date:20101006

Is there some way to set up a third-party online source for ports and/or
packages that allows users to do the same kinds of things they can do
with the official ports system?  I mean, for instance, using portversion
to check whether there are new versions available (or an equivalent
operation) and possibly even checking for security issues via portaudit.

I see, looking at the manpage for portversion, this:

 PKG_DBDIR  Alternative location for the installed package database.
The default is ``/var/db/pkg''.

 PORTSDIR   Alternative location for the ports tree and the ports
database files.  The default is ``/usr/ports''.

I also see some stuff in pkgtools.conf comments that might pertain to
this sort of thing, but I'm not entirely clear yet on how this might be
used to access a third-party repository for ports without breaking normal
operation.  If there's a tutorial out there that would explain how to do
something like this, I have not yet found it.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]


pgpEitpNPtUt0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Which OS for notebook

On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 10:50:42AM -0700, David Brodbeck wrote:
 On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 6:25 AM, Mark Blackman m...@exonetric.com wrote:
  There's also the whole train of thought that says FreeBSD isn't really
  aimed at the desktop/laptop/notebook use model and any benefit in that arena
  is entirely coincidental.
 
 That tends to be my perspective.  Linux tends to be more useful on
 laptops and desktops, where up-to-the-minute hardware support is
 needed.  For servers, where stability is important, I tend to prefer
 BSD, all other things being equal.

Weird.  I guess maybe my excellent experience of using FreeBSD on my
ThinkPad is wrong, and so is my experience of various Linux
distributions having more maintenance issues than FreeBSD on similar
hardware, and I should stop.


 
 Besides the mindshare issue that's been mentioned, part of the problem
 here is the balkanized nature of open source licenses, too.  Linux
 driver code is useless to FreeBSD developers because the GPL isn't
 compatible with the BSD license.

I don't think that's the case.  Maybe such drivers cannot be integrated
directly with the base system without licensing issues, but it can
certainly be distributed and installed when appropriate.  It is, in fact,
for this reason of compatibility that FreeBSD has had ZFS support where
Linux-based systems have not.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]


pgpEnjZDz6QYq.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Which OS for notebook

On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 11:11:23AM +0700, Phan Quoc Hien wrote:
 Hello everyone,
 Which laptop vendor is best support for FreeBSD ?

I've had good luck with ThinkPads.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]


pgppdjrOCJnkm.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Which OS for notebook

On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 04:42:40PM +, Michel Talon wrote:
 
 I mean that the concept of maintaining a full set of binary packages 
 which has been verified by the distribution maintainers and remain
 usable for an extended period of time, combined with an effective
 binary upgrader (apt-get, aptitude), is light years ahead, for ease of
 use and convenience, to a rolling release style bazar like FreeBSD
 ports, combined with tools like portupgrade, which sort of work only 
 when you spend all your time running them daily, after having sacrificed
 a young virgin to the gods. I concede that the FreeBSD way allows to have 
 very up to date ports, and to be in control of compilation options and
 so on. Personnally i don't have much use for these benefits.

I don't have the kinds of problems you imply.  Portupgrade works great,
even if I don't touch it for a week or so, at least for me.  There are
benefits to a rolling release process, too:

http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=4150

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]


pgp4WYGFexWRM.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: OT: fdisk - Data Recovered

2010-10-06 Thread Robert

On Mon, 4 Oct 2010 11:42:49 -0700
Robert travelin...@cox.net wrote:

 On Tue, 5 Oct 2010 03:53:09 +1100 (EST)
 Ian Smith smi...@nimnet.asn.au wrote:
 
 Ian
 
 I am in the process of dd the entire disk to a 1TB disk but I wanted
 to respond to you. You have given a lot of good advice and
 information and I appreciate it.
 

To all who responded to my ntfs fiasco, not only do I thank you but the
wife passes along her thanks and makes the point that she didn't need a
second bottle of wine. :-)

The above dd operation finished late last night but I didn't start
working on until this morning.

Using FreeBSD it acted exactly as the other dd attempts did, i.e. I
could mount_ntfs /dev/ad6 and see the same as I did before but ad6s1
failed to mount as ntfs. ad6s1 would mount with no fs specified but
nothing was readable.

I rebooted into Windows XP and to my surprise the computer restarted
right after the desktop rendered. I then booted into safe mode with
command prompt. This booted successfully and then I changed drives
until I found the data I was looking for. The 1tb drive, now showing as
500GB, appeared as drive G:

I ran chkdsk against g: and after finding and clearing several errors
it quit without completing. I tried to boot normal and the computer
rebooted after the desktop rendered again. I then booted into safe mode
and it came up and ran OK. 

I was able to open the drive and see the data I needed. I inserted a
thumb drive and copied the data over. 

I'm her hero again and we will have the second bottle tonight. :-)

Thanks again to everyone for all the great help.

Robert
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Which OS for notebook

2010-10-06 Thread Michael Ruhe


 Hi guys,

normally I am just listening to what is communicated related to the 
FreeBSD OS.


But here I feel that I can contribute something for Which OS for notebook.

I really do share the opinion that a good Linux might be more suitable 
for notebooks for Newbees, on the other hand I am using Freebsd for 
day to day business also on a Thinkpad T42. I was able to successfully 
install and get FreeBSD running on numerous different brands of notebooks.


Sure, you need time to compile and knowledge how to get things up and 
running. But don't underestimate what you gain doing things yourself.
To install for example Ubuntu its running out of the box. FreeBSD 
expects you to have a sound knowledge of OS's.


At this stage I would like to thank all people contributing to FreeBSD 
for the good documentation and the profound knowledge.


Only a few things are missing like skype but almost all other 
applications are running fine. I also tested PC-BSD it's working 
nice, but for fine tuning and learning pure FreeBSD will be my favourite.


By the way I made my own documentation what suits best. Feel free to ask 
and I will be happy to provide you with this document.


Hope this helps

Regards
Michael





On 10/06/10 19:14, Chad Perrin wrote:

On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 10:50:42AM -0700, David Brodbeck wrote:

On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 6:25 AM, Mark Blackmanm...@exonetric.com  wrote:

There's also the whole train of thought that says FreeBSD isn't really
aimed at the desktop/laptop/notebook use model and any benefit in that arena
is entirely coincidental.


That tends to be my perspective.  Linux tends to be more useful on
laptops and desktops, where up-to-the-minute hardware support is
needed.  For servers, where stability is important, I tend to prefer
BSD, all other things being equal.


Weird.  I guess maybe my excellent experience of using FreeBSD on my
ThinkPad is wrong, and so is my experience of various Linux
distributions having more maintenance issues than FreeBSD on similar
hardware, and I should stop.




