Re: Corporate spying hackng problem
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 9:00 PM, elekktrett...@exemail.com.au wrote: Hi all, Company that I work for has had a major intrusion into their billing system most likely by one of their competitors and they deleted about half a million $ worth of invoices. They used a chinese proxy server to avoid being tracked. The IP address of the proxy is 119.119.231.1. It blocks all incoming ports and ping, im curious is there any way to find out the name of the company/person who ownes this IP? Cheers, Petr Hi Petr, have you tried querying the WHOIS database?
Re: 1.6.0 + ALC650 no sound
On 12/20/06, Armin Arh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I have no sound (running 1.6.0) FreeBSD kernel says: pcm0: Intel ICH4 (82801DB) port 0xe000-0xe0ff,0xe400-0xe43f mem 0xee101000-0xee1011ff,0xee102000-0xee1020ff irq 17 at device 31.5 on pci0 pcm0: Avance Logic ALC650 AC97 Codec In Dragonfly i do kldload snd but no sound card gets detected. Load it at boot, from /boot/loader.conf. Armin -- PUBBOX Postmaster + spam-killer. Free email addresses at http://pubbox.net/ -- If it's there, and you can see it, it's real. If it's not there, and you can see it, it's virtual. If it's there, and you can't see it, it's transparent. If it's not there, and you can't see it, you erased it.
[PATCH] IFF_MONITOR support for Ethernet devices
Hi guys, please test and review [1] and [2] [1] http://night.rdslink.ro/dudu/misc/dragonflybsd/src_sys_net.diff [2] http://night.rdslink.ro/dudu/misc/dragonflybsd/src_sbin_ifconfig.diff Thanks. -- If it's there, and you can see it, it's real. If it's not there, and you can see it, it's virtual. If it's there, and you can't see it, it's transparent. If it's not there, and you can't see it, you erased it.
Re: [PATCH] IFF_MONITOR support for Ethernet devices
On 12/15/06, Vlad Galu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi guys, please test and review [1] and [2] [1] http://night.rdslink.ro/dudu/misc/dragonflybsd/src_sys_net.diff [2] http://night.rdslink.ro/dudu/misc/dragonflybsd/src_sbin_ifconfig.diff Thanks. Forgot to mention that it's imported from FreeBSD, it's not my work. Anyway, the patches are minimal. -- If it's there, and you can see it, it's real. If it's not there, and you can see it, it's virtual. If it's there, and you can't see it, it's transparent. If it's not there, and you can't see it, you erased it. -- If it's there, and you can see it, it's real. If it's not there, and you can see it, it's virtual. If it's there, and you can't see it, it's transparent. If it's not there, and you can't see it, you erased it.
Re: make buildworld crash, unwind.h
On 12/8/06, Vlad Galu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 12/7/06, walt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Justin C. Sherrill wrote: On Thu, December 7, 2006 3:39 pm, Peter Avalos wrote: When is cvsup appropriate vs. cvs? Using cvsup is what we have documented. It appears that he is using cvsup to get the repo, and usung cvs to update his src/ tree. Should we be describing that in documentation? I see both techniques in use, but I haven't seen a reason one should be described over the other. (I always just used cvsup.) I love cvsup, but lately we DragonFly fans are completely dependent on a binary cvsup package because ezm3 won't compile. The obvious solution is to use csup, which is a cvsup-workalike written in C. It works flawlessly on FreeBSD and NetBSD but not (yet) on DFBSD because of the newer version of cvs that we use. I've emailed the csup guru (Maxime Henrion) about updating csup, but I've had no answer from him. I hope Maxime is in good health and is just too busy to deal with csup, but I really don't know. Anyone who is interested in updating csup can get the sources here: http://www.mu.org/~mux/csup.html#download FWIW, http://mu.org/~mux/csup-snap-20060318.tgz does the trick for me. My supfile is below: -- cut here -- *default host=cvsup.dragonflybsd.org *default base=/usr *default prefix=/usr *default release=cvs tag=. *default delete use-rel-suffix *default compress dragonfly-cvs-src -- and here -- I spoke too early. It seems to work only for bare checkouts, it stumbles upon updates, indeed. -- If it's there, and you can see it, it's real. If it's not there, and you can see it, it's virtual. If it's there, and you can't see it, it's transparent. If it's not there, and you can't see it, you erased it. -- If it's there, and you can see it, it's real. If it's not there, and you can see it, it's virtual. If it's there, and you can't see it, it's transparent. If it's not there, and you can't see it, you erased it.
