Re: problem booting to multi-vdev root pool
Hi! My system: # uname -a FreeBSD open.technica-03.local 10.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #0: Tue Oct 30 14:13:01 EET 2012 root@open.technica-03.local:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP64R amd64 # zpool status -v pool: zsolar state: ONLINE scan: resilvered 2,56M in 0h0m with 0 errors on Tue Nov 20 10:26:35 2012 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM zsolar ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz2-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk0 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk2 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk3 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors Update source: # svn info Path: . Working Copy Root Path: /usr/src URL: svn://svn.freebsd.org/base/head Repository Root: svn://svn.freebsd.org/base Repository UUID: ccf9f872-aa2e-dd11-9fc8-001c23d0bc1f Revision: 243278 Node Kind: directory Schedule: normal Last Changed Author: avg Last Changed Rev: 243272 Last Changed Date: 2012-11-19 13:35:56 +0200 I used http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/zfs-spa-multi_vdev_root_support.diff buildworld + kernel rm /boot/zfs/zpool.cache Reboot Mounting from zfs:zsolar failed with error 45 --- Best regards, Andrei Lavreniyuk. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: problem booting to multi-vdev root pool
on 20/11/2012 10:57 Andrei Lavreniyuk said the following: Hi! My system: # uname -a FreeBSD open.technica-03.local 10.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #0: Tue Oct 30 14:13:01 EET 2012 root@open.technica-03.local:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP64R amd64 # zpool status -v pool: zsolar state: ONLINE scan: resilvered 2,56M in 0h0m with 0 errors on Tue Nov 20 10:26:35 2012 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM zsolar ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz2-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk0 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk2 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk3 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors Update source: # svn info Path: . Working Copy Root Path: /usr/src URL: svn://svn.freebsd.org/base/head Repository Root: svn://svn.freebsd.org/base Repository UUID: ccf9f872-aa2e-dd11-9fc8-001c23d0bc1f Revision: 243278 Node Kind: directory Schedule: normal Last Changed Author: avg Last Changed Rev: 243272 Last Changed Date: 2012-11-19 13:35:56 +0200 I used http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/zfs-spa-multi_vdev_root_support.diff buildworld + kernel rm /boot/zfs/zpool.cache Reboot Mounting from zfs:zsolar failed with error 45 Are there any other unusual messages before this line? Could you please try adding vfs.zfs.debug=1 to loader.conf and check again? Could you also provide 'zdb -CC zsolar' output and 'zdb -l /dev/gpt/diskX' for each of the disks. These could be uploaded somewhere as they can be quite lengthy. -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
sluggish X.org/Xfce behavior
Hi, since last weekend (November 17th) I have been noticing a sluggish behavior of X.org/Xfce. Typical symptoms are: - Alt-Tab not reacting all of the time - pulldown/popup menus not allowing selections with mouse (typically in Terminal/pidgin), or moving the mouse (touchpad) results in an automatic click - typing something in a Terminal requires mouse (touchpad) movements for the text to show up - sometimes moving the mouse (touchpad) is required for the laptop to wake up; this is noticeable when Thunderbird downloads all messages from the period when the laptop was frozen. I am running 10-amd64 r243234 (so with clang as cc) and ports 307851 without any local modifications. Since November 5 (when clang became cc) I noticed x11/nvidia-driver and x11-drivers/xf86-input-mouse were updated but rebuilding those with gcc did not make any difference. Maybe I missed a related port? All ports last updated before November 5th are still built with gcc. My /etc/make.conf and /etc/rc.conf are attached. Has anyone else been noticing this? Regards, René check_quotas=NO font8x14=iso15-8x14 font8x16=iso15-8x16 font8x8=iso15-8x8 keymap=us.iso moused_enable=YES ipv6_activate_all_interfaces=YES nfs_client_enable=YES sshd_enable=YES powerd_enable=YES hostname=acer wlans_iwn0=wlan0 ifconfig_wlan0=DHCP WPA ifconfig_bge0=DHCP ntpd_enable=YES dumpdev=AUTO linux_enable=YES dbus_enable=YES hald_enable=YES ddb_enable=YES webcamd_enable=YES CPUTYPE?=core2 DOC_LANG=en_US.ISO8859-1 nl_NL.ISO8859-1 PORTSDIR=/usr/ports/head WITHOUT_PKGTOOLS=yes # no pkg_* stuff WITH_VIM_OPTIONS=yes KERNCONF=GENERIC FORCE_MAKE_JOBS=yes # added by use.perl 2012-10-16 09:21:05 PERL_VERSION=5.14.2 ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. (Copied from freebsd-pf)
2012/11/20 Paul Webster paul.g.webs...@googlemail.com: I am aware this is a much discussed subject since the upgrade of PF, I believe the final decision was that to many users are used to the old style pf and an upgrade to the new syntax would cause to much confusion. But a change like this is expected in a new major branch, ie. 10-CURRENT. Not so in -STABLE branches of course. I don't see the problem here. Cheers -- Olivier Smedts _ ASCII ribbon campaign ( ) e-mail: oliv...@gid0.org- against HTML email vCards X www: http://www.gid0.org- against proprietary attachments / \ Il y a seulement 10 sortes de gens dans le monde : ceux qui comprennent le binaire, et ceux qui ne le comprennent pas. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: problem booting to multi-vdev root pool
