Re: Horrible installer
Damien Fleuriot wrote: On 1/19/12 3:25 AM, Allan McKinnon wrote: I finally got to install FreeBSD 9 onto my computer and noticed that the installer is now different. It seems to me that it forces you into doing extra steps that I was comfortable doing on my own. I really enjoyed the old installer because then I had complete control over how I tweaked my computer during and after the install. I am surprised that there is no gui present while installing FreeBSD because it feels more like Ubuntu or a windows install (somewhat). Please, please, please take this nightmare away and bring the beloved installer that was before FreeBSD 9. Thank you for listening. Allan ___ Erm, you have to realize the new installer was discussed at length here, when 9.0 was still under development/beta/prerelease. Then would have been the best time to voice your frustration over the new scheme. Alternatively, you could do like me and install entirely by hand: - boot an MFSBSD image (thanks mm@ ) - partition your disks from there (see http://my.gd/bsd.htm for a rough sketch on how to use gpart) - fetch the 9.0 archives in .txz (tar.xz) format - unpack archives with xz -d - untar archived to the mountpoint with your new filesystems (eg: tar xf base.tar -C /mnt) - customize configuration files (rc.conf, fstab, root's password or SSH key, sshd_config to allow root login temporarily) And then most of all, profit ;) I've been doing installs this way first with 8.x (using the install scripts on the CDROM) then now with 9.x unpacking the .txz archives. I'm quite happy with it, the process is simple enough to document and reproduce, and offers suitable customization options. We've developed a tiny web interface here that lets us customize the size, type and label of our GPT partitions, hostname, IP address, root password and SSH accounts/keys to deploy on such newly installed machines. The interface spits the whole wall of commands to paste once logged in to the MFSBSD image to install the new OS and configure it. Works like a charm really. ___ 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 so post your script so others can use it ___ 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: Horrible installer
On 1/20/12 9:36 AM, Fbsd8 wrote: Damien Fleuriot wrote: On 1/19/12 3:25 AM, Allan McKinnon wrote: I finally got to install FreeBSD 9 onto my computer and noticed that the installer is now different. It seems to me that it forces you into doing extra steps that I was comfortable doing on my own. I really enjoyed the old installer because then I had complete control over how I tweaked my computer during and after the install. I am surprised that there is no gui present while installing FreeBSD because it feels more like Ubuntu or a windows install (somewhat). Please, please, please take this nightmare away and bring the beloved installer that was before FreeBSD 9. Thank you for listening. Allan ___ Erm, you have to realize the new installer was discussed at length here, when 9.0 was still under development/beta/prerelease. Then would have been the best time to voice your frustration over the new scheme. Alternatively, you could do like me and install entirely by hand: - boot an MFSBSD image (thanks mm@ ) - partition your disks from there (see http://my.gd/bsd.htm for a rough sketch on how to use gpart) - fetch the 9.0 archives in .txz (tar.xz) format - unpack archives with xz -d - untar archived to the mountpoint with your new filesystems (eg: tar xf base.tar -C /mnt) - customize configuration files (rc.conf, fstab, root's password or SSH key, sshd_config to allow root login temporarily) And then most of all, profit ;) I've been doing installs this way first with 8.x (using the install scripts on the CDROM) then now with 9.x unpacking the .txz archives. I'm quite happy with it, the process is simple enough to document and reproduce, and offers suitable customization options. We've developed a tiny web interface here that lets us customize the size, type and label of our GPT partitions, hostname, IP address, root password and SSH accounts/keys to deploy on such newly installed machines. The interface spits the whole wall of commands to paste once logged in to the MFSBSD image to install the new OS and configure it. Works like a charm really. ___ 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 so post your script so others can use it I'm afraid it's not that simple, the PHP page that generates the customized lines to copy/paste for installations is integrated into our user management interface (for reasons I'll skip). I can't post that since it's corporate stuff. However you've got a rough sketch of how we do it at - http://my.gd/bsd.htm and a much more complete procedure based on it from Ollivier Robert at: - http://www.keltia.net/howtos/freebsd-dedibox ___ 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
