Re: why 100 packages are evil

[Joe Holden]

On 25/04/2016 08:39, Miroslav Lachman wrote:

Gerrit Kühn wrote on 04/25/2016 07:48:

On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 18:52:32 +0100 Matthew Seaman 
wrote about Re: why 100 packages are evil:

MS> > Is freebsd-update going away as result of the new packaging ?


Yes.  It will be replaced by 'pkg upgrade' -- as far as I know, that's
the plan for 11.0-RELEASE.


Hm... I never had any troubles with freebsd-update, it always "just
worked" for me. OTOH, I remember having several issues with pkg,
requiring
to fix databases manually and so on.


I had many issues with freebsd-update in the past so the last year I
converted all machines back to "installkernel & installworld" from NFS
mounted build server. It is faster and predictable than freebsd-update
(in my case).
I hope that pkg upgrade will be good replacement one day. But I don't
think it is good enough right now.

Miroslav Lachman
As another useless datapoint - I've not had any real issues with 
freebsd-update and I've been using it since 6.x, same with pkg(ng) after 
the initial bugs were ironed out, this is on 30-40 production servers.


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

Re: Bay Trail 32bit UEFI

[Joe Holden]

On 02/03/2016 19:45, Lundberg, Johannes wrote:

On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:37 AM, Jakob Alvermark <ja...@alvermark.net
<mailto:ja...@alvermark.net>> wrote:

On Wed, March 2, 2016 20:00, Lundberg, Johannes wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 2:10 AM, Joe Holden <m...@m.jwh.me.uk 
<mailto:m...@m.jwh.me.uk>> wrote:
>
>
>> On 02/03/2016 01:45, Lundberg, Johannes wrote:
>>
>>
>>> CherryTrail devices/boards with 64bit UEFI are already out. Upgrading
>>>  the hardware is one solution (I did).
>>>
>>> I'm thinking of the sticks etc, they all have 32bit UEFI and no
>>>
>> CSM/legacy boot, but have 64bit cpus
>>
>
>
>
> Yeah and it sucks. All to adapt to Microsoft who couldn't make 64bit UEFI
>  boot loader in time (or so I heard)... I heard though that newer (Linux)
> versions of Intel Compute Stick would have 64bit UEFI but I'm not sure.

The Intel Compute sticks can boot both 32 and 64 bit. It doesn't
matter if
you have the Windows or Linux version. (The difference between the
is the
amount of RAM and onboard storage, the firmware is the same)

I have the Windows one and it boots 64 bit just fine.
You can select it in the settings. (OS setting: Windows=32 bit,
Linux=64 bit)


That's great. However, as for all other BayTrail devices out there that
does not support Linux officially I think you're stuck with 32bit.


Jakob

My point was that it is possible to boot amd64 bit kernels from 32bit 
UEFI, grub (and therefore, linux) does it.
I think even openbsd at least has a 32bit loader, I'd settle for 32bit 
but the problem is I can't easily boot it.


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

Re: Bay Trail 32bit UEFI

[Joe Holden]

On 02/03/2016 01:45, Lundberg, Johannes wrote:

CherryTrail devices/boards with 64bit UEFI are already out. Upgrading
the hardware is one solution (I did).

I'm thinking of the sticks etc, they all have 32bit UEFI and no 
CSM/legacy boot, but have 64bit cpus



I never did try FreeBSD on BayTrail but for running Linux on BayTrail I
used special built Grub that was 32bit but could load 64bit OS. Could
this kind of Grub boot a 64bit FreeBSD, I wonder?

I looked at this but honestly it looked like a giant nightmare - I did 
get grub loading on a test platform (tablet, for display etc) but didn't 
manage to make it boot anything


On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 5:20 PM, John Baldwin <j...@freebsd.org
<mailto:j...@freebsd.org>> wrote:

On Sunday, February 28, 2016 07:00:06 AM Joe Holden wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Apologies if this is the wrong list...
>
> Is there any plan to support booting FreeBSD on 32bit UEFI systems (with
> or without 64bit kernel/userland)? Obviously there is no i386 efi loader
> currently so neither is possible...

I don't think anyone is actively working on it.  I think it shouldn't be
that much work once the i386 loader is resurrected.  The i386 kernel
just
needs to use the EFI memory map and I think the rest of it should
generally
just work.

--
John Baldwin
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
<mailto:freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org>"



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

Bay Trail 32bit UEFI

[Joe Holden]

Hi all,

Apologies if this is the wrong list...

Is there any plan to support booting FreeBSD on 32bit UEFI systems (with 
or without 64bit kernel/userland)? Obviously there is no i386 efi loader 
currently so neither is possible...