Besides the mindshare issue that's been mentioned, part of the problem
here is the balkanized nature of open source licenses, too.  Linux
driver code is useless to FreeBSD developers because the GPL isn't
compatible with the BSD license.


I don't think that's the case.  Maybe such drivers cannot be integrated
directly with the base system without licensing issues, but it can
certainly be distributed and installed when appropriate.  It is, in fact,
for this reason of compatibility that FreeBSD has had ZFS support where
Linux-based systems have not.



___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Which OS for notebook

2010-10-06 Thread Charlie Kester


On Wed 06 Oct 2010 at 07:31:58 PDT Mark Blackman wrote:

Charlie Kester wrote:

On Tue 05 Oct 2010 at 06:25:05 PDT Mark Blackman wrote:


There's also the whole train of thought that says FreeBSD isn't really
aimed at the desktop/laptop/notebook use model and any benefit in that
arena is entirely coincidental.


I've often seen that opinion expressed, but never on the FreeBSD website
or in any of its official materials.

On the contrary, most of the official literature presents it as an OS
for general-purpose computing, and not only for servers.

If I'm wrong about and there is an official statement somewhere that the
main intention is to provide an OS for servers, it would be good to
know.


It's derived from a server/workstation OS and I assume the number of 
FreeBSD deployed servers wildly outnumbers the desktop/notebook 
installations and the tag line is The power to serve, so there's a

strong server bias.


Yet if you go to http://www.freebsd.org the first thing you will read is
that FreeBSD is an advanced operating system for modern server,
desktop, and embedded computer platforms.   Nothing about a bias toward
servers or that it isn't really aimed at the desktop/laptop/notebook
use model.

If FreeBSD is really aimed primarily at servers, I would expect to see
something about this in the goals statement found in the FAQ and
Handbook.  But there's no such indication there.

So I can see why some people might be frustrated by the lack of
attention to some important issues for desktop/laptop/notebook hardware
support.  Nothing in the project literature tells them it's not a
priority. 
___

freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Issues with FlowCleaner on a spam server.

2010-10-06 Thread perikillo

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 1:28 AM, Bas Smeelen b.smee...@ose.nl wrote:
On 10/06/2010 09:40 AM, perikillo wrote:
Hi my friends I have a big issue that I still cannot track what is
causing that my server stop working.

may be this bug?
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/146792
a fix is also in the report
I have a spam gateway running:

spamassassin
clamavis
amavis
apache+mailgraph
postfix
bacula client
apcupsd client

My server is running freebsd 8.0-p2 AMD64. Raid-1.

Copyright (c) 1992-2009 The FreeBSD Project.
Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994
The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.
FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation.
FreeBSD 8.0-RELEASE-p2 #5: Mon May 10 23:23:20 PDT 2010
r...@filter.oakwest.com:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SPAMKER
Timecounter i8254 frequency 1193182 Hz quality 0
CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E3110 @ 3.00GHz (2999.68-MHz K8-class
CPU)
Origin = GenuineIntel Id = 0x1067a Stepping = 10
Features=0xbfebfbffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CLFLUSH,DTS,ACPI,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,SS,HTT,TM,PBE
Features2=0x408e3fdSSE3,DTES64,MON,DS_CPL,VMX,SMX,EST,TM2,SSSE3,CX16,xTPR,PDCM,SSE4.1,XSAVE
AMD Features=0x20100800SYSCALL,NX,LM
AMD Features2=0x1LAHF
TSC: P-state invariant
real memory = 4294967296 (4096 MB)
avail memory = 4119261184 (3928 MB)
ACPI APIC Table: 090208 APIC1432
FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 2 CPUs
FreeBSD/SMP: 1 package(s) x 2 core(s)
cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0
cpu1 (AP): APIC ID: 1

For some reason that I still don't know, amavisd stop working, the
port no longer answer any inbound, postfix, spamd, clamd works,
amavisd is the issue normally.

My server can work for a month, each weekend I update the ports and
upgrade my packages, spamd rules every month are updated.

No issue here, suddenly after a month or 4-5 weeks the server stop
working, amavisd stop doing the job, I can access the server via ssh
and see the issue.

This is the 4th time that happens.

My IDLE goes to 50%, when I start debugging I see a process called
FlowCleaner eating 1 CPU.

Always got the PID 20, looks like a internal process, I have been
searching info about this process but not to much info.

I cannot kill this process, I can restart clamd, spamd, apache,
bacula, but amavisd is stuck.

If I send a shutdown -r now won't work, my server just hang-up, if I
press the power button won't work to.

I have to do a cold reboot, I don't have other choice.

I have read logs but don't see any issue (maillog, console, all, message).

Avg. I got 40'c for each core:

dev.cpu.0.temperature: 42.0C
dev.cpu.1.temperature: 41.0C

I search around on Intel site and this chip max temp. is 70'c, I had
never seen this number on my emails, the biggest number had been 54'c
and this appear before my server got crazy yesterday:

dev.cpu.0.temperature: 53.0C
dev.cpu.1.temperature: 49.0C

Something is causing this, a spam attack, memory leak mmm I had not
seen my server use the whole 4GB ever.

My friends, what do u you recommend to me to track this?

Any input will be very appreciated, I got 1 month to track this before
this happen again, thanks!

DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is for the intended recipient(s) only. Access,
disclosure, copying,
distribution or reliance on any of it by anyone else is prohibited. If you
have received it
by mistake please let us know by reply and then delete it from your system.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Hey Bas thanks, I will try that, I had read the link u mention and I
have the same behavior, is not a router but I have the option inside
my kernel:

optionsFLOWTABLE # per-cpu routing cache

I had seen that we can disable with sysctl, I will try to disable and
wait for a month and see if my spam server don't have issues like this
anymore.

I will let u know, thanks again Bas.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core


http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.openbsd.misc/178267

And yes, there it is, in /usr/src/sys/contrib/dev/acpica/hardware/hwsleep.c:

 * 4.3. Licensee shall not export, either directly or indirectly, any of this
 * software or system incorporating such software without first obtaining any
 * required license or other approval from the U. S. Department of Commerce or
 * any other agency or department of the United States Government.  In the
 * event Licensee exports any such software from the United States or
 * re-exports any such software from a foreign destination, Licensee shall
 * ensure that the distribution and export/re-export of the software is in
 * compliance with all laws, regulations, orders, or other restrictions of the
 * U.S. Export Administration Regulations. Licensee agrees that neither it nor
 * any of its subsidiaries will export/re-export any technical data, process,
 * software, or service, directly or indirectly, to any country for which the
 * United States government or any agency thereof requires an export license,
 * other governmental approval, or letter of assurance, without first obtaining
 * such license, approval or letter.

So, is such approval on file with the FreeBSD Foundation?