[SOLVED] A quick fix for Firefox mailto: issues
I don't know who else has come across this, or who even uses this particular combination of firefox and thunderbird. I use it for the sake of my users, so its just easier to be a roman in rome. I have setup IceWM as the standard though. In firefox when one clicks on a mailto: link it fails to work (default). After searching for hours and googling my brains out, changing settings and what not with zero success, the final answer was ridiculously simple: Manually set the mail command. Default doesn't work (for whatever reason- probably due to gnome or the lack of). To make things all right in the world click (on the menu bar in firefox): edit-preferences. Click the applications tab on the popup window, and look for mailto: and select use other and pick the mailer of your choice. Forget all the about:config settings and the other crap out there- it simply doesn't work. It probably has to do with the infiltration of gnome (and linuxisms), but the long and the short of it is it doesn't work for FreeBSD. This does. HTH someone in need (probably using google a month from now...) :) ___ 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
Was... A quick fix for Firefox mailto: issues Now... The other way round problem
Excuse me for using this thread but I feel I have a problem related to this, but with Thunderbird not opening URLs. I followed all instructions I can find, but have not been successful. Using the config editor I added the following, and have checked that it is in the file prefs.js: user_pref(network.protocol-handler.app.ftp, /usr/local/bin/firefox); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.app.http, /usr/local/bin/firefox); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.app.https, /usr/local/bin/firefox); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.warn-external.ftp, true); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.warn-external.http, true); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.warn-external.https, true); This does not work for me and has been so for a while. It started after an upgrade. If anyone has a solution to this problem I would like to read about it. Thank you :-) 2012-01-20 15:02, Da Rock skrev: I don't know who else has come across this, or who even uses this particular combination of firefox and thunderbird. I use it for the sake of my users, so its just easier to be a roman in rome. I have setup IceWM as the standard though. In firefox when one clicks on a mailto: link it fails to work (default). After searching for hours and googling my brains out, changing settings and what not with zero success, the final answer was ridiculously simple: Manually set the mail command. Default doesn't work (for whatever reason- probably due to gnome or the lack of). To make things all right in the world click (on the menu bar in firefox): edit-preferences. Click the applications tab on the popup window, and look for mailto: and select use other and pick the mailer of your choice. Forget all the about:config settings and the other crap out there- it simply doesn't work. It probably has to do with the infiltration of gnome (and linuxisms), but the long and the short of it is it doesn't work for FreeBSD. This does. HTH someone in need (probably using google a month from now...) :) ___ 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 ___ 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
freebsd-update and src.txz
Is it true that freebsd-update does not update the souce files from 8.2-R to 9.0-RELEASE? And if not what is the best way to get the src.txz installed on an updated system? I do have the disc1 iso. Is src.txz installed under /usr/src or /usr/src/sys? ___ 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: Was... A quick fix for Firefox mailto: issues Now... The other way round problem