Hi! Are there any other unusual messages before this line? Could you please try adding vfs.zfs.debug=1 to loader.conf and check again? Could you also provide 'zdb -CC zsolar' output and 'zdb -l /dev/gpt/diskX' for each of the disks. These could be uploaded somewhere as they can be quite lengthy. Please download and view files: http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/disk0.txt http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/disk2.txt http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/disk3.txt http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/zdb_CC_zsolar.txt http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/gpart_show.txt http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/gpart_show_label.txt http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_004.jpg http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_005.jpg http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_006.jpg --- Best regards, Andrei Lavreniyuk. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: problem booting to multi-vdev root pool
on 20/11/2012 12:45 Andrei Lavreniyuk said the following: Hi! Are there any other unusual messages before this line? Could you please try adding vfs.zfs.debug=1 to loader.conf and check again? Could you also provide 'zdb -CC zsolar' output and 'zdb -l /dev/gpt/diskX' for each of the disks. These could be uploaded somewhere as they can be quite lengthy. Please view attached files. Thank you. Can not parse the config for pool message explains what happens but not why... Could you please apply the following patch, un-ifdef the DEBUG sections of it and try again? http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/spa_generate_rootconf.debug.diff -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. (Copied from freebsd-pf)
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:43:04AM +0100, Olivier Smedts wrote: 2012/11/20 Paul Webster paul.g.webs...@googlemail.com: I am aware this is a much discussed subject since the upgrade of PF, I believe the final decision was that to many users are used to the old style pf and an upgrade to the new syntax would cause to much confusion. But a change like this is expected in a new major branch, ie. 10-CURRENT. Not so in -STABLE branches of course. I don't see the problem here. So you don't expect people to upgrade boxes in place? I also guess you've never been 5,000 miles away from a box and typo'd something in the firewall and locked yourself out. The think how tons of FreeBSD users would feel if the default pf syntax was changed to be incompatible and they find themselves in a similar situation after an upgrade. Defaulting to open, while it could solve the problem (although I would suspect there could be edge cases where it doesn't), could be bad for other reasons. The other question that I haven't seen answered (or maybe even asked), but is relevant: what do we gain by going to a later version of pf? I.e. as an administrator, what benefit do I get by having to expend effort converting my filter rules? Gary ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. (Copied from freebsd-pf)
2012/11/20 Gary Palmer gpal...@freebsd.org: On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:43:04AM +0100, Olivier Smedts wrote: 2012/11/20 Paul Webster paul.g.webs...@googlemail.com: I am aware this is a much discussed subject since the upgrade of PF, I believe the final decision was that to many users are used to the old style pf and an upgrade to the new syntax would cause to much confusion. But a change like this is expected in a new major branch, ie. 10-CURRENT. Not so in -STABLE branches of course. I don't see the problem here. So you don't expect people to upgrade boxes in place? I expect that before upgrading to a *major* version you should read an updating or what's changed documentation. I also guess you've never been 5,000 miles away from a box and typo'd something in the firewall and locked yourself out. The think how tons of FreeBSD users would feel if the default pf syntax was changed to be incompatible and they find themselves in a similar situation after an upgrade. Defaulting to open, while it could solve the problem (although I would suspect there could be edge cases where it doesn't), could be bad for other reasons. This already happened to me but, no, not during a major upgrade because I won't do this kind of work without at least someone on-site. The other question that I haven't seen answered (or maybe even asked), but is relevant: what do we gain by going to a later version of pf? I.e. as an administrator, what benefit do I get by having to expend effort converting my filter rules? Gary At some time we'll surely *have* to upgrade our pf, because the legacy version won't be supported upstream. I say that a major release is the most appropriated place for such a change. Another question : how did OpenBSD managed this change ? Cheers -- Olivier Smedts _ ASCII ribbon campaign ( ) e-mail: oliv...@gid0.org- against HTML email vCards X www: http://www.gid0.org- against proprietary attachments / \ Il y a seulement 10 sortes de gens dans le monde : ceux qui comprennent le binaire, et ceux qui ne le comprennent pas. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: problem booting to multi-vdev root pool