-- 
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
mer...@stonehenge.com URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Netbooks BSD

2010-10-06 Thread Gary Kline

On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 09:33:08AM -0400, bdsf...@att.net wrote:
 On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 15:50:12 -0400, Matthias Apitz
 g...@unixarea.de wrote:
 
 El día Monday, October 04, 2010 a las 11:33:02PM +, Mikle
 Krutov escribió:
 
 Hello, list!
 I'm going to buy a netbook soon, so a question is which one.
 The choice is between
 1) Samsung N127
 2) ASUS Eee PC 900AX
 3) MSI U120-094
 Which one is the best for running FreeBSD?
 The best mainly is for opensource (e.g. not ndis)  stable wireless
 drivers.
 So, any good experience and suggestions?
 Thank you for your time!
 
 I have no idea about which would be the best one,
 but I'm using right now (in the moment of typing) an EeePC 900,
 details here: http://www.unixarea.de/installEeePC-8CURRENT.txt
 and this is just fine;
 
 HIH
 
  matthias
 
 
 +1 on EeePC, mine being the 1000. This uses a not-yet-supported
 wireless card (rt2860), but a driver is available and seems to work
 fine:
 http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=7010
 http://repo.or.cz/w/ralink_drivers.git
 (Contrary to the troll-bait happening in a similar thread right now..)
 
 Matthias took the plunge for KDE, which I do like, but for my Eee I
 went with Xfce. Matthias' work and documentation is more thorough
 than mine, so I'm looking thorough it for ideas.
 
 BTW, the specs on the 900AX make me think that Asus is using the
 model to offload old hardware. But if the price is very low, it
 still may be worth it. Personally I prefer to have an SSD instead of
 HDD, and I wouldn't want a screen any smaller than the 10.
 
 Brian


This brings a question to mind; maybe you know; maybe somebody
else on the list does.  Say that I buy an EEE 10 Atom, max out
the memory and go for a 160G hard drive.  Will I be able to
upgrade to a SSD in a few years?

gary



-- 
 Gary Kline  kl...@thought.org  http://www.thought.org  Public Service Unix
The 7.90a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php
   http://journey.thought.org

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: LDAP Authentication from console

2010-10-06 Thread Kevin Mai

Logins over ssh and sudo work great with ldap, but when I try to log in from 
console, it prompts me twice for the password.

If I put a wrong password it prints out that it cannot bind to the ldap server, 
what means that I'm being able to bind to ldap, but cannot login for some 
reason.

What is the specific file in pam.d/ that is used when authenticating through a 
ttyv?

- Mensaje original -
De: Jason jhelf...@e-e.com
Para: Dan Nelson dnel...@allantgroup.com
CC: Kevin Mai k...@mrecic.gov.ar, freebsd-questions 
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Enviados: Miércoles, 6 de Octubre 2010 14:00:08
Asunto: Re: LDAP Authentication from console

On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 11:59:53AM -0500, Dan Nelson thus spake:
In the last episode (Oct 06), Kevin Mai said:
 Hey guys,

 I've already configured PAM to authenticate against ldap and it works
 wonderful using ssh/su/sudo/etc, but when I try to log in from
 console it
 prompts:

 login: kma
 Password: 
 LDAP Password:  (same as the first one)
 Login Incorrect
 login:

Compare /etc/pam.d/login against one of your other pam services that
works. What I do on my servers is add pam_ldap to pam.d/system, then
blow away most
of the lines in the other files and replace them with

auth include system
account include system
session include system
password include system

, so I know everything uses the same configuration.

Back when I had used LDAP for authentication I also needed to edit
/etc/nsswitch.conf

Not sure if this is still the case, or if I was doing it incorrectly,
however not having didn't give me the ability to login via ldap.

-jgh
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Unable to access CDROM device to play music

2010-10-06 Thread Paul B Mahol

On 9/26/10, Carmel carmel...@hotmail.com wrote:
 On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:03:28 +0200
 Polytropon free...@edvax.de articulated:

 On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 19:46:08 -0400, Carmel carmel...@hotmail.com
 wrote:
  On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 00:49:16 +0200
  Polytropon free...@edvax.de articulated:
 
   Have you tried mounting using the ATAPI driver?
  
# mount -o ro -t cd9660 /dev/acd0 /mnt
  
   Does this work for data CDs?
 
  I get this error message:
 
 mount_cd9660: /dev/acd0: Invalid argument

 This seems to show that there's no ISO-9660 file system on
 the (data) CD, or the session is not finished, or any other
 problem on file system level. Can you check

  % file -  /dev/acd0
  % cdcontrol info

 Here's an example for the output for a data CD:

  % file -  /dev/acd0
  /dev/stdin: ISO 9660 CD-ROM filesystem data
  'FreeBSD_Install' (bootable)

  % cdcontrol info
  Starting track = 1, ending track = 1, TOC size = 18 bytes
  track start  duration   block  length   type
  -
  1   0:02.00  57:57.56   0  260831   data
170  57:59.56 -  260831   -  -

 And for an audio CD:

  % file -  /dev/acd0
  /dev/stdin: ERROR: cannot read `(null)' (Invalid argument)

  % cdcontrol info
  Starting track = 1, ending track = 18, TOC size = 154 bytes
  track start  duration   block  length   type
  -
  1   0:02.00   3:31.03   0   15828  audio
  2   3:33.03   2:52.67   15828   12967  audio
  ...
 17  52:24.53   7:27.30  235703   33555  audio
 18  59:52.08   2:48.67  269258   12667  audio
170  62:41.00 -  281925   -  -

 Do you get the same results for the respective CD content types?

 I made some file permission changes, rebooted and made sure that the
 changes were static, and then ran a few test.

 The cdcontrol program will not play a CDROM although it claims it is. I
 can play an audio CD from within KDE; however, it is like pulling teeth
 to accomplish it. Way too much trouble. MPlayer cannot access the audio
 CD naively.

 DATA CDs are another story. I cannot mount them.

 Using a data CD:

 # file -  /dev/acd0
 /dev/stdin: ERROR: cannot read `(null)' (Input/output error)

 # file -  /dev/cd0
 /dev/stdin: ERROR: cannot read `(null)' (Invalid argument)

 # cdcontrol info
 cdcontrol: getting toc header: Invalid argument
 cdcontrol: Invalid argument

 With an audio CD:

 # file -  /dev/acd0
 /dev/stdin: ERROR: cannot read `(null)' (Invalid argument)

 # file -  /dev/cd0
 /dev/stdin: ERROR: cannot read `(null)' (Device not configured)

 # cdcontrol info
 Starting track = 1, ending track = 3, TOC size = 34 bytes
 track start  duration   block  length   type
 -
 1   0:02.00   6:32.00   0   29400  audio
 2   6:34.00   3:55.12   29400   17637  audio
 3  10:29.12   3:42.23   47037   16673  audio
   170  14:11.35 -   63710   -  -

 Finally, just trying a mount command from the command line:

 $ sudo mount -o ro -t cd9660 /dev/acd0 /mnt
 mount_cd9660: /dev/acd0: Invalid argument

 $ sudo mount -o ro -t cd9660 /dev/cd0 /mnt
 mount_cd9660: /dev/cd0: Device not configured

 This is getting to be far more trouble and wasting way too much time
 than it is worth. I can just put the CDs in one of my Windows machines
 and then transfer the data over the network to the FreeBSD units. What
 is strange is that this use to work before I upgraded.

