Re: ports vs packages
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Alejandro Imass a...@p2ee.org wrote: On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Devin Teske devin.te...@fisglobal.com wrote: Of course, this is explicit to rather serious production environments. Desktop and casual usage ... ports may serve you better if you like to stay up-to-date rather than only upgrading once every 1-2 years. We think the opposite. Serious production environments should use specifically compiled ports for your needs and create packages from those. In fact we combine this approach with the use of EzJail and flavours. So I guess it all depends on the needs and what a serious production environment means for each company or individual. I would tend to agree. For specific use cases, one is usually better off having complete control over the entire build/compile process i.e. using ports. However, for (IMHO) majority of users the default options are usually OK and using packages is highly desired. That is why I really look forward to improvements of (again IMHO) obsolete binary package format (pkg-*) and hope that either pkgng (http://wiki.freebsd.org/pkgng) or new PBI format in PC-BSD (http://wiki.pcbsd.org/index.php/PBI9_Format) will gain more traction in the community. Regards, -- Nino ___ 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: starting firefox3 with defined geometry
On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 08:45:04 +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote: Hello, Is there some way to start firefox3 in a defined geometry, something like $ firefox3 -geometry 1024x768 Answer: Yes, but it's not as easy as it could have been. Unlike nearly every other X11 program, notably the old and outdated ones, Firefox does _not_ seem to support the _standard_ -geometry WxH+X+Y parameter. However, you can define the window width and height with command line parameters: % firefox -width 1024 -height 768 I've tested this with the Firefox installation I have here (which is v6.0.1). Positioning of the window is not possible by this means. Also note that those parameters do not show up when you try % firefox -h to get some help, and man firefox is of course fully futile. :-) There is a workaround for the lack of standard geometry support: You could have Firefox execute JavaScript instructions at startup window.moveTo(100, 100); window.resizeTo(1024, 768); Those can even be provided on the command line. However, that's a bad excuse for not supporting what users expect working for 30 years. UNIX since V7 on PDP-11, UNIX on mainframe since ESER 1055 (IBM /370) PDP-11 or K1600? Oh, and EC1056 here (OS/ES SVM OP1). :-) -- 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: starting firefox3 with defined geometry
El día Tuesday, January 10, 2012 a las 09:25:54AM +0100, Polytropon escribió: Answer: Yes, but it's not as easy as it could have been. Unlike nearly every other X11 program, notably the old and outdated ones, Firefox does _not_ seem to support the _standard_ -geometry WxH+X+Y parameter. However, you can define the window width and height with command line parameters: % firefox -width 1024 -height 768 does not work with firefox-3.5.18 (from ports) on 9-CURRENT; ... There is a workaround for the lack of standard geometry support: You could have Firefox execute JavaScript instructions at startup window.moveTo(100, 100); window.resizeTo(1024, 768); will try this in the page source; Those can even be provided on the command line. However, that's a bad excuse for not supporting what users expect working for 30 years. yes! UNIX since V7 on PDP-11, UNIX on mainframe since ESER 1055 (IBM /370) PDP-11 or K1600? Oh, and EC1056 here (OS/ES SVM OP1). :-) both, PDP-11 and the clone; have you ever driven a UNIX by punch cards? does PSU ring a bell? http://cvs.laladev.de/index.html/P8000/WEGA/contrib/ingres/dbs/tmp/ing_Vortrag?rev=1.1content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup matthias -- Matthias Apitz e g...@unixarea.de - w http://www.unixarea.de/ UNIX since V7 on PDP-11, UNIX on mainframe since ESER 1055 (IBM /370) UNIX on x86 since SVR4.2 UnixWare 2.1.2, FreeBSD since 2.2.5 ___ 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
Skype Security Service
[img_top.gif] [img_skype_logo.gif] [img_left_border.gif] [spacer50.gif] Dear Skype Member: As part of our security measures, we regularly screen activity in the Skype system.We recently contacted you after noticing an issue on your account This is the Last reminder to log in to Skype as soon as possible. Once you log in, you will be provided with steps to restore your account access. We appreciate your understanding as we work to ensure account safety. [spacer50.gif] [1]Click here We thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Please understand that this is a security measure intended to help protect you and your account. We apologise for any inconvenience. Sincerely, Skype Account Review Department [spacer50.gif] [img_right_border.gif] [spacer50.gif] [spacer50.gif] [spacer50.gif] [2][footicn_account.gif] [3]My account [spacer50.gif] [4][footicn_download.gif] [5]Latest download [spacer50.gif] [6][footicn_more.gif] [7]More great features [spacer50.gif] [8][footicn_share.gif] [9]Share Skype [spacer50.gif] [10][footicn_needhelp.gif] [11]Need Help [spacer50.gif] [spacer50.gif][spacer50.gif] [spacer50.gif] [spacer50.gif] [spacer50.gif] [spacer50.gif] [spacer50.gif] [spacer50.gif] © 2003-2012 Skype Limited. Skype Communications S.a.r.l., 23-29 Rives de Clausen, L-2165 Luxembourg. Skype, associated trademarks and logos and the S symbol are trademarks of Skype Limited. Be alert to emails that request account information or urgent action. Be cautious of websites with irregular addresses or those that offer unofficial Skype downloads. Security updates and product upgrades are made