2012/11/20 Tom Evans tevans...@googlemail.com: All those files just redirect to the homepage for me... Fixed. Please download and view files: http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/disk0.txt http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/disk2.txt http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/disk3.txt http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/zdb_CC_zsolar.txt http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/gpart_show.txt http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/gpart_show_label.txt http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_004.jpeg http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_005.jpeg http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_006.jpeg ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: problem booting to multi-vdev root pool
Hi! Can not parse the config for pool message explains what happens but not why... Could you please apply the following patch, un-ifdef the DEBUG sections of it and try again? http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/spa_generate_rootconf.debug.diff I use spa_generate_rootconf.debug.diff. make kernel reboot No new debug messages. Pool cannot mount. --- Best regards, Andrei Lavreniyuk. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: problem booting to multi-vdev root pool
2012/11/20 Andrei Lavreniyuk andy.l...@gmail.com: Hi! Can not parse the config for pool message explains what happens but not why... Could you please apply the following patch, un-ifdef the DEBUG sections of it and try again? http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/spa_generate_rootconf.debug.diff I use spa_generate_rootconf.debug.diff. make kernel reboot No new debug messages. Pool cannot mount. This problem is only on systems with raidz. System with ZFS Mirror work normally. --- Best regards, Andrei Lavreniyuk. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: problem booting to multi-vdev root pool
on 20/11/2012 14:41 Andrei Lavreniyuk said the following: Hi! Can not parse the config for pool message explains what happens but not why... Could you please apply the following patch, un-ifdef the DEBUG sections of it and try again? http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/spa_generate_rootconf.debug.diff I use spa_generate_rootconf.debug.diff. What about the un-ifdef the DEBUG sections of it part? make kernel reboot No new debug messages. Pool cannot mount. -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: problem booting to multi-vdev root pool
2012/11/20 Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org: on 20/11/2012 14:41 Andrei Lavreniyuk said the following: Hi! Can not parse the config for pool message explains what happens but not why... Could you please apply the following patch, un-ifdef the DEBUG sections of it and try again? http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/spa_generate_rootconf.debug.diff I use spa_generate_rootconf.debug.diff. What about the un-ifdef the DEBUG sections of it part? Sorry. A few minutes ... make kernel reboot No new debug messages. Pool cannot mount. -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: problem booting to multi-vdev root pool
What about the un-ifdef the DEBUG sections of it part? http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_000.jpeg http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_001.jpeg http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_002.jpeg http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_003.jpeg ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: sluggish X.org/Xfce behavior
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:18 AM, René Ladan r...@freebsd.org wrote: Hi, since last weekend (November 17th) I have been noticing a sluggish behavior of X.org/Xfce. Typical symptoms are: - Alt-Tab not reacting all of the time - pulldown/popup menus not allowing selections with mouse (typically in Terminal/pidgin), or moving the mouse (touchpad) results in an automatic click - typing something in a Terminal requires mouse (touchpad) movements for the text to show up - sometimes moving the mouse (touchpad) is required for the laptop to wake up; this is noticeable when Thunderbird downloads all messages from the period when the laptop was frozen. I am running 10-amd64 r243234 (so with clang as cc) and ports 307851 without any local modifications. Since November 5 (when clang became cc) I noticed x11/nvidia-driver and x11-drivers/xf86-input-mouse were updated but rebuilding those with gcc did not make any difference. Maybe I missed a related port? All ports last updated before November 5th are still built with gcc. My /etc/make.conf and /etc/rc.conf are attached. Has anyone else been noticing this? Very interesting symptoms. I had the same until xf86-input-mouse was fixed with the last update. The symptoms were reproducible when attaching an USB mouse which caused all kind of weird X11 (re)drawing issues. -- Bernhard Froehlich http://www.bluelife.at/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: sluggish X.org/Xfce behavior
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 2:44 PM, Bernhard Fröhlich de...@freebsd.org wrote: Very interesting symptoms. I had the same until xf86-input-mouse was fixed with the last update. The symptoms were reproducible when attaching an USB mouse which caused all kind of weird X11 (re)drawing issues. Exactly, known issue with xorg-mouse and xorg configuration + hald + allowEmptyInput, see list archive for good explanation :-) Best regards :-) Tomek -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
wifi + wpa_supplicant in 9.1-RC3