2012-01-20 17:16, Leslie Jensen skrev: Excuse me for using this thread but I feel I have a problem related to this, but with Thunderbird not opening URLs. I followed all instructions I can find, but have not been successful. Using the config editor I added the following, and have checked that it is in the file prefs.js: user_pref(network.protocol-handler.app.ftp, /usr/local/bin/firefox); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.app.http, /usr/local/bin/firefox); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.app.https, /usr/local/bin/firefox); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.warn-external.ftp, true); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.warn-external.http, true); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.warn-external.https, true); This does not work for me and has been so for a while. It started after an upgrade. If anyone has a solution to this problem I would like to read about it. Thank you :-) I just goggled a little more and found a mention of the file mimeTypes.rdf The changes I made was not transferred to this file. Editing the entries with firefox to the correct path did it. Sorry for the noise :-) /Leslie ___ 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
libjawt.so and libz.so.5
Hi! I ran pkg_libchk on FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE #0 and I got: libreoffice-3.4.5: /usr/local/lib/libreoffice/basis3.4/program/libofficebean.so misses libjawt.so I did check and I have /usr/local/openjdk6/jre/lib/i386/libjawt.so I had installed diableo which I deinstalled and install openjdk6. I reinstall libreoofice after that but before with diablo-jdk16 I had the same message. The other one is with Opera-11-60: /usr/local/lib/opera/liboperagtk2.so misses libz.so.5 I have on the system ;ibz.so.6 Thanks. Mitja http://jpgmag.com/people/lumiwa ___ 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: libjawt.so and libz.so.5
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 13:21:38 -0600, ajtiM wrote: The other one is with Opera-11-60: /usr/local/lib/opera/liboperagtk2.so misses libz.so.5 I have on the system ;ibz.so.6 I think you need to reinstall Opera so it will be linked against the current version libz.so.6. Maybe you have left out an important step when upgrading from v8 to v9. See /usr/src/Makefile's comment header: [...] 7. `make installworld' 8. `make delete-old' 9. `mergemaster'(you may wish to use -i, along with -U or -F). 10. `reboot' 11. `make delete-old-libs' (in case no 3rd party program uses them anymore) Steps 8 and 11 are important here. In case you've not removed the libs from v8, Opera still seems to link against them even though the version does not match anymore. Make sure you have performed the upgrading steps properly before rebuilding Opera. This is important when rebuilding installed applications after system upgrade (unless you have installed the compat8x-i386-x.y.* port and _not_ installed any further applications). -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ 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: libjawt.so and libz.so.5
On 20 January 2012 14:21, ajtiM lum...@gmail.com wrote: Hi! I ran pkg_libchk on FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE #0 and I got: libreoffice-3.4.5: /usr/local/lib/libreoffice/basis3.4/program/libofficebean.so misses libjawt.so I did check and I have /usr/local/openjdk6/jre/lib/i386/libjawt.so I had installed diableo which I deinstalled and install openjdk6. I reinstall libreoofice after that but before with diablo-jdk16 I had the same message. The other one is with Opera-11-60: /usr/local/lib/opera/liboperagtk2.so misses libz.so.5 I have on the system ;ibz.so.6 libz.so.5 is in misc/compat8x -- -- ___ 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: freebsd-update and src.txz
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 17:24:53 +0100, Dick Hoogendijk wrote: Is it true that freebsd-update does not update the souce files from 8.2-R to 9.0-RELEASE? I think also updating src/ is the default behaviour. See man freebsd-update.conf, setting Components: The parameters following this keyword are the components or sub-components of FreeBSD which will be updated. The components are ``src'' (source code), ``world'' (non-kernel binaries), and ``kernel''; the sub-components are the indi- vidual distribution sets generated as part of the release process (e.g., ``src/base'', ``src/sys'', ``world/base'', ``world/catpages'', ``kernel/smp''). Note that prior to FreeBSD 6.1, the ``kernel'' component was dis- tributed as part of ``world/base''. The file /etc/freebsd-update.conf contains this line: Components src world kernel So sources should be updated. And