 By the way, Polytropon, please do not CC me. I am on the list and I
 really do not need two copies of every post. Others may appreciate it;
 however, I don't.

If you are sure that this is not environment issue on you side, maybe
it is because output to cd is broken in new snd_hda requiring manual
setup (unforunatelly this is not trivial).

Look snd_hda(4) for more info. Also try to post to multimedia.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Which OS for notebook

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 8:14 PM, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote:
 On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 10:50:42AM -0700, David Brodbeck wrote:
 On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 6:25 AM, Mark Blackman m...@exonetric.com wrote:
  There's also the whole train of thought that says FreeBSD isn't really
  aimed at the desktop/laptop/notebook use model and any benefit in that 
  arena
  is entirely coincidental.

 That tends to be my perspective.  Linux tends to be more useful on
 laptops and desktops, where up-to-the-minute hardware support is
 needed.  For servers, where stability is important, I tend to prefer
 BSD, all other things being equal.

 Weird.  I guess maybe my excellent experience of using FreeBSD on my
 ThinkPad is wrong, and so is my experience of various Linux
 distributions having more maintenance issues than FreeBSD on similar
 hardware, and I should stop.

No, it´s not wrong .. just keep buying ThinkPads .. most devels use
them and hence .. they get more attention.



 Besides the mindshare issue that's been mentioned, part of the problem
 here is the balkanized nature of open source licenses, too.  Linux
 driver code is useless to FreeBSD developers because the GPL isn't
 compatible with the BSD license.

 I don't think that's the case.  Maybe such drivers cannot be integrated
 directly with the base system without licensing issues, but it can
 certainly be distributed and installed when appropriate.  It is, in fact,
 for this reason of compatibility that FreeBSD has had ZFS support where
 Linux-based systems have not.

 --
 Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted softwarein the core

2010-10-06 Thread Matt Emmerton



http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.openbsd.misc/178267

And yes, there it is, in 
/usr/src/sys/contrib/dev/acpica/hardware/hwsleep.c:


* 4.3. Licensee shall not export, either directly or indirectly, any of 
this
* software or system incorporating such software without first obtaining 
any
* required license or other approval from the U. S. Department of Commerce 
or

* any other agency or department of the United States Government.  In the
 snip

So, is such approval on file with the FreeBSD Foundation?


More to the point - we probably need to be doing what our Linux brethren 
have been doing - holding out for a more compatibly-licenced version of the 
ACPICA code.



From http://www.acpica.org/overview.php


quote
ACPICA is written in ANSI C, and can be generated under many different 
32-bit and 64-bit OS development environments. Source code packages are 
provided for the following environments: Microsoft Windows* and UNIX*.


1) The Windows package includes Visual C++* project files and other ACPI 
utilities that run under Windows.


2) The UNIX package has a format and licensing suitable for inclusion by 
commercial OS vendors.


There is no Linux* source code package since ACPICA updates for Linux are 
provided periodically in patch form. The ACPICA subsystem is modified to 
integrate smoothly with the Linux kernel source. This includes conversion of 
the ACPICA source code to the Linux kernel coding standard, and licensing 
under the GNU General Public License.

/quote

Seems like the FSF needs to work on a BSD-compatible licence for this code 
too.


Regards,
--
Matt Emmerton 


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: php5-mysqli problem

2010-10-06 Thread Jerry

On Wed, 6 Oct 2010 15:17:34 +0300
liNEr Crime h17li...@gmail.com articulated:

 Cann't install /usr/ports/databases/php5-mysqli/
 Error:
 /usr/local/include/mysql/m_string.h: In function 'lex_string_set':
 /usr/local/include/mysql/m_string.h:304: error: dereferencing pointer
 to incomplete type
 /usr/local/include/mysql/m_string.h:305: error: dereferencing pointer
 to incomplete type
 *** Error code 1
 1 error
 *** Error code 1
 
 Stop in /usr/ports/databases/php5-mysqli.
 *** Error code 1
 
 FreeBSD free.web 8.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE #0: Mon Jul 19
 02:55:53 UTC 2010

There is a PR files against this; however, I don't believe anything has
been done to rectify the problem.

ports/151133: Unable to build databases/php5-mysqli


-- 
Jerry ✌
freebsd.u...@seibercom.net

Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
__
Do you think that when they asked George Washington for ID that he
just whipped out a quarter?


Steven Wright
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core

2010-10-06 Thread RW

On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 12:40:54 -0700
mer...@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) wrote:

 
 http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.openbsd.misc/178267
...
 So, is such approval on file with the FreeBSD Foundation?

 without first obtaining _any_ _required_ license or other
approval ...

It doesn't say approval is needed. It says that it's needed if it's
required by the appropriate agencies. In other words, it's needed if
it's needed.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core

 RW == RW  rwmailli...@googlemail.com writes:

RW It doesn't say approval is needed. It says that it's needed if it's
RW required by the appropriate agencies. In other words, it's needed if
RW it's needed.

But doesn't this then shift the burden to every exporter, knowing or
unknowing, willing or unwilling?

Seems like an onerous burden.  Is it well-documented?

-- 
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
mer...@stonehenge.com URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: third-party ports/packages sources

2010-10-06 Thread Matthew Seaman

On 06/10/2010 19:06:01, Chad Perrin wrote:
 Is there some way to set up a third-party online source for ports and/or
 packages that allows users to do the same kinds of things they can do
 with the official ports system?  I mean, for instance, using portversion
 to check whether there are new versions available (or an equivalent
 operation) and possibly even checking for security issues via portaudit.
 
 I see, looking at the manpage for portversion, this:
 
  PKG_DBDIR  Alternative location for the installed package database.
 The default is ``/var/db/pkg''.
 
  PORTSDIR   Alternative location for the ports tree and the ports
 database files.  The default is ``/usr/ports''.
 
 I also see some stuff in pkgtools.conf comments that might pertain to
 this sort of thing, but I'm not entirely clear yet on how this might be
 used to access a third-party repository for ports without breaking normal
 operation.  If there's a tutorial out there that would explain how to do
 something like this, I have not yet found it.

