Re: [pfSense Support] auto-update blacklist
Luke Jaeger wrote: > How do I make squidguard automatically download & rebuild the > blacklist once a week? > cron job? what would the syntax look like? > > thanks - > > > Luke Jaeger | Technology Coordinator > Pioneer Valley Performing Arts Charter Public School > www.pvpa.org > > http://www.shallalist.de/helpers.html You need an outside script to do that. It's not something that is built into squidGuard. And why once a week? It's not that hard nor is it cpu intensive. I do it once a day for my customer that uses Squid/SquidGuard. Lyle Giese LCR Computer Services, Inc. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
Re: [pfSense Support] 2.0-RC1 access point problem
On Sun, March 6, 2011 21:28, Nenhum_de_Nos wrote: > hi, > > I have a just installed 2.0-rc1 on soekris 5501-70 and have an ral card: > > ral0: mem 0xa0008000-0xa000 irq 10 at > device 14.0 on pci0 > ral0: MAC/BBP RT2561C, RF RT2527 > ral0: [ITHREAD] > > I configured it as AP, and all is fine. but once a day (two days of > uptime) my wifi connection falls. yesterday I got to it and unchecked the > WME options and all went to work. now I guess the restart got it back. > > pfsense is: > > uname -a > FreeBSD red.apartnet 8.1-RELEASE-p2 FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE-p2 #0: Fri Mar 4 > 14:40:38 EST 2011 > sullrich@FreeBSD_8.0_pfSense_2.0-snaps.pfsense.org:/usr/obj.pfSense/usr/pfSensesrc/src/sys/pfSense_wrap.8.i386 > i386 > > log says: > > ral0: need multicast update callback > ral0: need multicast update callback > > if any leads, please say. I have an option to use atheros based pci card, > just have to get it :) > > thanks, > > matheus just forgot to say, when it "dies", I can still see the ap transmiting, just can't join the network. thanks, matheus -- We will call you cygnus, The God of balance you shall be A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style - To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
[pfSense Support] 2.0-RC1 access point problem
hi, I have a just installed 2.0-rc1 on soekris 5501-70 and have an ral card: ral0: mem 0xa0008000-0xa000 irq 10 at device 14.0 on pci0 ral0: MAC/BBP RT2561C, RF RT2527 ral0: [ITHREAD] I configured it as AP, and all is fine. but once a day (two days of uptime) my wifi connection falls. yesterday I got to it and unchecked the WME options and all went to work. now I guess the restart got it back. pfsense is: uname -a FreeBSD red.apartnet 8.1-RELEASE-p2 FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE-p2 #0: Fri Mar 4 14:40:38 EST 2011 sullrich@FreeBSD_8.0_pfSense_2.0-snaps.pfsense.org:/usr/obj.pfSense/usr/pfSensesrc/src/sys/pfSense_wrap.8.i386 i386 log says: ral0: need multicast update callback ral0: need multicast update callback if any leads, please say. I have an option to use atheros based pci card, just have to get it :) thanks, matheus -- We will call you cygnus, The God of balance you shall be A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style - To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
[pfSense Support] auto-update blacklist
How do I make squidguard automatically download & rebuild the blacklist once a week? cron job? what would the syntax look like? thanks - Luke Jaeger | Technology Coordinator Pioneer Valley Performing Arts Charter Public School www.pvpa.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
Re: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem
On Sun, March 6, 2011 19:26, Bao Ha wrote: > Hi Bart, > > Thanks for the note. > > According to the forum, it should not be a problem. :-( > > Unfortunately, mounting RW without NOATIME will pounce on the compact > flash > everytime a READ is made. It will kill the CF sooner or later. > > When we first got the reports of corrupted CFs, we just overnighted new > ones. Then, those died shortly, within a week or two. We replaced a > complete > system: systemboard, memory and CF. > > I am loosing my hair and sleeps, thinking one of our most reliable systems > being shipped since 2006 is having compatibility issues with pfSense 2.0. > > I am hoping that this is the real cause. And I can stop a flood of support > issues. I see this in a 4g nano image, but is no problem as I use microdrive. so, in case when this be corrected, how can I make it this way ? is the nano image the best for a microdrive soekris ? I want the full pc install just using serial instead of vga. thanks, matheus -- We will call you cygnus, The God of balance you shall be A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style - To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
RE: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem
Hi Bao, You're welcome :) I've read that, but not sure if that is actually true in all cases. Wow, that is fast! I doubt pfSense writes so much in that time the CF-cards start dieing, although I might be wrong. Could be the (lack of?) quality of the CF-cards combined with that problem that is causing them to fail so fast. (This is just me thinking out loud.) Out of curiosity, why ship systems with an OS that is still beta? Well, RC1 now, but still Not sure if this will help, but maybe adding /etc/rc.conf_mount_ro to a script that runs during boot-up will do some good. It's the command to mount read-only. I still have to add that one and /etc/rc.conf_mount_rw to the script that makes an IPv6 tunnel on my pfSense v1.2.3 system, since the script needs to write something during the boot of pfSense when the script is started but can't do that because of RO filesystem Hope this problem will be solved soon! With regards, Bart _ Van: Bao Ha [mailto:b...@hacom.net] Verzonden: zondag 6 maart 2011 23:26 Aan: support@pfsense.com Onderwerp: Re: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem Hi Bart, Thanks for the note. According to the forum, it should not be a problem. :-( Unfortunately, mounting RW without NOATIME will pounce on the compact flash everytime a READ is made. It will kill the CF sooner or later. When we first got the reports of corrupted CFs, we just overnighted new ones. Then, those died shortly, within a week or two. We replaced a complete system: systemboard, memory and CF. I am loosing my hair and sleeps, thinking one of our most reliable systems being shipped since 2006 is having compatibility issues with pfSense 2.0. I am hoping that this is the real cause. And I can stop a flood of support issues. Bao On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Bart Grefte wrote: Someone already made a bugreport <http://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/1279> http://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/1279 ;) _ Van: Bao Ha [mailto:b...@hacom.net] Verzonden: zondag 6 maart 2011 23:06 Aan: customersupp...@pfsense.org CC: support@pfsense.com Onderwerp: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem Something happened in BETA5 and it was carried into RC1, up to today snapshot: 20110306-0859. The file system in nanobsd version is now mounted fully RW, see the following "mount" command: ... [2.0-RC1][admin@pfHacom.localdomain]/root(1): mount /dev/ufs/pfsense0 on / (ufs, local) devfs on /dev (devfs, local) /dev/md0 on /tmp (ufs, local) /dev/md1 on /var (ufs, local) /dev/ufs/cf on /cf (ufs, local) devfs on /var/dhcpd/dev (devfs, local) ... I believe they are supposed to be mounted read-only or at least RW with NOATIME. We have had at least two systems running pfSense 2.0 BETA5 and RC1 RMAed back with suspected hardware problems, causing corruption of compact flash memory. We think the "root" cause of this problem is due to the filesystems mounted fully RW in the compact flash. We plan to distribute the following temporary fix to our custmers who want to run pfSense 2.0: ... [2.0-RC1][admin@pfHacom.localdomain]/root(1): cat /usr/local/etc/rc.d/hacom.sh #!/bin/sh # hacom.sh - BCH 3/6/2011 # Temprorary fix to mount the filesystem Read-Only to avoid destroying flash memory PLATFORM=`/bin/cat /etc/platform` if [ "$PLATFORM" = "nanobsd" ]; then /sbin/mount -u -oro /; /sbin/mount -u -onoatime /cf fi ... Appreciate if someone look into this problem. I have also CCed this message to support@pfsense.com to notify others currently using pfSense 2.0 RC1 nanobsd version of the danger to flash memory. Thanks. Bao -- Best Regards. Bao C. Ha Hacom - Embedded Systems and Appliances http://www.hacom.net voice: (714) 564-9932 -- Best Regards. Bao C. Ha Hacom - Embedded Systems and Appliances http://www.hacom.net voice: (714) 564-9932
Re: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem
Hi Bart, Thanks for the note. According to the forum, it should not be a problem. :-( Unfortunately, mounting RW without NOATIME will pounce on the compact flash everytime a READ is made. It will kill the CF sooner or later. When we first got the reports of corrupted CFs, we just overnighted new ones. Then, those died shortly, within a week or two. We replaced a complete system: systemboard, memory and CF. I am loosing my hair and sleeps, thinking one of our most reliable systems being shipped since 2006 is having compatibility issues with pfSense 2.0. I am hoping that this is the real cause. And I can stop a flood of support issues. Bao On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Bart Grefte wrote: > Someone already made a bugreport http://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/1279 > ;) > > > > > -- > > *Van:* Bao Ha [mailto:b...@hacom.net] > *Verzonden:* zondag 6 maart 2011 23:06 > *Aan:* customersupp...