Hello :-) I have some problems with WiFi connectivity on my Dell Latitude E4310 laptop with Intel card. Very often connection is broken, although windows clients of the same network is working fine. I need to turn radio off and on, sometimes this does not help, I need to kill wpa_supplicant and start one by hand, so probably this is something related with wpa_supplicant. Anyone observed similar issues? Btw if WiFi N supported? Best regards :-) Tomek -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: problem booting to multi-vdev root pool
on 20/11/2012 15:34 Andrei Lavreniyuk said the following: What about the un-ifdef the DEBUG sections of it part? http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_000.jpeg http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_001.jpeg http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_002.jpeg http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_003.jpeg Sorry to make you jump through so many hoops. Now that I see that the probed config is entirely correct, the problem appears to be quite obvious: vdev_alloc is not able to properly use spa_version in this context because spa_ubsync is not initialized yet. Let me think about how to fix this. -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. (Copied from freebsd-pf)
Olivier Smedts wrote: 2012/11/20 Gary Palmer gpal...@freebsd.org: On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:43:04AM +0100, Olivier Smedts wrote: 2012/11/20 Paul Webster paul.g.webs...@googlemail.com: I am aware this is a much discussed subject since the upgrade of PF, I believe the final decision was that to many users are used to the old style pf and an upgrade to the new syntax would cause to much confusion. But a change like this is expected in a new major branch, ie. 10-CURRENT. Not so in -STABLE branches of course. I don't see the problem here. So you don't expect people to upgrade boxes in place? I expect that before upgrading to a *major* version you should read an updating or what's changed documentation. I also guess you've never been 5,000 miles away from a box and typo'd something in the firewall and locked yourself out. The think how tons of FreeBSD users would feel if the default pf syntax was changed to be incompatible and they find themselves in a similar situation after an upgrade. Defaulting to open, while it could solve the problem (although I would suspect there could be edge cases where it doesn't), could be bad for other reasons. This already happened to me but, no, not during a major upgrade because I won't do this kind of work without at least someone on-site. The other question that I haven't seen answered (or maybe even asked), but is relevant: what do we gain by going to a later version of pf? I.e. as an administrator, what benefit do I get by having to expend effort converting my filter rules? Gary At some time we'll surely *have* to upgrade our pf, because the legacy version won't be supported upstream. I say that a major release is the most appropriated place for such a change. Another question : how did OpenBSD managed this change ? Cheers Hay I have been down this road myself. It's no longer possible to just re-port the current OpenBSD version of PF to FreeBSD. The FreeBSD version has been rewritten. Read all the threads shown in this post for all the gory details. [HEADS UP] merging projects/pf into head http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-pf/2012-September/006740.html ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: problem booting to multi-vdev root pool
on 20/11/2012 15:56 Andriy Gapon said the following: on 20/11/2012 15:34 Andrei Lavreniyuk said the following: What about the un-ifdef the DEBUG sections of it part? http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_000.jpeg http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_001.jpeg http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_002.jpeg http://tor.reactor-xg.kiev.ua/files/zfs/20121120_003.jpeg Sorry to make you jump through so many hoops. Now that I see that the probed config is entirely correct, the problem appears to be quite obvious: vdev_alloc is not able to properly use spa_version in this context because spa_ubsync is not initialized yet. Let me think about how to fix this. I hope that the following simple patch should fix the problem: http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/spa_import_rootpool.version.diff -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: sluggish X.org/Xfce behavior
On Tue, 20 Nov 2012, René Ladan wrote: since last weekend (November 17th) I have been noticing a sluggish behavior of X.org/Xfce. Typical symptoms are: - Alt-Tab not reacting all of the time - pulldown/popup menus not allowing selections with mouse (typically in Terminal/pidgin), or moving the mouse (touchpad) results in an automatic click - typing something in a Terminal requires mouse (touchpad) movements for the text to show up - sometimes moving the mouse (touchpad) is required for the laptop to wake up; this is noticeable when Thunderbird downloads all messages from the period when the laptop was frozen. This is one of the problems that having Option AllowEmptyInput Off in xorg.conf causes. If you have that, substitute Option AutoAddDevices Off in the same place.___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. (Copied from freebsd-pf)
Am Tue, 20 Nov 2012 13:24:49 +0100 schrieb Olivier Smedts oliv...@gid0.org: Another question : how did OpenBSD managed this change ? AFAIK, their users are used to stuff just disappearing or changing. Remember that pf started as a replacement to ipf and the rulesets had to be rewritten anyway. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax.