Re: make buildworld crash, unwind.h
On 12/7/06, walt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Justin C. Sherrill wrote: On Thu, December 7, 2006 3:39 pm, Peter Avalos wrote: When is cvsup appropriate vs. cvs? Using cvsup is what we have documented. It appears that he is using cvsup to get the repo, and usung cvs to update his src/ tree. Should we be describing that in documentation? I see both techniques in use, but I haven't seen a reason one should be described over the other. (I always just used cvsup.) I love cvsup, but lately we DragonFly fans are completely dependent on a binary cvsup package because ezm3 won't compile. The obvious solution is to use csup, which is a cvsup-workalike written in C. It works flawlessly on FreeBSD and NetBSD but not (yet) on DFBSD because of the newer version of cvs that we use. I've emailed the csup guru (Maxime Henrion) about updating csup, but I've had no answer from him. I hope Maxime is in good health and is just too busy to deal with csup, but I really don't know. Anyone who is interested in updating csup can get the sources here: http://www.mu.org/~mux/csup.html#download FWIW, http://mu.org/~mux/csup-snap-20060318.tgz does the trick for me. My supfile is below: -- cut here -- *default host=cvsup.dragonflybsd.org *default base=/usr *default prefix=/usr *default release=cvs tag=. *default delete use-rel-suffix *default compress dragonfly-cvs-src -- and here -- -- If it's there, and you can see it, it's real. If it's not there, and you can see it, it's virtual. If it's there, and you can't see it, it's transparent. If it's not there, and you can't see it, you erased it.
Re: bonding driver in DragonFly
On 11/6/06, Saverio Iacovelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does DragonFly have a feature as bonding driver in Gnu/Linux systems. When you configure two computers in high availability, it is possibile assigning two or more physical interfaces to one virtual interface which provides fault tolerance or high availability. This interface called bond0 in Gnu/Linux systems. Does DragonFly have similar feature? ng_one2many(4), ng_fec(4). Thanks anyone for answers, Saverio __ Do You Yahoo!? Poco spazio e tanto spam? Yahoo! Mail ti protegge dallo spam e ti da tanto spazio gratuito per i tuoi file e i messaggi http://mail.yahoo.it -- If it's there, and you can see it, it's real. If it's not there, and you can see it, it's virtual. If it's there, and you can't see it, it's transparent. If it's not there, and you can't see it, you erased it.
Re: NVIDIA FreeBSD Kernel Feature Requests, interesting info for dfly?
On 7/13/06, Dimitri Kovalov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Received: from [65.34.182.15] by web55908.mail.re3.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 10:06:16 PDT Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Dimitri Kovalov [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from [65.34.182.15] by web33313.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 11:12:51 PDT Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Danial Thom [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's safe to ignore him :) -- If it's there, and you can see it, it's real. If it's not there, and you can see it, it's virtual. If it's there, and you can't see it, it's transparent. If it's not there, and you can't see it, you erased it.
Re: Argh, Stray interrupts 2006
On 6/3/06, Danial Thom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Bill Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Danial Thom wrote: My tech tried firing up 1.4 on an opteron MB with an HT1000 chipset and, although it seems to work, the console is literally flooding with stray irq 7 messages. Freebsd at least suppressed these after a few, but when is someone actually going to FIX this in BSD? Someone told me years ago that this was an Intel chipset bug and there was nothing that could be done, but clearly that isn't the case here. whats the workaround solution as the console is unusable in its current state? DT Same as always: 1) ALT-F2 (3, 4, etc.) before logging in. 2) Edit /etc/syslog.conf to send soem/all console messages elsewhere - after which (1) is no longer necessary. Bill Thats not really a solution as I don't want a system thats processing 100s of interrupts per second for no reason. I previously reported that these were gone, but now that I put another card in the box (a dual port intel ethernet), they're back. I know I've been told that its a bios configuration problem, however I don't get stray interrupts if I pop a FreeBSD disk on the exact same hardware. So why is it a misconfiguration in DFLY but not in FreeBSD? http://www.myspace.com/danialt - is this you ? DT __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- If it's there, and you can see it, it's real. If it's not there, and you can see it, it's virtual. If it's there, and you can't see it, it's transparent. If it's not there, and you can't see it, you erased it.
Re: Any serious production servers yet?