available at [12]www.skype.com or using the client's upgrade function. [13]Terms of service o [14]Privacy o [15]Unsubscribe [spacer50.gif] [spacer50.gif] [spacer50.gif] [noemergency.gif] No Emergency Calls Skype is not a replacement for your ordinary telephone and can't be used for emergency calling. [spacer50.gif] [spacer50.gif] [MS] [52] References Visible links 1. http://www.log-expert.de/templates/rhuk_milkyway/images/green/intl/en/account/login/ 2. http://my.email.skype.com/r/5CALDBG/K9VZXI/JUEB708/DIXB1HM/RHOZE7/TT/h?a=cm%5fmmc=EMWE%7C0301%5fB6MU-%5f-0103%5f050311USen%26ed_rid=_edid__%26ed_mid=14035387 3. http://my.email.skype.com/r/5CALDBG/K9VZXI/JUEB708/DIXB1HM/DER1VT/TT/h?a=cm%5fmmc=EMWE%7C0301%5fB6MU-%5f-0103%5f050311USen%26ed_rid=_edid__%26ed_mid=14035387 4. http://my.email.skype.com/r/5CALDBG/K9VZXI/JUEB708/DIXB1HM/CIJUCT/TT/h?a=cm%5fmmc=EMWE%7C0301%5fB6MU-%5f-0103%5f050311USen%26ed_rid=_edid__%26ed_mid=14035387 5. http://my.email.skype.com/r/5CALDBG/K9VZXI/JUEB708/DIXB1HM/F9NTA8/TT/h?a=cm%5fmmc=EMWE%7C0301%5fB6MU-%5f-0103%5f050311USen%26ed_rid=_edid__%26ed_mid=14035387 6. http://my.email.skype.com/r/5CALDBG/K9VZXI/JUEB708/DIXB1HM/YC7KNQ/TT/h?a=cm%5fmmc=EMWE%7C0301%5fB6MU-%5f-0103%5f050311USen%26ed_rid=_edid__%26ed_mid=14035387 7. http://my.email.skype.com/r/5CALDBG/K9VZXI/JUEB708/DIXB1HM/AD93OH/TT/h?a=cm%5fmmc=EMWE%7C0301%5fB6MU-%5f-0103%5f050311USen%26ed_rid=_edid__%26ed_mid=14035387 8. http://my.email.skype.com/r/5CALDBG/K9VZXI/JUEB708/DIXB1HM/O1GVD4/TT/h?a=cm%5fmmc=EMWE%7C0301%5fB6MU-%5f-0103%5f050311USen%26ed_rid=_edid__%26ed_mid=14035387 9. http://my.email.skype.com/r/5CALDBG/K9VZXI/JUEB708/DIXB1HM/MPH0X5/TT/h?a=cm%5fmmc=EMWE%7C0301%5fB6MU-%5f-0103%5f050311USen%26ed_rid=_edid__%26ed_mid=14035387 10. http://my.email.skype.com/r/5CALDBG/K9VZXI/JUEB708/DIXB1HM/37XQLU/TT/h?a=cm%5fmmc=EMWE%7C0301%5fB6MU-%5f-0103%5f050311USen%26ed_rid=_edid__%26ed_mid=14035387 11. http://my.email.skype.com/r/5CALDBG/K9VZXI/JUEB708/DIXB1HM/YC7KNF/TT/h?a=cm%5fmmc=EMWE%7C0301%5fB6MU-%5f-0103%5f050311USen%26ed_rid=_edid__%26ed_mid=14035387 12. http://my.email.skype.com/r/5CALDBG/K9VZXI/JUEB708/DIXB1HM/55KOYS/TT/h 13. http://my.email.skype.com/r/5CALDBG/K9VZXI/JUEB708/DIXB1HM/9KE293/TT/h?a=cm%5fmmc=EMWE%7C0301%5fB6MU-%5f-0103%5f050311USen%26ed_rid=_edid__%26ed_mid=14035387 14. http://my.email.skype.com/r/5CALDBG/K9VZXI/JUEB708/DIXB1HM/JFUDLO/TT/h?a=cm%5fmmc=EMWE%7C0301%5fB6MU-%5f-0103%5f050311USen%26ed_rid=_edid__%26ed_mid=14035387 15. http://my.email.skype.com/u/5CALDBG/K9VZXI/JUEB708/DIXB1HM/8A/c2VydmljZXBleXBhbGVAZ21haWwuY29t/ Hidden links: 16. http://my.email.skype.com/r/5CALDBG/K9VZXI/JUEB708/DIXB1HM/55DSHD/TT/h?a=cm_mmc=EMWE|0301_B6MU-_-0103_050311USened_rid=_edid__ed_mid=14035387 ___ 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: ports vs packages
On 10-01-2012, Tue [08:51:33], n j wrote: On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Alejandro Imass a...@p2ee.org wrote: On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Devin Teske devin.te...@fisglobal.com wrote: Of course, this is explicit to rather serious production environments. Desktop and casual usage ... ports may serve you better if you like to stay up-to-date rather than only upgrading once every 1-2 years. We think the opposite. Serious production environments should use specifically compiled ports for your needs and create packages from those. In fact we combine this approach with the use of EzJail and flavours. So I guess it all depends on the needs and what a serious production environment means for each company or individual. I would tend to agree. For specific use cases, one is usually better off having complete control over the entire build/compile process i.e. using ports. However, for (IMHO) majority of users the default options are usually OK and using packages is highly desired. That is why I really look forward to improvements of (again IMHO) obsolete binary package format (pkg-*) and hope that either pkgng (http://wiki.freebsd.org/pkgng) or new PBI format in PC-BSD (http://wiki.pcbsd.org/index.php/PBI9_Format) will gain more traction in the community. Regards, -- Nino Would be nice to know if there any plans on switching to pkgng or any other pkg management system in a future. -- Dmitry Sarkisov --\ ---+-- --/ ___ 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: ports vs packages
On 10/01/2012 09:23, Dmitry Sarkisov wrote: Would be nice to know if there any plans on switching to pkgng or any other pkg management system in a future. pkgng is under active development with the stated aim of replacing the current packaging system. If you want to get involved, check out the #pkgng channel on irc.freenode.net It's still too early in the pkgng development cycle for a decision to have been made about if and when it becomes the new standard packaging system. Given it is such a major infrastructure change the switch over will have to be carefully managed and I'd expect there to be a lot of activity over on freebsd-ports@ while it is all in beta. 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: creating a bootable iso for raid BIOS flash
On Sun, 8 Jan 2012, the wise Polytropon wrote: Does this image boot successfully? Unfortunately this is also a no go. I think Intel has done something special to their iso's, considering that I'm missing 7MB of data. Regards, Marco -- Men have as exaggerated an idea of their rights as women have of their wrongs. -- Edgar W. Howe ___ 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: FreeBSD9 + PHP
Op 9-1-2012 21:06, Chuck Swiger schreef: On Jan 9, 2012, at 12:02 PM, alexus wrote: there is no way to make it like that? so it has to be build via ports? The PHP maintainer decides the default options, which is what the precompiled package you got used. While many people want PHP in the form of an Apache module, other folks use it via fastcgi and so forth... Yes that might be so. But it's far better to *have* this module and disable it in Apache than not have it at all and for that reason only *buiild* apache from ports in stead of using a package. ___ 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: FreeBSD9 + PHP