Paul Webster wrote: I am aware this is a much discussed subject since the upgrade of PF, I believe the final decision was that too many users are used to the old style pf and an upgrade to the new syntax would cause too much confusion. I don't buy that. Think of a confusion in a year of two when OpenBSD PF rules and the PF documentation won't match the legacy syntax in FreeBSD's PF. Maxim Khitrov wrote: 1) To move to the newer pf and just add to releases notes what had happened, My vote is for option 1, but I'll also be happy with option 2 if it costs little to maintain both versions. I'm pretty much for anything that brings pf in sync (or close to it) with OpenBSD. My sentiments exactly. Olivier Smedts wrote: But a change like this is expected in a new major branch, ie. 10-CURRENT. Not so in -STABLE branches of course. I don't see the problem here. Indeed. Gary Palmer wrote: So you don't expect people to upgrade boxes in place? I also guess you've never been 5,000 miles away from a box and typo'd something in the firewall and locked yourself out. The think how tons of FreeBSD users would feel if the default pf syntax was changed to be incompatible and they find themselves in a similar situation after an upgrade. The risk of locking oneself out even on minor fiddling with fw rules on a remote machine, let alone upgrading its OS, is something that every administrator is already aware if. Working without a safety net is unwise for a hobbyist, and unacceptable for a professional. I don't think the above argument holds water. Olivier Smedts wrote: Another question : how did OpenBSD managed this change ? This is from http://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade46.html | | If you reboot your system without a usable pf.conf file in place, your pf | rules will not be loaded, and you will end up using the default rule set, | which will block all traffic EXCEPT for ssh over the standard port 22. | This means that if you do not fix your pf.conf rules before rebooting, | you may be greeted by a box that does not even respond to pings. | Do not panic, as you can still ssh to the box, assuming you have sshd(8) | listening on the usual port. Gary Palmer wrote: The other question that I haven't seen answered (or maybe even asked), but is relevant: what do we gain by going to a later version of pf? I.e. as an administrator, what benefit do I get by having to expend effort converting my filter rules? For one thing, I'm desperately awaiting NAT64 support (the 'af-to' translation rule in newer pf (5.1?), committed on 2011-10). Other: packet normalization (scrub) has been reworked and simplified, and is now a rulset option. Considering that scrub is currently broken (9.1, see list of PF bugs in FreeBSD), along with several other bugs that need fixing, it seems the (scarce) manpower would better be spent in moving on, than keeping the already leaky (buggy) pf afloat. I think the compatibility issue should not be used as an excuse for not moving on. You can't make an omelette without breaking eggs. Mark ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: problem booting to multi-vdev root pool
Sorry to make you jump through so many hoops. Now that I see that the probed config is entirely correct, the problem appears to be quite obvious: vdev_alloc is not able to properly use spa_version in this context because spa_ubsync is not initialized yet. Let me think about how to fix this. I hope that the following simple patch should fix the problem: http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/spa_import_rootpool.version.diff At mount system trap and reboot. --- Best regards, Andrei Lavreniyuk. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: problem booting to multi-vdev root pool
on 20/11/2012 16:59 Andrei Lavreniyuk said the following: Sorry to make you jump through so many hoops. Now that I see that the probed config is entirely correct, the problem appears to be quite obvious: vdev_alloc is not able to properly use spa_version in this context because spa_ubsync is not initialized yet. Let me think about how to fix this. I hope that the following simple patch should fix the problem: http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/spa_import_rootpool.version.diff At mount system trap and reboot. Unexpected. Can you catch the backtrace of the panic? If you have it on the screen. -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: problem booting to multi-vdev root pool
on 20/11/2012 17:06 Andriy Gapon said the following: on 20/11/2012 16:59 Andrei Lavreniyuk said the following: Sorry to make you jump through so many hoops. Now that I see that the probed config is entirely correct, the problem appears to be quite obvious: vdev_alloc is not able to properly use spa_version in this context because spa_ubsync is not initialized yet. Let me think about how to fix this. I hope that the following simple patch should fix the problem: http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/spa_import_rootpool.version.diff At mount system trap and reboot. Unexpected. Can you catch the backtrace of the panic? If you have it on the screen. Ah, found another bogosity in the code: --- a/sys/cddl/contrib/opensolaris/uts/common/fs/zfs/spa.c +++ b/sys/cddl/contrib/opensolaris/uts/common/fs/zfs/spa.c @@ -3925,8 +4117,6 @@ spa_import_rootpool(const char *name) return (error); } - spa_history_log_version(spa, LOG_POOL_IMPORT); - spa_config_enter(spa, SCL_ALL, FTAG, RW_WRITER); vdev_free(rvd); spa_config_exit(spa, SCL_ALL, FTAG); This previously worked only because the pool version was zero and thus the action was a NOP anyway. -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. (Copied from freebsd-pf)