if not what is the best way to get the src.txz installed on an updated system? If Internet connection is available, I prefer using CVS for that particular task (the make update method), as it's easy to specify a certain release. However, you need some basic files in /usr/src to perform this task. If the system has been installed without the sources, it's easier to get the source archive file from CD or DVD, or download it from an official FTP mirror. The 9.0/i386 sources are here: ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/releases/i386/9.0-RELEASE/src.txz Example: # cd /tmp # ftp ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/releases/i386/9.0-RELEASE/src.txz # tar -xz -C / -f src.txz After getting the RELEASE sources and installing them, for LATER use you could create or modify /etc/make.conf to contain those lines: SUP=/usr/bin/csup SUP_UPDATE= /usr/bin/csup SUPFLAGS= -L 2 SUPHOST=cvsup.freebsd.org SUPFILE=/etc/sup/stable.sup #PORTSSUPFILE= /etc/sup/ports.sup # optional #DOCSUPFILE=/etc/sup/doc.sup# optional #DOC_LANG= en_US.ISO8859-1 de_DE.ISO8859-1 # change You can use the same mechanism to update your ports tree and the documentation for the languages you select. The file name for getting the exact RELEASE sources could be /etc/sup/release.sup, containing the RELEASE instead of the STABLE tag shown in the next example. Then create directory /etc/sup and file /etc/sup/release.sup: *default host=cvsup.freebsd.org *default base=/var/db *default prefix=/usr *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_9 *default delete use-rel-suffix *default compress src-all This one will keep you on 9-STABLE. You can specify any other version you need (even _older_ versions if you want to downgrade) by using the tag= parameter. RELENG_9_0_0_RELEASE- 9.0-RELEASE RELENG_9_0 - 9.0-pX (security patches) RELENG_9- 9-STABLE The different tags are explained here: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cvs-tags.html Then the simple thing you need to do is: # cd /usr/src # make update That's a versatile and easy approach. With the example above, you should get the sources of 9.0-RELEASE properly. I do have the disc1 iso. Is src.txz installed under /usr/src or /usr/src/sys? I think it will be obvious place, which is /usr/src, as usr/src/ is hardcoded in the path prefix of the archive file, so extraction beginning in / should do the correct thing. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ 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: libjawt.so and libz.so.5
On Friday 20 January 2012 13:41:25 Polytropon wrote: On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 13:21:38 -0600, ajtiM wrote: The other one is with Opera-11-60: /usr/local/lib/opera/liboperagtk2.so misses libz.so.5 I have on the system ;ibz.so.6 I think you need to reinstall Opera so it will be linked against the current version libz.so.6. Maybe you have left out an important step when upgrading from v8 to v9. See /usr/src/Makefile's comment header: [...] 7. `make installworld' 8. `make delete-old' 9. `mergemaster'(you may wish to use -i, along with -U or -F). 10. `reboot' 11. `make delete-old-libs' (in case no 3rd party program uses them anymore) Steps 8 and 11 are important here. In case you've not removed the libs from v8, Opera still seems to link against them even though the version does not match anymore. Make sure you have performed the upgrading steps properly before rebuilding Opera. This is important when rebuilding installed applications after system upgrade (unless you have installed the compat8x-i386-x.y.* port and _not_ installed any further applications). I didn't update version 8 to 9. I mage new install of FreeBSD 9.0-RC3 and than I use freebsd-update upgrade to FreeBSD-RELEASE. I did reinstall Opera two times and it is the same. I don't know whey LibreeOffice didn't saw that I have libjawt.so? Thanks. Mitja http://jpgmag.com/people/lumiwa ___ 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
problem to kill -KILL process
Hi
# ps ax|grep rad
45471 ?? TLs 263:35.44 /usr/local/sbin/radiusd
26473 1 S+ 0:00.00 grep rad
flux# date
Fri Jan 20 23:20:28 UTC 2012
flux# kill -KILL 45471
flux# date
Fri Jan 20 23:20:41 UTC 2012
flux# kill -KILL 45471
flux# date
Fri Jan 20 23:20:54 UTC 2012
flux# kill -KILL 45471
top
9 root16- 0K 8K syncer 2 7:12 0.00% syncer
45471 freeradius 20 -20 311M 283M STOP0 3:38 0.00% {radiusd}
49114 root210 10460K 4240K select 0 2:43 0.00% zebra
How to kill process without reboot?