Op 9-1-2012 21:02, alexus schreef: there is no way to make it like that? so it has to be build via ports? On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Peterfb...@peterk.org wrote: I created a jail and within a jail I did pkg_add -r apache22 pkg_add -r php5 now I have apache and php, but whenever I'm trying to hit phpinfo.php, I see source code... I dont think php5 added inside of apache22 -- http://alexus.org/ I don't think the package has the apache module by default: pkbsd:#pwd /usr/ports/lang/php5 pkbsd:#make config [ ] APACHE Build Apache module That is unchecked. You'll have to select that and build the port. ...Or you can use the CGI version which is included in the package: [*] CGIBuild CGI version Yes there is no other way. Personally I find this unchecking rather weird. To me apache/PHP are a happily married couple. It makes building a webserver on packages only *not* possible and that's stupid imo. ___ 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: ports vs packages
Op 9-1-2012 23:00, alexus schreef: Thank you so much for this wonderful feedback! One of the things I'm seeing is that unfortunately packages are somewhat limited vs ports... For example: I'm trying to get Apache httpd + PHP to work, after pkg_add -r php5, php5 doesn't have libphp5.so that links Apache and PHP together... so unless I'm doing something entirely wrong I basically must use ports and nothing else to get the functionality i need... As I write in another reply: that's true and totally stupid imo. ___ 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: ports vs packages
On 10-01-2012, Tue [10:16:06], Matthew Seaman wrote: On 10/01/2012 09:23, Dmitry Sarkisov wrote: Would be nice to know if there any plans on switching to pkgng or any other pkg management system in a future. pkgng is under active development with the stated aim of replacing the current packaging system. If you want to get involved, check out the #pkgng channel on irc.freenode.net It's still too early in the pkgng development cycle for a decision to have been made about if and when it becomes the new standard packaging system. Given it is such a major infrastructure change the switch over will have to be carefully managed and I'd expect there to be a lot of activity over on freebsd-ports@ while it is all in beta. Cheers, Matthew Thanks for the info, Matthew! It's really good to see some moving forward once in a while. -- Best wishes, Dmitry Sarkisov --\ ---+-- --/ ___ 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: ports vs packages
Dick Hoogendijk d...@nagual.nl writes: Hi, As I write in another reply: that's true and totally stupid imo. *You* think it's stupid. There's not one true way to serve php pages, more and more platforms use a lightweight httpd daemon like nginx and php-fpm for example. If you manage many servers, you can build custom packages with options you need and then deploy. If you tinker with your home server, using the ports isn't that a problem... Éric Masson -- je comprend pas ce a quoi sert ce site ou cette boite a lettre.J'y voit plein de messages et autres anneries alors si tu pouvais m'aider et me repondre pour m'expliquer a qui et a quoi servent toutes ses phrases -+- DD in http://www.le-gnu.net : Allo Huston, nous avons un neuneu. -+- ___ 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: ports vs packages
Op 10-1-2012 12:36, Eric Masson schreef: Dick Hoogendijkd...@nagual.nl writes: Hi, As I write in another reply: that's true and totally stupid imo. *You* think it's stupid. Yes, as I wrote: stupid imo But thanks again for your reply. You may be right but I still feel it's better to *have* the pache module and disable it than to *have to* use ports just to get 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: ports vs packages
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Dick Hoogendijk d...@nagual.nl wrote: Op 10-1-2012 12:36, Eric Masson schreef: Dick Hoogendijkd...@nagual.nl writes: Hi, As I write in another reply: that's true and totally stupid imo. *You* think it's stupid. Yes, as I wrote: stupid imo But thanks again for your reply. You may be right but I still feel it's better to *have* the pache module and disable it than to *have to* use ports just to get it. IMO it's stupid as well and I second Dick's opinion. The module doesn't hurt anyone, and reduces confusion. I think that PHP is still more heavily deployed on mod_php than on anything else. The Apache module should be built by default unless there is a really strong argument as to why it shouldn't. -- Alejandro Imass ___ 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 Kernel Internals Documentation
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 03:56:39PM -0500, David Jackson wrote: And that's just the way it is now. Try replicating the wealth of information you get in various config files in FreeBSD in a GUI. Just how hard it is to open a simple text file in an editor and just fracking do what it tells you to in comments?! And it's not just the base system, any decent third party program has this wonderfull feature. How hard can it be?! Seriously. Sure, sometimes things can get confusing but that's the nature of any complex system, you can't make it go away with a GUI. I absolutely agree that no one should be required to use a GUI. it should be there for those that want to use it. But you should be able to directly use config files if you would like, the GUI in any case would just be a front end to config files that, you would not need to use the GUI if you do not want to. A GUI for some users can improve useability. Well, as