On 11/20/12 11:43, Olivier Smedts wrote: 2012/11/20 Paul Webster paul.g.webs...@googlemail.com: I am aware this is a much discussed subject since the upgrade of PF, I believe the final decision was that to many users are used to the old style pf and an upgrade to the new syntax would cause to much confusion. But a change like this is expected in a new major branch, ie. 10-CURRENT. Not so in -STABLE branches of course. I don't see the problem here. Cheers What would be the alternative? Being stuck with the old PF? As Olivier Smedts said, changes like that are expected in a complete new branch. If people need to stay compatible, they are about to use 9.X as long as they have migrated. The downside is more work. The bright side would be development/progression. oh signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. (Copied from freebsd-pf)
On 11/20/2012 10:27 AM, O. Hartmann wrote: On 11/20/12 11:43, Olivier Smedts wrote: 2012/11/20 Paul Webster paul.g.webs...@googlemail.com: I am aware this is a much discussed subject since the upgrade of PF, I believe the final decision was that to many users are used to the old style pf and an upgrade to the new syntax would cause to much confusion. But a change like this is expected in a new major branch, ie. 10-CURRENT. Not so in -STABLE branches of course. I don't see the problem here. Cheers What would be the alternative? Being stuck with the old PF? As Olivier Smedts said, changes like that are expected in a complete new branch. If people need to stay compatible, they are about to use 9.X as long as they have migrated. The downside is more work. The bright side would be development/progression. oh Why not release pf2 as a port? Then those who want the new pf can use it, and those that want the old one can use it. Or, another option is a knob USE_NEWPF during buildworld will build the new pf, otherwise it'd build the old, default one. This way you can still introduce the change, but default to the old one for those of us who are too crusty to change. :) -- Chuck Burns brea...@gmail.com ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. (Copied from freebsd-pf)
20.11.2012, 18:34, Chuck Burns brea...@gmail.com: On 11/20/2012 10:27 AM, O. Hartmann wrote: On 11/20/12 11:43, Olivier Smedts wrote: 2012/11/20 Paul Webster paul.g.webs...@googlemail.com: I am aware this is a much discussed subject since the upgrade of PF, I believe the final decision was that to many users are used to the old style pf and an upgrade to the new syntax would cause to much confusion. But a change like this is expected in a new major branch, ie. 10-CURRENT. Not so in -STABLE branches of course. I don't see the problem here. Cheers What would be the alternative? Being stuck with the old PF? As Olivier Smedts said, changes like that are expected in a complete new branch. If people need to stay compatible, they are about to use 9.X as long as they have migrated. The downside is more work. The bright side would be development/progression. oh Why not release pf2 as a port? Then those who want the new pf can use it, and those that want the old one can use it. Or, another option is a knob USE_NEWPF during buildworld will build the new pf, otherwise it'd build the old, default one. This way you can still introduce the change, but default to the old one for those of us who are too crusty to change. :) FreeBSD already have 3x firewalls. Having 4th m I think, isn't desired. -- Aldis Berjoza FreeBSD addict ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: wifi + wpa_supplicant in 9.1-RC3
On 20 November 2012 05:52, CeDeROM cede...@tlen.pl wrote: Hello :-) I have some problems with WiFi connectivity on my Dell Latitude E4310 laptop with Intel card. Very often connection is broken, although windows clients of the same network is working fine. I need to turn radio off and on, sometimes this does not help, I need to kill wpa_supplicant and start one by hand, so probably this is something related with wpa_supplicant. Anyone observed similar issues? Please file a PR with the details. Which wireless card is it? Which driver/ Btw if WiFi N supported? Yes, the iwn(4) NICs support 802.11n in 9.1. Best regards :-) Tomek -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. (Copied from freebsd-pf)