___
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: Was... A quick fix for Firefox mailto: issues Now... The other way round problem
On 01/21/12 02:27, Leslie Jensen wrote: 2012-01-20 17:16, Leslie Jensen skrev: Excuse me for using this thread but I feel I have a problem related to this, but with Thunderbird not opening URLs. I followed all instructions I can find, but have not been successful. Using the config editor I added the following, and have checked that it is in the file prefs.js: user_pref(network.protocol-handler.app.ftp, /usr/local/bin/firefox); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.app.http, /usr/local/bin/firefox); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.app.https, /usr/local/bin/firefox); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.warn-external.ftp, true); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.warn-external.http, true); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.warn-external.https, true); This does not work for me and has been so for a while. It started after an upgrade. If anyone has a solution to this problem I would like to read about it. Thank you :-) I just goggled a little more and found a mention of the file mimeTypes.rdf The changes I made was not transferred to this file. Editing the entries with firefox to the correct path did it. Sorry for the noise :-) I didn't know about that one- we use thunderbrowse here. Check addons :) ___ 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: Was... A quick fix for Firefox mailto: issues Now... The other way round problem
If you backed up up your ~/.thunderbird file before you upgraded (yes, I was shocked to see that I actually did back mine up), copy the mimeTypes.rdf from your old install to the new install (its in the .thunderbird directory, 2 levels down) and your browser of choice will launch on a thunderbird link-click, again. Tim Kellers NJIT On 1/20/12 6:32 PM, Da Rock wrote: On 01/21/12 02:27, Leslie Jensen wrote: 2012-01-20 17:16, Leslie Jensen skrev: Excuse me for using this thread but I feel I have a problem related to this, but with Thunderbird not opening URLs. I followed all instructions I can find, but have not been successful. Using the config editor I added the following, and have checked that it is in the file prefs.js: user_pref(network.protocol-handler.app.ftp, /usr/local/bin/firefox); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.app.http, /usr/local/bin/firefox); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.app.https, /usr/local/bin/firefox); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.warn-external.ftp, true); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.warn-external.http, true); user_pref(network.protocol-handler.warn-external.https, true); This does not work for me and has been so for a while. It started after an upgrade. If anyone has a solution to this problem I would like to read about it. Thank you :-) I just goggled a little more and found a mention of the file mimeTypes.rdf The changes I made was not transferred to this file. Editing the entries with firefox to the correct path did it. Sorry for the noise :-) I didn't know about that one- we use thunderbrowse here. Check addons :) ___ 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 ___ 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
kgzip(8) regression in RELENG_9 GENERIC
Taking a GENERIC 9.0-RELEASE kernel and running kgzip(8) on it produces an unusable kernel which causes immediate BTX halt in loader(8). NOTE: This is w.r.t. a completely un-modified src-tree (including the GENERIC config itself). Just thought I'd share this regression. 8.1-RELEASE-p6 doesn't have this problem. To replicate (warning DO NOT DO THIS unless you know how to recover the boot process using either interactive loader(8) or LiveCD): 1. Install i386 9.0-RELEASE and make sure you select that you wish to unpack src.txz 2. Go to /usr/src/sys/i386/compile and say: config -C -g GENERIC 3. Go to ../compile/GENERIC and say: make cleandepend make depend make 4. Say: kgzip kernel 5. Copy kernel.kgz to /boot 6. Add kernel=kernel.kgz to loader.conf(5) 7. Reboot 8. Witness your own death via BTX halted -- Devin NOTE: Looking for confirmation from at least one other individual before filing a PR on this one. It could be any number of factors and not a true regression. For example, I'm using VMware Workstation 7.1 to replicate this. _ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you. ___ 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: Horrible installer