You certainly can do this sort of thing.  If you want to create a local
pkg repository all it is basically is a HTTP or FTP server wrapped
around the file structure generated by 'make package' under
/usr/ports/packages.  Maybe with some extra depth in the path to account
for CPU architecture and OS version.  You can mirror pkgs from the
official sites or you can compile your own -- in which case, check out
the Tinderbox application.  Then you just need to set some environment
variables such as PKG_PATH, PACKAGEROOT or PACKAGESITE so that the
various client-side tools will use your personal pkg repo.  See the
ENVIRONMENT section in pkg_add(1).

Now, you could create your own entirely independent ports tree if you
felt that way inclined, but why would you want to?  Most freely
available software is already available from the ports, and you don't
want to duplicate the maintenance burden of any of that.  Instead, a
better approach is to use the hooks provided within the ports system to
add your own local patches, add extra ports or even entire extra
categories of ports to the standard tree.  The key point here is that
you can create a Makefile.local at any level in the ports tree and it
will be included by the regular ports Makefile at that level.  There are
several other potential Makefile filenames you could use similarly,
which the ports looks for and will include given various criteria: the
best way to learn about them is to study the code in
/usr/ports/Mk/bsd.ports.mk.

If your local ports are any good, then do submit them for inclusion in
the main ports collection.  Pro bono publico as lawyers quite rarely say.

You have to be a bit careful with updating mechanisms if you customise
your ports like this: portsnap for one is quite unfriendly to foreign
files within the ports tree, but csup works fine.

Portaudit is a bit harder -- it's processed out of the vuxml sources
automatically, and there isn't a simple mechanism for adding local
modifications.  You could duplicate the whole portaudit generation
process with some local tweaks if you needed to, but on the whole I
think just using the centrally generated version would be good enough
for the vast majority of people.

Cheers,

Matthew

-- 
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.   7 Priory Courtyard
  Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk   Kent, CT11 9PW



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: LDAP Authentication from console

2010-10-06 Thread Michel Talon


Kevin Mai wrote:
 Logins over ssh and sudo work great with ldap, but when I try to log in
 from console, it prompts me twice for the password.
 
 If I put a wrong password it prints out that it cannot bind to the ldap
 server, what means that I'm being able to bind to ldap, but cannot login
 for some reason.

I went through that recently so i can share what i have done:

. First don't forget to configure /usr/local/etc/nss_ldap.conf
This was not mentioned in the doc i had found on the web, i had to run
truss to discover why authentification was not working.

. Second for some strange reason the certificates in cacertir have to be
named in specific way. I have found this hint on the web, and it worked
for me:
ln -s someCA.pem `openssl x509 -in someCA.pem -noout -hash`.0 
(of course i have
tls_cacertdir  /usr/local/etc/openldap/certs
in the 3 ldap config files)

When ldapsearch finally worked OK, i had to play with the pam files.
The file login in /etc/pam.d in fact includes system which needs to
be tuned.

Now the following works but i don't pretend it is optimal or secure, i
am not a pam expert. But it allows me to enter the console either as a
local user or a ldap user and stops unauthenticated users. But something
is not polished enough since changing passwds is not managed, apparently
(the passwd section below). The order of the stuff is important,
choosing between sufficient and required is important, the
try_first_pass is important (it gets passwd from the previous ldap
query for ldap users), etc. it is a big mess. For sshd i used what i
have found in the web documentation, it works but seems quite
complicated.

niobe% cat system
#
# $FreeBSD: src/etc/pam.d/system,v 1.1.32.1.4.1 2010/06/14 02:09:06
# kensmith
# Exp $
#
# System-wide defaults
#

# auth
authsufficient  pam_opie.so no_warn no_fake_prompts
authrequisite   pam_opieaccess.so   no_warn allow_local
#auth   sufficient  pam_krb5.so no_warn try_first_pass
#auth   sufficient  pam_ssh.so  no_warn try_first_pass
authsufficient  /usr/local/lib/pam_ldap.so  no_warn 
authsufficient  pam_unix.so no_warn try_first_pass 
nullok 

# account
#accountrequiredpam_krb5.so
account requiredpam_login_access.so
account sufficient  /usr/local/lib/pam_ldap.so  no_warn 
account sufficient  pam_unix.so  


# session
#sessionoptionalpam_ssh.so
session requiredpam_lastlog.so  no_fail

# password
#password   sufficient  pam_krb5.so no_warn try_first_pass
passwordsufficient  /usr/local/lib/pam_ldap.so  no_warn 
passwordsufficient  pam_unix.so no_warn try_first_pass 


-- 

Michel TALON

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core

2010-10-06 Thread Jerry

On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 14:16:37 -0700
Randal L. Schwartz mer...@stonehenge.com articulated:

  RW == RW  rwmailli...@googlemail.com writes:
 
 RW It doesn't say approval is needed. It says that it's needed if
 RW it's required by the appropriate agencies. In other words, it's
 RW needed if it's needed.
 
 But doesn't this then shift the burden to every exporter, knowing or
 unknowing, willing or unwilling?
 
 Seems like an onerous burden.  Is it well-documented?

Are you familiar with the axiom:

Ignorantia juris non excusat or Ignorantia legis neminem excusat

Translated:

ignorance of the law does not excuse or ignorance of the law excuses
no one In other words, it is a legal principle holding that a person who
is unaware of a law may not escape liability for violating that law
merely because he or she was unaware of its content.

There are exception; however, they are rare.

-- 
Jerry ✌
freebsd.u...@seibercom.net

Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
__

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core

 Jerry == Jerry  freebsd.u...@seibercom.net writes:

 But doesn't this then shift the burden to every exporter, knowing or
 unknowing, willing or unwilling?
 
 Seems like an onerous burden.  Is it well-documented?

Jerry Are you familiar with the axiom:

Jerry Ignorantia juris non excusat or Ignorantia legis neminem excusat

Jerry Translated:

Jerry ignorance of the law does not excuse or ignorance of the law excuses
Jerry no one In other words, it is a legal principle holding that a person who
Jerry is unaware of a law may not escape liability for violating that law
Jerry merely because he or she was unaware of its content.

Jerry There are exception; however, they are rare.

I understand that entirely.  Which is why it would be reasonable (and
downright ethical) to ensure that every FreeBSD integrator be made well
aware of this restriction.

It hadn't occurred to *me* for example to think that FreeBSD might be
restricted.  And I hadn't seen any prominent disclaimers.  Why rely on a
very very buried notice?