On 11/20/2012 10:52 AM, Aldis Berjoza wrote: 20.11.2012, 18:34, Chuck Burns brea...@gmail.com: On 11/20/2012 10:27 AM, O. Hartmann wrote: On 11/20/12 11:43, Olivier Smedts wrote: 2012/11/20 Paul Webster paul.g.webs...@googlemail.com: I am aware this is a much discussed subject since the upgrade of PF, I believe the final decision was that to many users are used to the old style pf and an upgrade to the new syntax would cause to much confusion. But a change like this is expected in a new major branch, ie. 10-CURRENT. Not so in -STABLE branches of course. I don't see the problem here. Cheers What would be the alternative? Being stuck with the old PF? As Olivier Smedts said, changes like that are expected in a complete new branch. If people need to stay compatible, they are about to use 9.X as long as they have migrated. The downside is more work. The bright side would be development/progression. oh Why not release pf2 as a port? Then those who want the new pf can use it, and those that want the old one can use it. Or, another option is a knob USE_NEWPF during buildworld will build the new pf, otherwise it'd build the old, default one. This way you can still introduce the change, but default to the old one for those of us who are too crusty to change. :) FreeBSD already have 3x firewalls. Having 4th m I think, isn't desired. Nonsense. More options are always preferable to fewer options. -- Chuck Burns brea...@gmail.com ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. (Copied from freebsd-pf)
On 20 November 2012 12:47, Chuck Burns brea...@gmail.com wrote: Nonsense. More options are always preferable to fewer options. Even when those options must be maintained? Documented? Bug fixed? -- Eitan Adler ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. (Copied from freebsd-pf)
On 11/20/2012 11:51 AM, Eitan Adler wrote: On 20 November 2012 12:47, Chuck Burns brea...@gmail.com wrote: Nonsense. More options are always preferable to fewer options. Even when those options must be maintained? Documented? Bug fixed? The ones who want the old pf can maintain it.. those who want the new one, can maintain *it*. I, for one, would prefer the new one eventually replace the old one, but there should definitely be a transition period, similar to how pkgng is going in. Chuck ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. (Copied from freebsd-pf)
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Chuck Burns brea...@gmail.com wrote: The ones who want the old pf can maintain it.. those who want the new one, can maintain *it*. This is beach front property on Fantasy Island. There isn't even enough manpower to sufficiently support one currently. -- Adam Vande More ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: sluggish X.org/Xfce behavior
On 20-11-2012 15:34, Warren Block wrote: On Tue, 20 Nov 2012, René Ladan wrote: since last weekend (November 17th) I have been noticing a sluggish behavior of X.org/Xfce. Typical symptoms are: - Alt-Tab not reacting all of the time - pulldown/popup menus not allowing selections with mouse (typically in Terminal/pidgin), or moving the mouse (touchpad) results in an automatic click - typing something in a Terminal requires mouse (touchpad) movements for the text to show up - sometimes moving the mouse (touchpad) is required for the laptop to wake up; this is noticeable when Thunderbird downloads all messages from the period when the laptop was frozen. This is one of the problems that having Option AllowEmptyInput Off in xorg.conf causes. If you have that, substitute Option AutoAddDevices Off in the same place. Commenting out AllowEmptyInput Off (and not having an AutoAddDevices entry) works for me. Must do better homework... René ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: sluggish X.org/Xfce behavior
On Tue, 20 Nov 2012, René Ladan wrote: On 20-11-2012 15:34, Warren Block wrote: On Tue, 20 Nov 2012, René Ladan wrote: since last weekend (November 17th) I have been noticing a sluggish behavior of X.org/Xfce. Typical symptoms are: - Alt-Tab not reacting all of the time - pulldown/popup menus not allowing selections with mouse (typically in Terminal/pidgin), or moving the mouse (touchpad) results in an automatic click - typing something in a Terminal requires mouse (touchpad) movements for the text to show up - sometimes moving the mouse (touchpad) is required for the laptop to wake up; this is noticeable when Thunderbird downloads all messages from the period when the laptop was frozen. This is one of the problems that having Option AllowEmptyInput Off in xorg.conf causes. If you have that, substitute Option AutoAddDevices Off in the same place. Commenting out AllowEmptyInput Off (and not having an AutoAddDevices entry) works for me. Must do better homework... http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/aei.html gives more detail.___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re[2]: netisr panic?
Здравствуйте, Ian. Вы писали 19 ноября 2012 г., 7:32:08: IF Gleb Smirnoff wrote: On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 05:07:54PM +0200, Ian FREISLICH wrote: I I have this consistently with: I I FreeBSD firewall2.jnb1.gp-online.net 10.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #30 IF r243156: Fri Nov 16 20:12:33 SAST 2012 IF i...@firewall2.jnb1.gp-online.net:/ IF usr/obj/usr/src/sys/FIREWALL amd64 Pretty sure this is a new version of wrong byte order panic, which no longer can happen in HEAD. Can you please try this patch? Do you mean 10 only. Are that available in FreeBSD 9? -- С уважением, Eugen mailto:kes-...@yandex.ru ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax.