I've been sort of keeping track of this particular thread, because it interested me, and after reading through, I'd like to share my personal opinions. Now, before I go any further, let me just state here and now; This is my personal opinion, so, please, don't take this in a bad way, or in the wrong way; I'm a incredibly loyal FreeBSD and PC-BSD user, and have loved FreeBSD since 4.0 when I first got to use it. Now, with that said, here's what I think: FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE was a big deal, IS a big deal to ME personally, because, well, I LOVE FreeBSD. Basically, I've tried out NetBSD ONCE, and I didn't think it was anything special to warrent me using it instead of FreeBSD. If I ever need to use an OS on my toaster, I'll download a newer release; until then, I'll stick with FreeBSD and PC-BSD 9And let be honest here, lol, PC-BSD is FreeBSD with a pretty paint job, and some very VERY nice custom Applications to make installation, software management, and so on, easier to do. Basically it's FreeBSD but made specifically for the Desktop user). OpenBSD I just don't care. That guy Theo rubbed me the wrong way a long time ago, when I saw him reply to a FreeBSD security advisory, insulting one of the FreeBSD security team members and basically saying they didn't know what they were talking about and that they ere full of it, and so on. I thought that was incredibly rude, and insulting. The FreeBSD Security Team member replied with nothing more than the OpenBSD Security notification in question, proving to Theo that yes, he was in fact not lying, and it was infact from his OWN OS! I couldn't Believe ow mean Theo was; He said that basically no such advisory existed. When they replied with the advisory, he didn't even respond. My guess is, it's hard to type while trying to swallow your pride AND fit your tail between your legs at the same time. I also don't think much, or care, about taking BSD, shutting everything off, and calling it the most secure thing ever. (Yes, I'm over simplifying that, I know they've done a lot of work, but really, who doesn't do code audits now? And yea, I'm trying to make that have a little humour to it as well). Anyway, FreeBSD 9.0, I saw the Email from FreeBSD-Announce, and I got really excited. I'd been waiting for a LONG time for RELEASE come out. I was VERY freaking tempted to grab the RC3, but no, I waited. Somehow lol. But as soon as I saw it was released, and FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE was now available, I jumped on Opera, and grabbed it. I burned it, and had it installed within an hour of reading the email that it was out. I will admit; I'm totally biased towards FreeBSD, as it's one of my favorite OSs period. I also LOVE how awesome the Core Team are; Grey Lehey wrote The Complete FreeBSD which, I got with the BSD PowerPak I bought which had 4.0 + 6CD Toolkit, and I still read that third edition to this day! It's great! I also bought the newer 4th Edition when it came out. (Having Marshal Kirk McKusick do the forward made me happy, he's one of my personal heros. I also got to speak with him recently and I was almost speechless I LOVE that guy, and he's so funny! The DVD 25 years of Bereley Unix is something I'd recommend you ALL buy. I also loved how nice he was. Marshal Kirk McKusick is one of the nicest, friendliest people I've have the pleasure of talking to). Anyway, back on topic; FreeBSD 9.0's new installer bsdinstall is FINE! I KNOW it isn't perfect, OK? I got that. But how many of you HONESTLY would rather keep using sysinstall? Seriously? If you answered yes, then why not just download 8.2 or before?It's got sysinstall as the installer, and you can be happy with it. I don't understand why so much of this is such a big issue, but, I'm only a co-sys admin of my home Network, with my Wife as the other BOFH (I'm the Bastard Operator, She's the Bitch :)) (by the way, no, I don't call woman that in that manner, it's rude, but we both love BOFH so it was an inside joke we enjoy). So I can't speak for those of you on here that are actually running huge data centers, or corporate stuff, so please understand, I'm not trying to say you don't have an actual issue. You guys are on a WAY higher level than I am. I'm a little guy compared to a lot of you. That's why I said I was only giving my opinion, and meant no harm by it, but again, why not just use 8.x or something? I'm not being sarcastic or anything either, I really am asking why not jut go to 8.2 which I also Loved? I personally like the way the new installer works. I DO think it would be nice if the Partition section was more like sysinstall, where you could simply hit a and it would give you a payout of partitions for the system to use, because I did like that, and now it does just / and Swap and boot by default, but the point is, that's not a huge deal really. I try to use BSD on everything I can really. It's probably the most stable OS out
* Re: Horrible installer