-- 
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
mer...@stonehenge.com URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: third-party ports/packages sources

On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 10:18:54PM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:

[stuff]

Thanks!  That gives me a lot to look into.  I appreciate the information.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]


pgpnxxRo3nzZg.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: confirm 0fa75124cd6e5148b308c9a2d70f2847d79ff29f

2010-10-06 Thread Jerry

On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 22:17:09 +
freebsd-questions-requ...@freebsd.org
freebsd-questions-requ...@freebsd.org articulated:

 Mailing list subscription confirmation notice for mailing list
 freebsd-questions
 
 We have received a request for subscription of your email address,
 good_old_...@nc.rr.com, to the freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing
 list.  To confirm that you want to be added to this mailing list,
 simply reply to this message, keeping the Subject: header intact.  Or
 visit this web page:
 
 
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/confirm/freebsd-questions/0fa75124cd6e5148b308c9a2d70f2847d79ff29f
 
 
 Or include the following line -- and only the following line -- in a
 message to freebsd-questions-requ...@freebsd.org:
 
 confirm 0fa75124cd6e5148b308c9a2d70f2847d79ff29f
 
 Note that simply sending a `reply' to this message should work from
 most mail readers, since that usually leaves the Subject: line in the
 right form (additional Re: text in the Subject: is okay).
 
 If you do not wish to be subscribed to this list, please simply
 disregard this message.  If you think you are being maliciously
 subscribed to the list, or have any other questions, send them to
 freebsd-questions-ow...@freebsd.org.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

VirtualBox: Pressing some key few times fast causes an event storm

2010-10-06 Thread Yuri


I run Ubuntu guest on FreeBSD host.
I am in Open Accessories/Terminal app

I get this quite often: when I press some button fast few times it gets 
pressed endless number of times. This can be Enter after some command. 
Or Up/Down on some large file in vim. Guest behaves like I pressed this 
button infinite number of times and stops responding.


Trying to close the guest window causes window manager to ask if I would 
like to terminate the virtualbox application altogether. This means that 
this window isn't responding.


Is this a known bug?

Yuri
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core

2010-10-06 Thread Erik Trulsson

On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 02:16:37PM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
  RW == RW  rwmailli...@googlemail.com writes:
 
 RW It doesn't say approval is needed. It says that it's needed if it's
 RW required by the appropriate agencies. In other words, it's needed if
 RW it's needed.
 
 But doesn't this then shift the burden to every exporter, knowing or
 unknowing, willing or unwilling?

 
 Seems like an onerous burden.  Is it well-documented?

Since it essentially says that if you export it from the USA you will
have to follow whatever laws and regulations covers such exports, it
doesn't really add any burden since anybody doing such an export would
be legally required to do so anyway.

AFAICT the paragraph in question does not add any restrictions or
burdens, it just points out potentially existing ones.




-- 
Insert your favourite quote here.
Erik Trulsson
ertr1...@student.uu.se
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core

 Erik == Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se writes:

Erik Since it essentially says that if you export it from the USA you will
Erik have to follow whatever laws and regulations covers such exports, it
Erik doesn't really add any burden since anybody doing such an export would
Erik be legally required to do so anyway.

Erik AFAICT the paragraph in question does not add any restrictions or
Erik burdens, it just points out potentially existing ones.

Yes, you always have to obey the law when you export.  But this clause
seems to imply that the associated software *knowingly* triggers the
export laws, probably in a bad way.

Do you have a different opinion, and is it a legal opinion?

Either this clause needs to be hoisted to the front page of the FreeBSD
distro proper (Some software contained within may be subject to...)
or it should be removed from this software entirely.

Burying it is irresponsible.

-- 
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
mer...@stonehenge.com URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: VirtualBox: Pressing some key few times fast causes an event storm

2010-10-06 Thread Adam Vande More

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Yuri y...@rawbw.com wrote:

 I run Ubuntu guest on FreeBSD host.
 I am in Open Accessories/Terminal app

 I get this quite often: when I press some button fast few times it gets
 pressed endless number of times. This can be Enter after some command. Or
 Up/Down on some large file in vim. Guest behaves like I pressed this button
 infinite number of times and stops responding.

 Trying to close the guest window causes window manager to ask if I would
 like to terminate the virtualbox application altogether. This means that
 this window isn't responding.

 Is this a known bug?


Yes, it is not specific to FreeBSD and really not even specific to
VirtualBox since VMware guests can also experience the issue.  There are
resolutions to it, if you bother to look.

-- 
Adam Vande More
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: LDAP Authentication from console

2010-10-06 Thread Indexer

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


On 07/10/2010, at 10:05 AM, Michel Talon wrote:

 
 Kevin Mai wrote:
 Logins over ssh and sudo work great with ldap, but when I try to log in
 from console, it prompts me twice for the password.
 
 If I put a wrong password it prints out that it cannot bind to the ldap
 server, what means that I'm being able to bind to ldap, but cannot login
 for some reason.
 
 

Can you send a copy of your /etc/pam.d/sshd and /etc/pam.d/system ? What i 
think you have done is this

authsufficient  pam_opie.so no_warn no_fake_prompts
authrequisite   pam_opieaccess.so   no_warn allow_local
authsufficient  pam_krb5.so no_warn try_first_pass 
authsufficient  /usr/local/lib/pam_ldap.so no_warn 
try_first_pass
authrequiredpam_unix.so no_warn use_first_pass

Notice the try_first_pass options on krb5 and ldap? This will prompt for the 
krb5 password then prompt again for the ldap password, and then fall back to 
unix. It looks like this when you enter the wrong password

Password:
LDAP Password:

Password
LDAP Password:  

etc 

In your case, you likely have something else, and not krb5, but editing your 
file to appear like this will be of great help

authsufficient  pam_opie.so no_warn no_fake_prompts
authrequisite   pam_opieaccess.so   no_warn allow_local
authsufficient  /usr/local/lib/pam_ldap.so no_warn 
try_first_pass
authrequiredpam_unix.so no_warn use_first_pass

You need to set ldap to try_first_pass, and unix to use_first_pass. This will 
stop the double prompting

Also of note, is that /etc/pam.d/login is an include of system. Thus likely you 
have your system file setup wrong. Mine is a carbon copy of my sshd file. Here 
it is here

authsufficient  pam_opie.so no_warn no_fake_prompts
authrequisite   pam_opieaccess.so   no_warn allow_local
authsufficient  /usr/local/lib/pam_ldap.so no_warn 
try_first_pass
authrequiredpam_unix.so no_warn use_first_pass
#auth   requiredpam_deny.so use_first_pass

account requiredpam_nologin.so
#account requiredpam_krb5.so
account requiredpam_login_access.so
account optionalpam_unix.so
account required/usr/local/lib/pam_ldap.so 
ignore_authinfo_unavail ignore_unknown_user

# session
#sessionoptionalpam_ssh.so
session requiredpam_permit.so
#account optionalpam_krb5.so
#session requiredpam_mkhomedir.so skel=/etc/skel/ umask=0022

passwordsufficient  pam_unix.so no_warn use_first_pass

A few other hints

Make sure your certificates have the correct CN, that matches your hosts FQDN. 
You can specifiy them with the option tls_cacertfile and these DO NOT need 
converting into any weird formats, just the standard output from openssl will 
work. 