On Nov 20, 2012 9:44 AM, Mark Martinec mark.martinec+free...@ijs.si wrote: Paul Webster wrote: I am aware this is a much discussed subject since the upgrade of PF, I believe the final decision was that too many users are used to the old style pf and an upgrade to the new syntax would cause too much confusion. I don't buy that. Think of a confusion in a year of two when OpenBSD PF rules and the PF documentation won't match the legacy syntax in FreeBSD's PF. Their documentation already doesn't match the legacy syntax, you have to look for older pf documentation to match that in use by FreeBSD. This has been the case since at least OpenBSD 4.7: http://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade47.html To get documentation for FreeBSD pf, you generally need to look for OpenBSD documentation for 4.2 or 4.3 as there were minute changes in the mid-4.x range. kmw ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. (Copied from freebsd-pf)
Olivier, On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 01:24:49PM +0100, Olivier Smedts wrote: O The other question that I haven't seen answered (or maybe even asked), but O is relevant: what do we gain by going to a later version of pf? I.e. as an O administrator, what benefit do I get by having to expend effort converting O my filter rules? O O Gary O O At some time we'll surely *have* to upgrade our pf, because the legacy O version won't be supported upstream. I say that a major release is the O most appropriated place for such a change. This isn't answer to Gary's question, sorry. He asked for what exact features or performance gains are we talking about when we say the new pf. Regarding your answer. First, OpenBSD never supports anything older than the latest release. Thus, pf in FreeBSD was never supported by OpenBSD and never would be. Second, if you carefully analyze current open problem reports in GNATS assigned to freebsd-pf, you would find, that vast majority of them are specific to FreeBSD port and are not shared with OpenBSD. Taking this into account I will state, that pf needs to be supported by FreeBSD developers, end. -- Totus tuus, Glebius. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. (Copied from freebsd-pf)
Chuck, On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 10:33:11AM -0600, Chuck Burns wrote: C Why not release pf2 as a port? Then those who want the new pf can use C it, and those that want the old one can use it. C C Or, another option is a knob USE_NEWPF during buildworld will build the C new pf, otherwise it'd build the old, default one. C C This way you can still introduce the change, but default to the old one C for those of us who are too crusty to change. :) Why not? The netpfil/ subdir in the source tree has enough space for zillions of packet filters. Just do the dirty coding job and post patches. If you see the point in doing this, then you are the person to do. -- Totus tuus, Glebius. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: problem booting to multi-vdev root pool
2012/11/20 Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org: on 20/11/2012 17:06 Andriy Gapon said the following: on 20/11/2012 16:59 Andrei Lavreniyuk said the following: Sorry to make you jump through so many hoops. Now that I see that the probed config is entirely correct, the problem appears to be quite obvious: vdev_alloc is not able to properly use spa_version in this context because spa_ubsync is not initialized yet. Let me think about how to fix this. I hope that the following simple patch should fix the problem: http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/spa_import_rootpool.version.diff At mount system trap and reboot. Unexpected. Can you catch the backtrace of the panic? If you have it on the screen. Ah, found another bogosity in the code: --- a/sys/cddl/contrib/opensolaris/uts/common/fs/zfs/spa.c +++ b/sys/cddl/contrib/opensolaris/uts/common/fs/zfs/spa.c @@ -3925,8 +4117,6 @@ spa_import_rootpool(const char *name) return (error); } - spa_history_log_version(spa, LOG_POOL_IMPORT); - spa_config_enter(spa, SCL_ALL, FTAG, RW_WRITER); vdev_free(rvd); spa_config_exit(spa, SCL_ALL, FTAG); This previously worked only because the pool version was zero and thus the action was a NOP anyway. Problem solved. Raidz pool mount without zpool.cache. # zpool status -v pool: zsolar state: ONLINE scan: resilvered 2,56M in 0h0m with 0 errors on Tue Nov 20 10:26:35 2012 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM zsolar ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz2-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk0 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk2 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk3 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors # uname -a FreeBSD opensolaris.technica-03.local 10.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #6 r243278M: Wed Nov 21 09:28:51 EET 2012 root@opensolaris.technica-03.local:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP64R amd64 Thanks! ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax.
Mark, On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 03:43:17PM +0100, Mark Martinec wrote: M For one thing, I'm desperately awaiting NAT64 support (the 'af-to' M translation rule in newer pf (5.1?), committed on 2011-10). Backport this exact feature to FreeBSD and send patch. M Other: packet normalization (scrub) has been reworked and simplified, M and is now a rulset option. Considering that scrub is currently broken M (9.1, see list of PF bugs in FreeBSD), along with several other M bugs that need fixing, it seems the (scarce) manpower would better M be spent in moving on, than keeping the already leaky (buggy) pf M afloat. Yes, scrub improvements can be cherry picked and added to FreeBSD, too. But if you think that bulk import of new version would close all current bugs without opening new problems, then you are mistaking. Last bulk import introduced much more bugs than it closed. And this statement isn't a accusation towards the person who did the import. This is just a generic rule. If you take 100k lines of code that were developed for another operating system kernel and without thourough reviewing it just make it compile and link with another kernel, then you are about to miss many rough edges that will show up later, when the code would be utilized. Thus, cherry-picking is preferred over bulk imports. -- Totus tuus, Glebius. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