I said, there's PC-BSD. I haven't tried it, and don't have a need for it, but as far as I can tell people who like that sort of stuff seem to enjoy it. And if one would like to work on such tools, it's the place to do it because a) it exists and that's its purpose, and b) because of a) FreeBSD should be then left free of such complications and focused on substance. One problem with your approach is that it never stops at just being a front end to config files. I don't know why this is so, but in practice it seems that every time you try such a thing it becomes a mandatory unmaintainable mess. At lest that's how it ends up on Unix(-like) OSes. Or it ends up sort of working, but you're stuck with GUI developers' assumptions on how stuff works and should be done. I think that FOSS community just needs to accept that different categories of users have different needs and one single OS can't be everything to every person. World domination ideas are just silly and pointless, or as Bill Joy said: What was the goal of the Linux community--to replace Windows? One can imagine higher aspirations. I think recent developments with tablet computers are showing that most people kinda don't need, or even want, a full blown workstation/desktop computer and OS overhead that comes with it. I have my serious reservations on where this trend will lead us, and I'm not really comfortable with it (fortunately, people are becoming aware of these issues, see various discussions on the decline of general purpose computer and similar on the net and meatspace), but on the other hand I can't deny it makes sense. Fortunately this battle is not yet lost and projects like CyanogenMod are extremely important, as is strong activism towards mobile hardware vendors to make their devices open and standardized the way PC architecture (for the most part) is. HTC decided to sell easily unlockable phones because of consumer pressure, so it can be done. On the other hand, I don't think people who can help improve FreeBSD and make it continually viable for it's real purpose (server and professional workstation) are scared of config files and vi. On the contrary. (Same goes for other two major BSDs). I think that we should be pragmatic about binary drivers and that it better to accept and welcome binary drivers from hardware companies. Open source drivers should of course be developed, then users can use the open source drivers as they become available, but, until then, they can use the binary driver, or use a binary driver for more rare and unusual hardware. You are either confusing FreeBSD with OpenBSD or just plain trolling. I would never troll. Everything I say is my sincere view, I do not say anything to offend people. I believe you, but seriously, AFAIK FreeBSD has never been too hostile to binary blobs. Most of the time when a blob is necessary and nonexistant it's the case of a vendor being lazy or incompetent. Or they just sell mass market junk hardware and are only interested in Windows no matter what you do. Some printer vendors are perfect examples of retarded--printers don't even need a kernel space driver, or at least shouldn't need one, all that is required is a filter you can plug into pretty much standardized Unix printing schemes; hell, even Apple insists that printers have no place inside the kernel. If they are such bottom feeders that they are incapable of making a program to convert Postscript input to their stupid proprietary control language, I'm afraid there's not much FreeBSD can do about that. As for my idea for a driver compatability layer of some sort, I have looked into doing that myself, Its not something i have asked anyone to do, that is the reason I have been studying the freebsd kernel. I've taken a quick look at I/O Kit docs when you mentioned it (it's an interesting idea). IANA kernel developer, but it doesn't seem viable. Apple cites ireconcilable differences[1] :), unfortunately. And there's of
freebsd-update auto merge fails on trivial VC lines
Hello, When upgrading from FreeBSD 8.2-RELEASE to 9.0-RELEASE using freebsd-update, I'm asked to merge, what seems like, everything in /etc manually. And all of the merges are trivial version controls lines. E.g. my /etc/amd.map (which I never modified) begins with: # $FreeBSD: releng/8.2/etc/amd.map 164015 2006-11-06 01:42:11Z obrien $ And this file (and line) freebsd-update asks me to manually merge. I wonder why that is. Kind regards, -- Martin Koch Andersen http://925.dk___ 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: FreeBSD9 + PHP
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 5:09 AM, Dick Hoogendijk d...@nagual.nl wrote: Op 9-1-2012 21:02, alexus schreef: there is no way to make it like that? so it has to be build via ports? On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Peterfb...@peterk.org wrote: I created a jail and within a jail I did pkg_add -r apache22 pkg_add -r php5 now I have apache and php, but whenever I'm trying to hit phpinfo.php, I see source code... I dont think php5 added inside of apache22 -- http://alexus.org/ I don't think the package has the apache module by default: pkbsd:#pwd /usr/ports/lang/php5 pkbsd:#make config [ ] APACHE Build Apache module That is unchecked. You'll have to select that and build the port. ...Or you can use the CGI version which is included in the package: [*] CGI Build CGI version Yes there is no other way. Personally I find this unchecking rather weird. To me apache/PHP are a happily married couple. It makes building a webserver on packages only *not* possible and that's stupid imo. +1 I second you again here! I've read in some PHP forums to stay away from Apache and mod_php and to use FCGI instead. Maybe this is a trend in the PHP community, but I couldn't care less because IMO it hurts FBSD in the long run, not to have the module built by default. -- Alejandro Imass ___ 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: FreeBSD9 + PHP