@Michael

If you plan to use LDAP groups to control access to be able to login to a 
server, you need to change your ldap account line, as at this time it will 
allow anyone through into the system. Regardless, what i have also means that 
ldap is not checked for non ldap users. 

Changing ldap passwords IS NOT POSSIBLE from the passwd binary. I cannot 
remember why but it is not. You must use the ldappasswd utility. 

Alot of basic help can be found here 
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/ldap-auth/ldap.html

Sincerely,

William Brown

pgp.mit.edu



-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin)
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=qIai
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Netbooks BSD

2010-10-06 Thread Gary Kline

On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 04:45:35PM -0400, bdsf...@att.net wrote:
 On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 15:54:35 -0400, Gary Kline kl...@thought.org wrote:
 
 
  This brings a question to mind; maybe you know; maybe somebody
  else on the list does.  Say that I buy an EEE 10 Atom, max out
  the memory and go for a 160G hard drive.  Will I be able to
  upgrade to a SSD in a few years?
 
  gary
 
 It depends on the model and your hardware hackatude. This has
 nothing to do with FreeBSD, so I suggest you check the Asus Eee
 forums.
 
 Brian


The only reason for my post is that I plan to drop on FreeBSD. 
...iF it takes hardware work--well, anything beyond plugging
into SSD cubes--then I'll wait.  

gary

-- 
 Gary Kline  kl...@thought.org  http://www.thought.org  Public Service Unix
The 7.90a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php
   http://journey.thought.org

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core


El 06/10/2010 08:08 p.m., Randal L. Schwartz escribió:

Erik == Erik Trulssonertr1...@student.uu.se  writes:


Erik  Since it essentially says that if you export it from the USA you will
Erik  have to follow whatever laws and regulations covers such exports, it
Erik  doesn't really add any burden since anybody doing such an export would
Erik  be legally required to do so anyway.

Erik  AFAICT the paragraph in question does not add any restrictions or
Erik  burdens, it just points out potentially existing ones.

Yes, you always have to obey the law when you export.  But this clause
seems to imply that the associated software *knowingly* triggers the
export laws, probably in a bad way.

Do you have a different opinion, and is it a legal opinion?

Either this clause needs to be hoisted to the front page of the FreeBSD
distro proper (Some software contained within may be subject to...)
or it should be removed from this software entirely.

Burying it is irresponsible.



+1

BTW: IAAL

Best Regards
Gonzalo Nemmi
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core

2010-10-06 Thread Rob Farmer

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 14:46, Randal L. Schwartz mer...@stonehenge.com wrote:
 I understand that entirely.  Which is why it would be reasonable (and
 downright ethical) to ensure that every FreeBSD integrator be made well
 aware of this restriction.

 It hadn't occurred to *me* for example to think that FreeBSD might be
 restricted.  And I hadn't seen any prominent disclaimers.  Why rely on a
 very very buried notice?

If your business model involves importing/exporting large collections
of material which you did not create, and further more do not outright
own, but are licensed to use under certain conditions, then you need
to have both a lawyer and an accountant review your setup for any
potential issues. There are entire college degrees in international
business and it is folly to think that all the ins and outs of a
particular scenario will be readily apparent.

A competent review would turn up this license clause and would give
you advice on what to do about it. I don't think complaining that you
weren't aware of the license terms before exporting is valid.
Furthermore, this isn't really a license issue, but more of a issue of
federal law. If you are in the US, these laws regarding what may be
exported to where always apply, regardless of what the license says.

Making the license more visible may be a good idea, but doesn't
materially change the situation any.

-- 
Rob Farmer
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core

 Rob == Rob Farmer rfar...@predatorlabs.net writes:

Rob Making the license more visible may be a good idea, but doesn't
Rob materially change the situation any.

I agree, it doesn't change it materially.

But for the casual integrator, making it very visible would help.

-- 
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
mer...@stonehenge.com URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core

2010-10-06 Thread Michael Powell

Rob Farmer wrote:

 On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 14:46, Randal L. Schwartz mer...@stonehenge.com
 wrote:
 I understand that entirely.  Which is why it would be reasonable (and
 downright ethical) to ensure that every FreeBSD integrator be made well
 aware of this restriction.

 It hadn't occurred to *me* for example to think that FreeBSD might be
 restricted.  And I hadn't seen any prominent disclaimers.  Why rely on a
 very very buried notice?
 
 If your business model involves importing/exporting large collections
 of material which you did not create, and further more do not outright
 own, but are licensed to use under certain conditions, then you need
 to have both a lawyer and an accountant review your setup for any
 potential issues. There are entire college degrees in international
 business and it is folly to think that all the ins and outs of a
 particular scenario will be readily apparent.
 
 A competent review would turn up this license clause and would give
 you advice on what to do about it. I don't think complaining that you
 weren't aware of the license terms before exporting is valid.
 Furthermore, this isn't really a license issue, but more of a issue of
 federal law. If you are in the US, these laws regarding what may be
 exported to where always apply, regardless of what the license says.
 
 Making the license more visible may be a good idea, but doesn't
 materially change the situation any.
 

Please forgive my somewhat ignorant idea(s) on this subject, as I am 
definitely not a lawyer. 

I was under the impression that the most onerous of these export rules and 
restrictions applied to crypto technology. If this is so, what I don't quite 
grasp is what do crypto export restrictions have to do with acpi? Is acpi a 
copyrighted, patented, or trademark otherwise owned by some entity? Quite 
possibly so as it is in contrib. I just have no idea who might own it. Or 
how it would fall afoul of crypto export restrictions.

Looking forward to enlightenment.  :-)

-Mike


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core

2010-10-06 Thread Michael Powell

Michael Powell wrote:

[snip] export restrictions have to do with acpi? Is
 acpi a copyrighted, patented, or trademark otherwise owned by some entity?
 Quite possibly so as it is in contrib. I just have no idea who might own
 it. Or how it would fall afoul of crypto export restrictions.
 
 Looking forward to enlightenment.  :-)
 
Oh - I see now, it is owned by Intel.

-Mike



___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core

 Michael == Michael Powell nightre...@hotmail.com writes:

Michael I was under the impression that the most onerous of these
Michael export rules and restrictions applied to crypto technology. If
Michael this is so, what I don't quite grasp is what do crypto export
Michael restrictions have to do with acpi? Is acpi a copyrighted,
Michael patented, or trademark otherwise owned by some entity? Quite
Michael possibly so as it is in contrib. I just have no idea who might
Michael own it. Or how it would fall afoul of crypto export
Michael restrictions.

