16 snapshot is:
>
> 2017-01-06.16:10:01 zfs snapshot fs0-admin-02/h/105@Fri-16
>
33 matches
Mail list logo