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 22:52, alexus ale...@gmail.com wrote: I created a jail and within a jail I did pkg_add -r apache22 pkg_add -r php5 now I have apache and php, but whenever I'm trying to hit phpinfo.php, I see source code... I dont think php5 added inside of apache22 `grep php /usr/local/etc/apache22/httpd.conf ` [wash@jaribu ~]$ grep php /usr/local/etc/apache22/httpd.conf LoadModule php5_modulelibexec/apache22/libphp5.so DirectoryIndex index.php index.php3 index.html index.htm index.shtml index.phtml index.inc index.pl index.cgi index.jsp index.txt AddType application/x-httpd-php .php AddType application/x-httpd-php-source .phps The last two lines are very important. However, I seriously doubt this documentation that you read, as it lied to you so badly. Which one is it?? -- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254733744121/+254722743223 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I can't hear you -- I'm using the scrambler. Please consider the environment before printing this email. ___ 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: FreeBSD9 + PHP
On 1/10/12 11:11 AM, Dick Hoogendijk wrote: Op 9-1-2012 21:06, Chuck Swiger schreef: On Jan 9, 2012, at 12:02 PM, alexus wrote: there is no way to make it like that? so it has to be build via ports? The PHP maintainer decides the default options, which is what the precompiled package you got used. While many people want PHP in the form of an Apache module, other folks use it via fastcgi and so forth... Yes that might be so. But it's far better to *have* this module and disable it in Apache than not have it at all and for that reason only *buiild* apache from ports in stead of using a package. Yeah, no thank you. What about those people that don't even *use* apache and want to install PHP ? We get stuck with a useless module ? Really, *no 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: FreeBSD9 + PHP
On 1/10/12 3:09 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote: On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 5:09 AM, Dick Hoogendijk d...@nagual.nl wrote: Op 9-1-2012 21:02, alexus schreef: there is no way to make it like that? so it has to be build via ports? On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Peterfb...@peterk.org wrote: I created a jail and within a jail I did pkg_add -r apache22 pkg_add -r php5 now I have apache and php, but whenever I'm trying to hit phpinfo.php, I see source code... I dont think php5 added inside of apache22 -- http://alexus.org/ I don't think the package has the apache module by default: pkbsd:#pwd /usr/ports/lang/php5 pkbsd:#make config [ ] APACHE Build Apache module That is unchecked. You'll have to select that and build the port. ...Or you can use the CGI version which is included in the package: [*] CGIBuild CGI version Yes there is no other way. Personally I find this unchecking rather weird. To me apache/PHP are a happily married couple. It makes building a webserver on packages only *not* possible and that's stupid imo. +1 I second you again here! I've read in some PHP forums to stay away from Apache and mod_php and to use FCGI instead. Maybe this is a trend in the PHP community, but I couldn't care less because IMO it hurts FBSD in the long run, not to have the module built by default. And that's your MO. Mine is, as I pointed out in my earlier reply to Dick, that people who don't even *use* apache shouldn't get stuck with a *useless apache module* just because they installed PHP. A possible alternative that would keep everyone happy would be *another* package that actually includes the module, like for example a package called mod_php5, it would install the stuff from php5 + the apache module. ___ 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: ports vs packages
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Dick Hoogendijk d...@nagual.nl wrote: Op 10-1-2012 12:36, Eric Masson schreef: Dick Hoogendijkd...@nagual.nl writes: Hi, As I write in another reply: that's true and totally stupid imo. *You* think it's stupid. Yes, as I wrote: stupid imo But thanks again for your reply. You may be right but I still feel it's better to *have* the pache module and disable it than to *have to* use ports just to get it. IMO it's stupid as well and I second Dick's opinion. The module doesn't hurt anyone, and reduces confusion. I think that PHP is still more heavily deployed on mod_php than on anything else. The Apache module should be built by default unless there is a really strong argument as to why it shouldn't. -- Alejandro Imass When I do pkg_add -r php I'm supposed to install apache as a dependency to that package ? Then people will ask why apache and all its glory is installed and we'll be back to this same argument but in reverse. ]Peter[ All my stuff runs on 'cheap' hardware, so I build most items, removing crud I don't need and will never use. [portmaster, list all the dependencies, then do 'pkg_add' on the ones I made no change in 'make-config']. Lean mean serving machine vs. everything and the kitchen sink all purpose serving machine. ___ 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: ports vs packages
Alejandro Imass a...@p2ee.org writes: Hi, IMO it's stupid as well and I second Dick's opinion. You're at least two, great. The module doesn't hurt anyone, and reduces confusion. I think that PHP is still more heavily deployed on mod_php than on anything else. The Apache module should be built by default unless there is a really strong argument as to why it shouldn't. And then someone will pop here telling that he doesn't need mod_php and doesn't understand why it's packaged by default and that his own configuration should be the default instead... Éric Masson -- Ce personnage doit probablement avoir des qualités cachées (bien cachées) pour ne pas avoir été rejeté par ces paires. Ou bien ça s'apelle l'esprit de corps. -+- FrF in : GNU - Il a les couilles chevillées au corps -+- ___ 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: FreeBSD9 + PHP