Sent from my iPhone On Jan 20, 2012, at 7:43 PM, gore koggy...@comcast.net wrote: [snip] I also bought the newer 4th Edition when it came out. (Having Marshal Kirk McKusick do the forward made me happy, he's one of my personal heros. I also got to speak with him recently and I was almost speechless I LOVE that guy, and he's so funny! The DVD 25 years of Bereley Unix is something I'd recommend you ALL buy. I also loved how nice he was. Marshal Kirk McKusick is one of the nicest, friendliest people I've have the pleasure of talking to). [snip] why not just use 8.x or something? I'm not being sarcastic or anything either, I really am asking why not jut go to 8.2 which I also Loved? SU+J by Kirk McKusick ?? :-D -- Devin _ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you. ___ 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: Horrible installer
I've been using FreeBSD since 2.2.1, and IMHO, the 9.0 installer SUX! It blow chunks. It's a POS. It's crap. It is a joke. I hope I made myself clear. ;-) - M ___ 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: Horrible installer
Just to give thoughts as a younger user... I first touched FreeBSD around 2005. The current insteller is much more appealing and useful. All the people displaying elitist attitude toward the arcaic installer which infact DID push people away from FreeBSD, I don't understand you. The old installer was pretty crappy and there where many occasion on which you could fuck up and have to start the install all over, or just randomly quit the installer for that matter. The only reason to say the new installer sucks is that it has no gui. It is 2012 and you still are using text-based installers... Also, there was plently of time during RC to discuss this, I don't see why you all cry right now. To me, it seems you are afraid of change and getting out of your comfort zone. -- Lyubomir Grigorov (bgalakazam) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: FreeBSD 9
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 05:31:00PM -0800, Devin Teske wrote:
-Original Message- From: 'Frank Shute'
[mailto:fr...@shute.org.uk] Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 4:52
PM To: Devin Teske Cc: 'Chad Perrin';
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Dave Robison Subject: Re: FreeBSD 9
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 02:36:29PM -0800, Devin Teske wrote:
I believe the difficulty in maintenance stems primarily
from the fact that the existing partition editor MAY have to
be entirely rewritten to accommodate other root filesystem
types (but even that's not entirely true -- if done right).
Other than that, it's most likely just FUD and misperception
that sysinstall(8) is either (a) hard to maintain or (b)
hard to extend. -- Devin
To quote the manpage for sysinstall:
BUGS
snip
This utility is a prototype which lasted several years
past its expira- tion date and is greatly in need of
death.
There are a (great) number of undocumented variables.
UTSL.
Perspective.
Let's take a look at the commit history for this manual.
Let's not. Let us discuss the merit of what the manpage says.
There are a (great) number of undocumented variables.
From my reading of postings to this list and stable@,
yet not -sysinstall@ (?!)
Didn't know it existed until now!
it was felt that sysinstall couldn't be extended without a total
re-write, that seems to suggest that the manpage is right and is
not FUD.
I disagree. Just because you document something doesn't make it
true.
I've already discussed the fact that the first line you quoted (in
need of death) is 15+ years old and we have no way of tracking its
origin and thus can't extrapolate why on-Earth it was put into a
release-quality product in the first place.
The second line you quote (which was added 2 years 10 months ago via
SVN r189754 by grog@) has everything to do with highlighting the
fact that sysinstall(8) is highly scriptable through a large number
of under-documented dispatch keywords and nothing to do with the
total re-write issue you're discussing.
Plus, the keywords are a lot more documented than you think. If a
dispatch word is not documented, there's probably good cause (a
great number of the dispatch keywords are meant for internal use
only and their documentation would merely invite strangeness only
reserved for people that know what they're doing -- i.e. they can
read the code to learn what their function is).
However, I will concede to the fact that the number of dispatch
keywords that are documented versus ones that CAN be used is only
about 33%.
Here's how I generated that number...
awk '/VAR_/{sub(/[^]*/,);sub(/$/,);print}'
/usr/src/usr.sbin/sysinstall/sysinstall.h | sh -c 'while read var;do
zgrep -q \$var\ /usr/share/man/man8/sysinstall.8.gz
varcount=$((${varcount:-0}+1));done;echo $varcount'
This returns the number of variables -- as-defined-as a dispatch
keyword in sysinstall.h -- are present in the manual.
In 9.0-RELEASE, it returns 33 for me.
In contrast with the number of dispatch keywords, obtainable by:
awk '/VAR_/{print}' | wc -l
which returns 105 for me ... minus the markedly internal keywords
which begin with _...
awk '/VAR_/{print}' | grep -vc '_'
We see 101 supposedly-usable dispatch keywords which brings us to
about 33% documentation.