Exactly my point.  Either it's crypto, and the whole distro is tainted
and should be marked as such UP FRONT, or it's not, and the paragraph
should be removed, if possible.

Or a third alternative... use the ACPI implementation from OpenBSD,
which doesn't have such a restriction.

-- 
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
mer...@stonehenge.com URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core

2010-10-06 Thread Jung-uk Kim

On Wednesday 06 October 2010 03:40 pm, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
 http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.openbsd.misc/178267

 And yes, there it is, in
 /usr/src/sys/contrib/dev/acpica/hardware/hwsleep.c:

  * 4.3. Licensee shall not export, either directly or indirectly,
 any of this * software or system incorporating such software
 without first obtaining any * required license or other approval
 from the U. S. Department of Commerce or * any other agency or
 department of the United States Government.  In the * event
 Licensee exports any such software from the United States or *
 re-exports any such software from a foreign destination, Licensee
 shall * ensure that the distribution and export/re-export of the
 software is in * compliance with all laws, regulations, orders, or
 other restrictions of the * U.S. Export Administration Regulations.
 Licensee agrees that neither it nor * any of its subsidiaries will
 export/re-export any technical data, process, * software, or
 service, directly or indirectly, to any country for which the *
 United States government or any agency thereof requires an export
 license, * other governmental approval, or letter of assurance,
 without first obtaining * such license, approval or letter.

 So, is such approval on file with the FreeBSD Foundation?

Please stop the FUD.  ACPICA is actually triple-licensed, i.e., 
generic Intel software license, (three-clause) BSD-like license, and 
GPLv2.  For example, please see the same file on Linux:

http://fxr.watson.org/fxr/source/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c?v=linux-2.6

When a new ACPICA release is merged to Linux tree, it is pre-processed 
with acpisrc (which is also included in ACPICA release tarball) and 
all C source files are converted to Linux style.  Actually this tool 
replaces the generic Intel license with the actual BSD/GPLv2 dual 
license header at the same time:

http://git.moblin.org/cgit.cgi/acpica/tree/source/tools/acpisrc

The following file contains source conversion table for Linux:

http://git.moblin.org/cgit.cgi/acpica/tree/source/tools/acpisrc/astable.c#n158

Historically FreeBSD never touched the license header.  However, I am 
going to do it next time to avoid confusions.

Jung-uk Kim
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core

 Jung-uk == Jung-uk Kim j...@freebsd.org writes:

Jung-uk Please stop the FUD.  ACPICA is actually triple-licensed, i.e., 
Jung-uk generic Intel software license, (three-clause) BSD-like license, and 
Jung-uk GPLv2.

[...]

Jung-uk Historically FreeBSD never touched the license header.  However, I am 
Jung-uk going to do it next time to avoid confusions.

Then. Please. Do.

I would have never brought this up (nor would the OpenBSD list before
me) if the right license was here.

Geez.  What a wasted amount of effort.  If anything to be learned from
here, it's use the right boilerplate when you include something into the
distro.

Otherwise, smart people will react to license notices because yes
indeed, THESE MATTER.

-- 
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
mer...@stonehenge.com URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core

2010-10-06 Thread Rob Farmer

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 20:04, Michael Powell nightre...@hotmail.com wrote:
 I was under the impression that the most onerous of these export rules and
 restrictions applied to crypto technology. If this is so, what I don't quite
 grasp is what do crypto export restrictions have to do with acpi? Is acpi a
 copyrighted, patented, or trademark otherwise owned by some entity? Quite
 possibly so as it is in contrib. I just have no idea who might own it. Or
 how it would fall afoul of crypto export restrictions.

 Looking forward to enlightenment.  :-)

I'm not a lawyer either, so take all this with a grain of salt.

Basically, there are two reasons the US will block an export, which
you can read about at:
http://www.bis.doc.gov/licensing/exportingbasics.htm

1) The export is considered dangerous for one reason or another, and
needs to be licensed so the government can keep track of who is
getting it and why they want it. Examples include military equipment,
nuclear equipment, controlled substances, firearms, etc. Crypto is
defined as a munition and is restricted for this reason. There are a
lot of opinions about whether this is right, but it has held up in
court.

2) The destination is designated as supporting terrorist activities
or is embargoed for political reasons (socialist/totalitarian
government - Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, and Syria). Most of the
people in these countries don't have access to a computer and the
rights to install whatever they want on it, so this is targeted at
government officials.

As such, you are correct that for the vast majority of cases, the ACPI
code shouldn't have problems or need a license. The biggest legal risk
I can see is if ftp.freebsd.org and such allow people in the embargoed
countries to download code - I've seen a brief reference saying
Sourceforge was forced to IP ban these.

-- 
Rob Farmer
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core


El 06/10/2010 11:18 p.m., Rob Farmer escribió:

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 14:46, Randal L. Schwartzmer...@stonehenge.com  wrote:

I understand that entirely.  Which is why it would be reasonable (and
downright ethical) to ensure that every FreeBSD integrator be made well
aware of this restriction.

It hadn't occurred to *me* for example to think that FreeBSD might be
restricted.  And I hadn't seen any prominent disclaimers.  Why rely on a
very very buried notice?


If your business model involves importing/exporting large collections
of material which you did not create, and further more do not outright
own, but are licensed to use under certain conditions, then you need
to have both a lawyer and an accountant review your setup for any
potential issues.  There are entire college degrees in international


As a lawyer, no matter how much I review your set up, it´s a _fact_ that 
a license place in a place like 
/usr/src/sys/contrib/dev/acpica/hardware/hwsleep.c, that is to say, lost 
amongs a gazillion files: _will_ scape any review.


Furthermore, you can count on legal advise about the thing you tell you 
lawyer to review, but if you ignore _what_ you want to get reviewed: you 
can´t count on anyone knowing it for you.



business and it is folly to think that all the ins and outs of a
particular scenario will be readily apparent.

A competent review would turn up this license clause and would give
you advice on what to do about it. I don't think complaining that you
weren't aware of the license terms before exporting is valid.


No ... and you are dead wrong about that .. a competent review will only 
answer the questions asked ... if you ignore the existence of such 
license and it´s terms, then there´s no way you would ask for advice 
about it, and _that_ I think is the point Randal is trying to make.



Furthermore, this isn't really a license issue, but more of a issue of
federal law. If you are in the US, these laws regarding what may be
exported to where always apply, regardless of what the license says.

Making the license more visible may be a good idea, but doesn't
materially change the situation any.


It does by making it visible and thus telling potential 
exporters/re-exporters watch out for this one. Ask your lawyer about 
it´s terms and conditions.


Best Regards
Gonzalo Nemmi
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Like it or not, Theo has a point... freebsd is shipping export-restricted software in the core