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Damien Fleuriot m...@my.gd wrote: [...] Mine is, as I pointed out in my earlier reply to Dick, that people who don't even *use* apache shouldn't get stuck with a *useless apache module* just because they installed PHP. A possible alternative that would keep everyone happy would be *another* package that actually includes the module, like for example a package called mod_php5, it would install the stuff from php5 + the apache module. Could be, something like mod_perl, but contrary from Perl, PHP is not very useful without Apache anyway. -- Alejandro Imass ___ 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: FreeBSD9 + PHP
Op 10-1-2012 15:30, Damien Fleuriot schreef: On 1/10/12 11:11 AM, Dick Hoogendijk wrote: Op 9-1-2012 21:06, Chuck Swiger schreef: On Jan 9, 2012, at 12:02 PM, alexus wrote: there is no way to make it like that? so it has to be build via ports? The PHP maintainer decides the default options, which is what the precompiled package you got used. While many people want PHP in the form of an Apache module, other folks use it via fastcgi and so forth... Yes that might be so. But it's far better to *have* this module and disable it in Apache than not have it at all and for that reason only *buiild* apache from ports in stead of using a package. Yeah, no thank you. What about those people that don't even *use* apache and want to install PHP ? We get stuck with a useless module ? Really, *no thank you* Wow, that really IS bad.. considering the price of drivespace.. No it really is much better to *force* everyone who wants to run apache/PHP to *build* from source. No pkgadd for those guys.. ___ 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: FreeBSD9 + PHP
Op 10-1-2012 15:32, Damien Fleuriot schreef: A possible alternative that would keep everyone happy would be *another* package that actually includes the module, like for example a package called mod_php5, it would install the stuff from php5 + the apache module. That is the way CentOS handles things and that works very well too. So +1 ___ 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: FreeBSD9 + PHP
On 1/10/12 4:34 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote: On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Damien Fleuriot m...@my.gd wrote: [...] Mine is, as I pointed out in my earlier reply to Dick, that people who don't even *use* apache shouldn't get stuck with a *useless apache module* just because they installed PHP. A possible alternative that would keep everyone happy would be *another* package that actually includes the module, like for example a package called mod_php5, it would install the stuff from php5 + the apache module. Could be, something like mod_perl, but contrary from Perl, PHP is not very useful without Apache anyway. And who are you to claim that php is not very useful w/o apache anyway ? I mean, just because it falls within your needs doesn't mean it's a good option for everyone. In the same way, I could claim that rsyslogd should replace syslogd in the base system because I find it better, so everyone should use it. We use PHP here in a production environment on many servers that have never seen, and will never ever see, apache. On some it runs daemons, on some it runs scripts, on yet some others it's served by either nginx or lighttpd, not to mention dedicated fastcgi servers that don't have a web server running to begin with. IMO the best option would be a separate package, enforcing an apache module on people that will never ever use it is just plain dumb. This also seems to be the opinion of the port's manager, seeing mod_php is unselected by default. Just my 2 cents. ___ 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: FreeBSD9 + PHP
On 1/10/12 5:01 PM, Dick Hoogendijk wrote: Op 10-1-2012 15:30, Damien Fleuriot schreef: On 1/10/12 11:11 AM, Dick Hoogendijk wrote: Op 9-1-2012 21:06, Chuck Swiger schreef: On Jan 9, 2012, at 12:02 PM, alexus wrote: there is no way to make it like that? so it has to be build via ports? The PHP maintainer decides the default options, which is what the precompiled package you got used. While many people want PHP in the form of an Apache module, other folks use it via fastcgi and so forth... Yes that might be so. But it's far better to *have* this module and disable it in Apache than not have it at all and for that reason only *buiild* apache from ports in stead of using a package. Yeah, no thank you. What about those people that don't even *use* apache and want to install PHP ? We get stuck with a useless module ? Really, *no thank you* Wow, that really IS bad.. considering the price of drivespace.. No it really is much better to *force* everyone who wants to run apache/PHP to *build* from source. No pkgadd for those guys.. It's not about disk space, it's about the philosophy behind it. Following the same line of thinking, the CGI binary should also be included, along with spawn-fcgi, php-fpm and so on. A separate package would be ideal, it'd be the same as php5 but would also include the apache module. ___ 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: starting firefox3 with defined geometry