On 6/3/06, Danial Thom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Matthew Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I couldn't have put it better myself. Vis-a-vie network performance, my goal for DragonFly is to have 'good' performance. But I think it is a complete waste of time to try to squeeze every last erg out of the network subsystem like FreeBSD has. We aren't trying to compete with Cisco, and nobody in their right mind would take a turnkey BSD or linux-based system over a Cisco (or other piece of high-end networking gear) to route multi-gigabits/sec of traffic. I still think we can get close to FreeBSD's rated performance, eventually, but I am not willing to create a mess of hacks and crazy configuration options to turn DragonFly into the ultimate ether switch when I can purchase one off the shelf for a few hundred bucks. I think the last time I tried to use a general purpose UNIX OS as an actual 'router' was in 1994. We used two BSDi boxes (and later FreeBSD boxes) to route the two T1's that BEST Internet had when we had just started up. It was a horror, frankly. Hardware bugs in the ethernet cards and even in the T1 card required a lot of hacking to work around, and trying to run BGP with gated was even worse. Back then 'real' networking hardware was bulky and expensive. Today, though, there is no excuse. It's cheap (and even cheaper on E-Bay), and far more reliable then a general purpose PC. If someone is trying to route multi-gigabits worth of traffic then the infrastructure is clearly important enough to warrent purchasing dedicated networking gear. If someone isn't trying to go all out, then a general purpose OS might be adequate, if still not as reliable. So all I can say to Mr Thom in that regard is: Stop trying to fit a square peg into a round hole and just buy the appropriate gear for your network infrastructure needs. -Matt Your caveman-like views are as troubling as they are entertaining. You seem to have no grasp of the modern world and no understanding of 'BSDs niche. Everything was buggy in '94, but with you and clowns like Paul Borman trying to do networking, what the hell would you expect no matter what you had to work with? :))) Many, many large network appliances (load balancers, bandwidth managers, firewalls, security filters) are based on linux or BSD. The reason is that CISCOs and mega-gigabit routers have no extra CPU power to do things like filtering and shaping at a very high level. I've made myself many millons of $$ selling a few thousand network devices, which is more than you'll ever make having a really cool desktop OS, even if its better than anything else out there. Designing a product for fun is one thing, but if you want to get funding you have to produce something that's useful for the corporate world, not for a bunch of pimply-faced college kids. The reality of the corporate world is that even if DFLY is the best damned OS ever written, they will use windows or linux, because you can't staff a support center with DFLY experts. Its simply never going to happen. You can however get in as a server platform, because only a couple of guys have to know what they're doing. Unix as a desktop box is not even an afterthought. 'BSDs niche is as a network server. Period. You might think its a waste of time to optimize networking, but it seems to me you're wasting your time entirely if your goal is to be a little faster than LINUX as a desktop box. Who cares? FreeBSD with 1 processor is faster than linux with 2, but no-one used FreeBSD anyway. Nobody wants to use 'BSD as a desktop machine, except for a handful of people with a lot more time on their hands than the rest of us. People want to use 'BSD as network servers. People in the real world that is. Maybe thats why your not with FreeBSD anymore; your refusal to modernize your ideas to what's going on in the real world, and your complete lack of understanding where the dollars are to fund your efforts? I should probably be moving on the same trend the other subscribers follow and give you a very diplomatic pat on the shoulder, but your bluntness simply calls for more. Shouldn't you be out, making some millions ? You seem to be better at it than at implanting your ideas into other people's minds. Everything they do, and especially Matt, is pro-bono. For fun. While their idea of having fun consists of spending a considerable amount of hours each day writing code, yours seem to be polishing your typing skills. Do all of us and especially yourself a favor and reconsider your schedule. DT Dumb Troll ? __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- If it's there, and you can see it, it's real.
Re: Any serious production servers yet?