However, I will re-iterate...
The first quote you pulled from the man-page was made 15+ years ago,
the second quote you pulled was from 2+ years ago and the two are
not related. The first declares some inferred quality about the code
itself and the second simply states that the variable keywords are
under-documented. One not-necessarily imply the other or vice-versa.
-- Devin
Devin, damn you with your logic, sensible arguments
*statistics*[spit] ;)
You've obviously got more invested in sysinstall than I have. It was
always a thing that I just muddled through to get a minimal system up
running.
But if you're using the scripting interface then I can see that you
would want something of equivalent functionality in the replacement,
bsdinstall.
Regards,
--
Frank
Contact info: http://www.shute.org.uk/misc/contact.html
pgp0xdjiNi6hm.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Horrible installer
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 9:15 PM, Lyubomir Grigorov lyubo...@grigorovl.eu wrote: Just to give thoughts as a younger user... Also, there was plently of time during RC to discuss this, I don't see why you all cry right now. To me, it seems you are afraid of change and getting out of your comfort zone. I don't have a comfort zone, I'm still a beginner ;-) My post was half in jest, but not entirely. I'm all for making things easy for the default install, but don't like having the expert knobs so far out of reach. The old sysinstall may have been showing its age, but replacing with something that looks even less professional isn't great, either. - M ___ 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: Horrible installer
On 21 Jan 2012, at 05:47, Michael Sierchio ku...@tenebras.com wrote: I've been using FreeBSD since 2.2.1, and IMHO, the 9.0 installer SUX! It blow chunks. It's a POS. It's crap. It is a joke. I hope I made myself clear. ;-) - M Just because you see things a certain way doesn't make them a fact. It's your personal opinion and other people's mileage may vary. Since you're a fbsd user from 2.x, certainly you're WAY beyond needing the installer and just unpack the base system + kern + src + ports and install them manually. Refer my earlier post on the subject. Perhaps if you're unhappy with the new installer you should have submitted feedback about it before -RELEASE hit the road. Last but not least I find your calling the new installer a pos highly disrespectful towards the people that invested time, energy and money in it. ___ 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: * Re: Horrible installer
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:19:32PM -0800, Devin Teske wrote: On Jan 20, 2012, at 7:43 PM, gore koggy...@comcast.net wrote: why not just use 8.x or something? I'm not being sarcastic or anything either, I really am asking why not jut go to 8.2 which I also Loved? SU+J by Kirk McKusick ?? :-D There are things 9.0 offers that earlier versions do not. I think 9.0 is the first where the entire base system builds with Clang without issues, for instance (someone correct me if I'm wrong). The big thing I wanted in 9.0 actually got pushed back to 9.1 at least, so I'm still waiting for that, but that too indicates a reason that someone might not be satisfied with 8.2. As I mentioned earlier, it seems to me (as an outsider to the installer development process) that offering a choice between sysinstall and bsdinstall for at least one RELEASE of FreeBSD might have been a good idea, to give users a transition period and ensure that if there are some unforseen show-stoppers that did not appear in testing there would still be an option for those who need it. After talking some more to people who actually know a bit about how the installers work, I still don't see why that would not be the better choice. On the other hand, bsdinstall does get the job done, at least for my purposes. It just does so in a way that feels a bit more straightjacketed, and it rubs me personally a bit the wrong way. Your mileage may vary, and it certainly has not been a show-stopper for me so far. The actual installed OS is still my favorite, and when forced to screw around with something like Debian or (heaven forfend) MS Windows, it makes me want to tear my hair out or cry or break something. In the final analysis, the worst this has done for me is make me feel just slightly inconvenienced during installation, having to restart the installation process more often when I made a misstep for instance. No biggie, I guess. It's certainly not worth giving up being able to build the whole base system with Clang instead of GCC to have sysinstall instead of bsdinstall. -- 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