On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 09:56:21 +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote: El día Tuesday, January 10, 2012 a las 09:25:54AM +0100, Polytropon escribió: Answer: Yes, but it's not as easy as it could have been. Unlike nearly every other X11 program, notably the old and outdated ones, Firefox does _not_ seem to support the _standard_ -geometry WxH+X+Y parameter. However, you can define the window width and height with command line parameters: % firefox -width 1024 -height 768 does not work with firefox-3.5.18 (from ports) on 9-CURRENT; Oh the joy of modern software. :-) ... There is a workaround for the lack of standard geometry support: You could have Firefox execute JavaScript instructions at startup window.moveTo(100, 100); window.resizeTo(1024, 768); will try this in the page source; You can also provide those as command line parameters and have Firefox execute them on startup % firefox javascript:%20resizeTo\(500,500\) This works with v6.0.1 running on WindowMaker. As you said you're running KDE, why not try to compensate Firefox's inabilities to support standard -geometry parameters? I found this tool: http://tomas.styblo.name/wmctrl/ Maybe it also works with KDE which manages the Firefox window? The program can be found at x11/wmctrl in the ports collection. KDE uses kwin as its window management subsystem which (according to the documentation) should be compatible. It's really annoying that one has to jump through such hoops just to get a 30 year old standard functionality that every other program has... Hey, even Opera can do it! And now back to history. :-) UNIX since V7 on PDP-11, UNIX on mainframe since ESER 1055 (IBM /370) PDP-11 or K1600? Oh, and EC1056 here (OS/ES SVM OP1). :-) both, PDP-11 and the clone; Our clone or the KFKI clone? http://hampage.hu/tpa/e_tpa1140.html Did you run MUTOS or SVP on that thing? have you ever driven a UNIX by punch cards? No, but I'm familiar with the concept of input redirection in batch mode. Even TSO could be fed via punch cards as it was represented as a batch job. :-) does PSU ring a bell? http://cvs.laladev.de/index.html/P8000/WEGA/contrib/ingres/dbs/tmp/ing_Vortrag?rev=1.1content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup Yes, it does. And I even know this text - which is easy as the material found on the Internet about this topic is very limited. :-) Do you know VMX, a UNIX running as a virtual machine on SVM? (I've also been running UNIX System III WEGA on a P8000 here.) -- 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
Old UFS label complains on 9.0
Hello, I've just updated my laptop from 8.2-RELEASE to 9.0-RELEASE, everything worked but the kernel complains about labels see : g_dev_taste: make_dev_p() failed (gp-name=vol/root, error=17) g_dev_taste: make_dev_p() failed (gp-name=vol/root, error=17) g_dev_taste: make_dev_p() failed (gp-name=vol/var, error=17) g_dev_taste: make_dev_p() failed (gp-name=vol/var, error=17) g_dev_taste: make_dev_p() failed (gp-name=vol/tmp, error=17) g_dev_taste: make_dev_p() failed (gp-name=vol/tmp, error=17) The labels works because my fstab relies on them. How can I fix that? Cheers, -- David Demelier ___ 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: starting firefox3 with defined geometry
On Tue, 10 Jan 2012, Polytropon wrote: On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 09:56:21 +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote: El día Tuesday, January 10, 2012 a las 09:25:54AM +0100, Polytropon escribió: Answer: Yes, but it's not as easy as it could have been. Unlike nearly every other X11 program, notably the old and outdated ones, Firefox does _not_ seem to support the _standard_ -geometry WxH+X+Y parameter. However, you can define the window width and height with command line parameters: % firefox -width 1024 -height 768 does not work with firefox-3.5.18 (from ports) on 9-CURRENT; Oh the joy of modern software. :-) ... There is a workaround for the lack of standard geometry support: You could have Firefox execute JavaScript instructions at startup window.moveTo(100, 100); window.resizeTo(1024, 768); will try this in the page source; You can also provide those as command line parameters and have Firefox execute them on startup % firefox javascript:%20resizeTo\(500,500\) Another option is x11-wm/devilspie.___ 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: starting firefox3 with defined geometry
El día Tuesday, January 10, 2012 a las 07:27:45PM +0100, Polytropon escribió: And now back to history. :-) UNIX since V7 on PDP-11, UNIX on mainframe since ESER 1055 (IBM /370) PDP-11 or K1600? Oh, and EC1056 here (OS/ES SVM OP1). :-) both, PDP-11 and the clone; Our clone or the KFKI clone? http://hampage.hu/tpa/e_tpa1140.html I don't remember the exact name, it was one from USSR, maybe a CMC1420(?), or was it from Chech? Did you run MUTOS or SVP on that thing? no, I never used them; I only booked slots of time in the night to do UNIX ports and tests on the hardware, booting my own tapes or disks; does PSU ring a bell? http://cvs.laladev.de/index.html/P8000/WEGA/contrib/ingres/dbs/tmp/ing_Vortrag?rev=1.1content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup Yes, it does. And I even know this text - which is easy as the material found on the Internet about this topic is very limited. :-) Do you know VMX, a UNIX running as a virtual machine on SVM? I did the port of the driver of the 7906 terminal in the VMX project :-) (I've also been running UNIX System III WEGA on a P8000 here.) me too; it was a two mini-tower system, wasn't it? we are gooing OT and maybe even to much into history of old stories; matthias -- Matthias Apitz e g...@unixarea.de - w http://www.unixarea.de/ UNIX since V7 on PDP-11, UNIX on mainframe since ESER 1055 (IBM /370) UNIX on x86 since SVR4.2 UnixWare 2.1.2, FreeBSD since 2.2.5 ___ 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: Problems building world with 9.0 RC3 [SOLVED]