@pfsense.org > *CC:* support@pfsense.com > *Onderwerp:* [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem > > > > Something happened in BETA5 and it was carried into RC1, up to today > snapshot: 20110306-0859. > > The file system in nanobsd version is now mounted fully RW, see the > following "mount" command: > > ... > > [2.0-RC1][admin@pfHacom.localdomain]/root(1): mount > > /dev/ufs/pfsense0 on / (ufs, local) > > > devfs on /dev (devfs, local) > > > /dev/md0 on /tmp (ufs, local) > > > /dev/md1 on /var (ufs, local) > > > /dev/ufs/cf on /cf (ufs, local) > > > devfs on /var/dhcpd/dev (devfs, local) > > ... > > > > I believe they are supposed to be mounted read-only or at least RW with > NOATIME. > > > > We have had at least two systems running pfSense 2.0 BETA5 and RC1 RMAed > back with suspected hardware problems, causing corruption of compact flash > memory. We think the "root" cause of this problem is due to the filesystems > mounted fully RW in the compact flash. > > > > We plan to distribute the following temporary fix to our custmers who want > to run pfSense 2.0: > > ... > > [2.0-RC1][admin@pfHacom.localdomain]/root(1): cat > /usr/local/etc/rc.d/hacom.sh > > #!/bin/sh > > > > > > # hacom.sh - BCH 3/6/2011 > > > # Temprorary fix to mount the filesystem Read-Only to avoid destroying > flash memory > > > > > PLATFORM=`/bin/cat /etc/platform` > > > > > > if [ "$PLATFORM" = "nanobsd" ]; then > > > /sbin/mount -u -oro /; /sbin/mount -u -onoatime /cf > > > fi > > > ... > > > > Appreciate if someone look into this problem. > > > > I have also CCed this message to support@pfsense.com to notify others > currently using pfSense 2.0 RC1 nanobsd version of the danger to flash > memory. > > > > Thanks. > > Bao > > -- > Best Regards. > Bao C. Ha > Hacom - Embedded Systems and Appliances > http://www.hacom.net > voice: (714) 564-9932 > -- Best Regards. Bao C. Ha Hacom - Embedded Systems and Appliances http://www.hacom.net voice: (714) 564-9932
RE: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem
Someone already made a bugreport <http://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/1279> http://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/1279 ;) _ Van: Bao Ha [mailto:b...@hacom.net] Verzonden: zondag 6 maart 2011 23:06 Aan: customersupp...@pfsense.org CC: support@pfsense.com Onderwerp: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem Something happened in BETA5 and it was carried into RC1, up to today snapshot: 20110306-0859. The file system in nanobsd version is now mounted fully RW, see the following "mount" command: ... [2.0-RC1][admin@pfHacom.localdomain]/root(1): mount /dev/ufs/pfsense0 on / (ufs, local) devfs on /dev (devfs, local) /dev/md0 on /tmp (ufs, local) /dev/md1 on /var (ufs, local) /dev/ufs/cf on /cf (ufs, local) devfs on /var/dhcpd/dev (devfs, local) ... I believe they are supposed to be mounted read-only or at least RW with NOATIME. We have had at least two systems running pfSense 2.0 BETA5 and RC1 RMAed back with suspected hardware problems, causing corruption of compact flash memory. We think the "root" cause of this problem is due to the filesystems mounted fully RW in the compact flash. We plan to distribute the following temporary fix to our custmers who want to run pfSense 2.0: ... [2.0-RC1][admin@pfHacom.localdomain]/root(1): cat /usr/local/etc/rc.d/hacom.sh #!/bin/sh # hacom.sh - BCH 3/6/2011 # Temprorary fix to mount the filesystem Read-Only to avoid destroying flash memory PLATFORM=`/bin/cat /etc/platform` if [ "$PLATFORM" = "nanobsd" ]; then /sbin/mount -u -oro /; /sbin/mount -u -onoatime /cf fi ... Appreciate if someone look into this problem. I have also CCed this message to support@pfsense.com to notify others currently using pfSense 2.0 RC1 nanobsd version of the danger to flash memory. Thanks. Bao -- Best Regards. Bao C. Ha Hacom - Embedded Systems and Appliances http://www.hacom.net voice: (714) 564-9932
[pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem
Something happened in BETA5 and it was carried into RC1, up to today snapshot: 20110306-0859. The file system in nanobsd version is now mounted fully RW, see the following "mount" command: ... [2.0-RC1][admin@pfHacom.localdomain]/root(1): mount /dev/ufs/pfsense0 on / (ufs, local) devfs on /dev (devfs, local) /dev/md0 on /tmp (ufs, local) /dev/md1 on /var (ufs, local) /dev/ufs/cf on /cf (ufs, local) devfs on /var/dhcpd/dev (devfs, local) ... I believe they are supposed to be mounted read-only or at least RW with NOATIME. We have had at least two systems running pfSense 2.0 BETA5 and RC1 RMAed back with suspected hardware problems, causing corruption of compact flash memory. We think the "root" cause of this problem is due to the filesystems mounted fully RW in the compact flash. We plan to distribute the following temporary fix to our custmers who want to run pfSense 2.0: ... [2.0-RC1][admin@pfHacom.localdomain]/root(1): cat /usr/local/etc/rc.d/hacom.sh #!/bin/sh # hacom.sh - BCH 3/6/2011 # Temprorary fix to mount the filesystem Read-Only to avoid destroying flash memory PLATFORM=`/bin/cat /etc/platform` if [ "$PLATFORM" = "nanobsd" ]; then /sbin/mount -u -oro /; /sbin/mount -u -onoatime /cf fi ... Appreciate if someone look into this problem. I have also CCed this message to support@pfsense.com to notify others currently using pfSense 2.0 RC1 nanobsd version of the danger to flash memory. Thanks. Bao -- Best Regards. Bao C. Ha Hacom - Embedded Systems and Appliances http://www.hacom.net voice: (714) 564-9932