On 6/4/06, Danial Thom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Vlad GALU [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/3/06, Danial Thom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Matthew Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I couldn't have put it better myself. Vis-a-vie network performance, my goal for DragonFly is to have 'good' performance. But I think it is a complete waste of time to try to squeeze every last erg out of the network subsystem like FreeBSD has. We aren't trying to compete with Cisco, and nobody in their right mind would take a turnkey BSD or linux-based system over a Cisco (or other piece of high-end networking gear) to route multi-gigabits/sec of traffic. I still think we can get close to FreeBSD's rated performance, eventually, but I am not willing to create a mess of hacks and crazy configuration options to turn DragonFly into the ultimate ether switch when I can purchase one off the shelf for a few hundred bucks. I think the last time I tried to use a general purpose UNIX OS as an actual 'router' was in 1994. We used two BSDi boxes (and later FreeBSD boxes) to route the two T1's that BEST Internet had when we had just started up. It was a horror, frankly. Hardware bugs in the ethernet cards and even in the T1 card required a lot of hacking to work around, and trying to run BGP with gated was even worse. Back then 'real' networking hardware was bulky and expensive. Today, though, there is no excuse. It's cheap (and even cheaper on E-Bay), and far more reliable then a general purpose PC. If someone is trying to route multi-gigabits worth of traffic then the infrastructure is clearly important enough to warrent purchasing dedicated networking gear. If someone isn't trying to go all out, then a general purpose OS might be adequate, if still not as reliable. So all I can say to Mr Thom in that regard is: Stop trying to fit a square peg into a round hole and just buy the appropriate gear for your network infrastructure needs. -Matt Your caveman-like views are as troubling as they are entertaining. You seem to have no grasp of the modern world and no understanding of 'BSDs niche. Everything was buggy in '94, but with you and clowns like Paul Borman trying to do networking, what the hell would you expect no matter what you had to work with? :))) Many, many large network appliances (load balancers, bandwidth managers, firewalls, security filters) are based on linux or BSD. The reason is that CISCOs and mega-gigabit routers have no extra CPU power to do things like filtering and shaping at a very high level. I've made myself many millons of $$ selling a few thousand network devices, which is more than you'll ever make having a really cool desktop OS, even if its better than anything else out there. Designing a product for fun is one thing, but if you want to get funding you have to produce something that's useful for the corporate world, not for a bunch of pimply-faced college kids. The reality of the corporate world is that even if DFLY is the best damned OS ever written, they will use windows or linux, because you can't staff a support center with DFLY experts. Its simply never going to happen. You can however get in as a server platform, because only a couple of guys have to know what they're doing. Unix as a desktop box is not even an afterthought. 'BSDs niche is as a network server. Period. You might think its a waste of time to optimize networking, but it seems to me you're wasting your time entirely if your goal is to be a little faster than LINUX as a desktop box. Who cares? FreeBSD with 1 processor is faster than linux with 2, but no-one used FreeBSD anyway. Nobody wants to use 'BSD as a desktop machine, except for a handful of people with a lot more time on their hands than the rest of us. People want to use 'BSD as network servers. People in the real world that is. Maybe thats why your not with FreeBSD anymore; your refusal to modernize your ideas to what's going on in the real world, and your complete lack of understanding where the dollars are to fund your efforts? I should probably be moving on the same trend the other subscribers follow and give you a very diplomatic pat on the shoulder, but your bluntness simply calls for more. Shouldn't you be out, making some millions ? You seem to be better at it than at implanting your ideas into other people's minds. Everything they do, and especially Matt, is pro-bono. For fun. While their idea of having fun consists of spending a considerable amount of hours each day writing code, yours seem
Re: Serious question: Is DragonFly's smp ISP-production-ready?
On 4/19/06, Tomaž Borštnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I'm sorry for chiming in here, but I feel I should say this: - I like DFly's SMP approach better - various pieces of hardware work a bit better (read: they work) under FreeBSD due to more active development and newer commits. These are small issues such as WPA (which is about to be fixed these days) for wireless, better DMA handling for various IDE chipsets (I'm sure that these would also be easy to fix with small commits in various .h files). - threading is still an open subject. I asked a question about this on the mailing list a few days ago and David Xu said he was working on it. I have a few things that would benefit from threading which forces me to stick to FreeBSD for the time being (with libthr, by the way :) - I like the idea of using pkgsrc better, because it targets a much broader user base, so issues are more promptly brought to commiters' attention and dealt with. - I like Matt's reactions better (no, this is not asskissing, just an impression) - he seems to care more for his public's reactions and is more willing to listen to new ideas. This doesn't affect the projects' leadership at all, it seems, which is great. I know I didn't make much sense, but bottom line, DFly is certainly the platform of choice for me, once it has combed a few minor things. I'm one of the anxious users out there :) I'd love to spend more time hacking on it and submitting patches, but unfortunately my customers pay for other things :( -- If it's there, and you can see it, it's real. If it's not there, and you can see it, it's virtual. If it's there, and you can't see it, it's transparent. If it's not there, and you can't see it, you erased it.
Can DFly handle ...
APIC ? What about libthread_xu ? Thanks in advance. -- If it's there, and you can see it, it's real. If it's not there, and you can see it, it's virtual. If it's there, and you can't see it, it's transparent. If it's not there, and you can't see it, you erased it.