-Original Message- From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Patrick Mahan Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 4:28 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Problems building world with 9.0 RC3 All, I am having an issue with getting buildworld to work for me. It is failing while building zfs - cc -DADARA_OS - I/data/pmahan/devel/pm_ipr9.0/ipr9.0/src/cddl/sbin/zfs/../../../cddl/contrib /opensolaris/lib/libzpool/common - I/data/pmahan/devel/pm_ipr9.0/ipr9.0/src/cddl/sbin/zfs/../../../cddl/compat/ opensolaris/include - I/data/pmahan/devel/pm_ipr9.0/ipr9.0/src/cddl/sbin/zfs/../../../cddl/compat/ opensolaris/lib/libumem - I/data/pmahan/devel/pm_ipr9.0/ipr9.0/src/cddl/sbin/zfs/../../../sys/cddl/com pat/opensolaris - I/data/pmahan/devel/pm_ipr9.0/ipr9.0/src/cddl/sbin/zfs/../../../cddl/contrib /opensolaris/head - I/data/pmahan/devel/pm_ipr9.0/ipr9.0/src/cddl/sbin/zfs/../../../cddl/contrib /opensolaris/lib/libuutil/common - I/data/pmahan/devel/pm_ipr9.0/ipr9.0/src/cddl/sbin/zfs/../../../cddl/contrib /opensolaris/lib/libzfs/common - I/data/pmahan/devel/pm_ipr9.0/ipr9.0/src/cddl/sbin/zfs/../../../cddl/contrib /opensolaris/lib/libumem/common - I/data/pmahan/devel/pm_ipr9.0/ipr9.0/src/cddl/sbin/zfs/../../../cddl/contrib /opensolaris/lib/libnvpair - I/data/pmahan/devel/pm_ipr9.0/ipr9.0/src/cddl/sbin/zfs/../../../sys/cddl/con trib/opensolaris/uts/common - I/data/pmahan/devel/pm_ipr9.0/ipr9.0/src/cddl/sbin/zfs/../../../sys/cddl/con trib/opensolaris/uts/common/fs/zfs - I/data/pmahan/devel/pm_ipr9.0/ipr9.0/src/cddl/sbin/zfs/../../../sys/cddl/con trib/opensolaris/uts/common/sys - I/data/pmahan/devel/pm_ipr9.0/ipr9.0/src/cddl/sbin/zfs/../../../sys/cddl/con trib/opensolaris/common/zfs -DNEED_SOLARIS_BOOLEAN -std=gnu89 -fstack- protector -Wno-pointer-sign -Wno-unknown-pragmas -o zfs zfs_main.o zfs_iter.o -lbsdxml -lgeom -lm -lnvpair -lsbuf -lumem -lutil -luutil -lzfs /lib/libthr.so.3: undefined reference to `__pselect@FBSDprivate_1.0' /data/pmahan/devel/pm_ipr9.0/ipr9.0/amd64/obj/data/pmahan/devel/pm_ipr9.0/ip r9.0/src/tmp/usr/lib/libzfs.so: undefined reference to `openat@FBSD_1.2' Now, when I take a look at libpthr.so.3 I for '__pselect' I find - pmahan@libthr 90 readelf --symbols libthr.so.3 | grep __pselect 455: c000 120 FUNCGLOBAL DEFAULT 11 ___pselect@@FBSDprivate_1.0 624: c000 120 FUNCGLOBAL DEFAULT 11 ___pselect So I see the symbol there but with a double @ not a single. I don't see any errors generated when libthr.so.3 is being built so I'm a bit of a loss to understand this. I saw in my googling that the wacky symbol naming was introduced sometime in 8.x, but I I couldn't find anything explaining the symbol generation. So I am looking for pointers on how to track this one down. Is this a compiler issue? I figured this out today, thanks to a colleague who was building just fine. It turns out that I had LD_LIBRARY_PATH set in my environment (no particular reason, just left over environmental stuff from years of abuse). It pointed to '/lib:/usr/lib:/usr/local/lib' So I'm guessing the it was picking up a library outside of the buildworld sandbox. Looking at the failed command I notice that there are no -L directives. Wouldn't this have over-ridden my LD_LIBRARY_PATH? In any case I have removed that from my shell environment and everything is now building. Thanks, Patrick Patrick Mahan Lead Technical Kernel Engineer Adara Networks Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are solely the responsibility of the author and are not to be construed as an official opinion of Adara Networks. ___ 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
(no subject)
My name is Glen Davenport. I am trying to download freebsd but haven't a clue as to how the FTP function works.When I go to download I am given a directory listing. Needless to say, I have never downloaded anything for UNIX/LIINUX. Can you help? My e-mail address is gdd80...@gmail.com. Thanks. Glen Davenport GDD ___ 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: (no subject)
On 01/11/2012 02:25 AM, Glen Davenport wrote: My name is Glen Davenport. I am trying to download freebsd but haven't a clue as to how the FTP function works.When I go to download I am given a directory listing. Needless to say, I have never downloaded anything for UNIX/LIINUX. Can you help? My e-mail address is gdd80...@gmail.com. Thanks. Glen Davenport GDD ___ 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 Hi Glen, Assuming you have a 32-bit PC, here's the link to the disc image you need: http://ftp.dk.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ISO-IMAGES-i386/8.2/FreeBSD-8.2-RELEASE-i386-disc1.iso . Burn it on a CD as image, not directly, then boot from CD and, with the help of the excellent Handbook (http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/) you will have a shiny BSD system installed. Feel free to ask if you get stuck, but it's recommended you take a look at the Handbook first. Best, -- Rares Aioanei ___ 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
mpd5 up-script Example?
I've installed mpd5 and am using it to access a pptp VPN server at work. I've got the config working but am trying to use the 'set iface up-script script' function to do some special routing. After the connection is set, I have these routes: DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif Expire default192.168.1.2UGS 0 145071em0 aaa.bbb.0.0/16 159.145.18.10 UGS 00ng0 aaa.bbb.18.10 link#16UH 02ng0 And I need to make these routes: Internet: DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif Expire default192.168.1.2UGS 0 145071em0 aaa.bbb.0.0/16 159.145.18.10 UGS 06ng0 aaa.bbb.18.10 192.168.1.2UGHS04em0 So after my connection is up, I'm manually performing these commands: route delete aaa.bbb.18.10 route add -host aaa.bbb.18.10 192.168.1.2 I'm sure my answer lies in the up-script. I created a simple sh script to do this but mpd5 is passing lots of stuff to it and it fails. How should I do this? Thanks, Drew -- Like card tricks? Visit The Alchemist's Warehouse to learn card magic secrets for free! http://alchemistswarehouse.com ___ 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