TIA,
J
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: CVE-2015-7547: critical bug in libc

[Joe Holden]

On 22/02/2016 00:04, Chris H wrote:

On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 08:39:32 -0600 (CST) Dan Mack <m...@macktronics.com> wrote


On Thu, 18 Feb 2016, Joe Holden wrote:


On 17/02/2016 14:07, Daniel Kalchev wrote:

On 17.02.2016 ?., at 15:40, Shawn Webb <shawn.w...@hardenedbsd.org>
wrote: >>>
TL;DR: FreeBSD is not affected by CVE-2015-7547.


Unless you use Linux applications under emulation.

Daniel


Which is supported by ports so at most it should be a ports advisory and
not a FreeBSD (base) SA and therefore not on the website.

Just my 2p ;)

Documenting and putting out security advisiories for other operating
systems seems like a bad precedent in general.  The same could be said
for runniing java applications, windows under bhyve, etc. - *sigh* -
if the cross over use is common via a port, then have the port maybe
remind users to consult their distribution specific security
vulnerabilites prior to running it maybe - which is what they should
be doing anyway.

That's my two insignificant cents :-)

Dan

If Sell distributes a bad batch of gasoline. It's not Chevrolet's
responsibility to inform it's car buyers/owners, that Shell produced
a bad batch of gasoline. Is it? :)

--Chris

Exactly, however it is done now so nevermind
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: CVE-2015-7547: critical bug in libc

[Joe Holden]

On 17/02/2016 14:07, Daniel Kalchev wrote:



On 17.02.2016 г., at 15:40, Shawn Webb  wrote:

TL;DR: FreeBSD is not affected by CVE-2015-7547.



Unless you use Linux applications under emulation.

Daniel

Which is supported by ports so at most it should be a ports advisory and 
not a FreeBSD (base) SA and therefore not on the website.


Just my 2p ;)
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: Import of DragonFly Mail Agent

[Joe Holden]

On 24/02/2014 04:26, Julio Merino wrote:

On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Baptiste Daroussin b...@freebsd.orgwrote:


Hi,

As some of you may have noticed, I have imorted a couple of days ago dma
(DragonFly Mail Agent) in base. I have been asked to explain my motivation
so
here they are.

DragonFly Mail Agent is a minimalistic mailer that is able to relay mails
to
some smtp servers (with TLS, authentication and so on)

It supports MASQUERADE and NULLCLIENT, and is able to deliver mails locally
(respecting aliases).

I imported it because dma is lightweight, BSD license and easy to use.

The code base is rather small and easy to capsicumize (which I plan to do)

My initial goal is not to replace sendmail.



But is it an eventual goal?  *I* don't see why not, but if it is: what's
the plan?  How is the decision to drop sendmail going to be made when the
time comes?  (I.e. who _can_ and will make the call?)



All I want is a small mailer
simple to configure, and not listening to port 25, suitable for small
environment (embedded and/or resource bounded) as well as for server
deployment.



Playing devil's advocate: what specific problems is this trying to solve?
  I'd argue, for example, that postfix can be also easily configured and can
be made to not listen on port 25 for local mail delivery, while at the same
time it is a fully-functional MTA that could replace sendmail altogether.
  (Which, by the way, is the configuration with which postfix ships within
the NetBSD base system.)

The reason I'm asking these questions is because I have seen NetBSD
maintain two MTAs (sendmail + postfix) in the base system for _years_ and
it was not a pretty situation.  The eventual removal of sendmail was
appreciated, but of course it came with the associated bikeshedding.

*dons flame-proof suit*

The trend towards having sensible lightweight things in the base is a 
good thing IMO.  There is no need for things like bind (replaced by 
unbound), or a full featured mta like sendmail in the base, base install 
should contain enough to get going but for specific functions like 
performing MTA tasks, the user can install the appropriate software, 
such as postfix.


Just my 2p :)

___
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: Import of DragonFly Mail Agent

[Joe Holden]

On 24/02/2014 10:00, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:

On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 09:56:05AM +, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

In message 530b13ca.6000...@rewt.org.uk, Joe Holden writes:

On 24/02/2014 04:26, Julio Merino wrote:

On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Baptiste Daroussin b...@freebsd.orgwrote:



As some of you may have noticed, I have imorted a couple of days ago dma
(DragonFly Mail Agent) in base. I have been asked to explain my motivation
so here they are.



I'd argue, for example, that postfix can be also easily configured and can
be made to not listen on port 25 for local mail delivery, while at the same
time it is a fully-functional MTA that could replace sendmail altogether.



The trend towards having sensible lightweight things in the base is a
good thing IMO.


Fully agree.

To the extent we can manage it, we should have minimal client-focused
tools for things like DNS, SMTP and NTP in the tree and make it
trivial for people to install the fully featured server version of
their choice from ports.


That's is what I'm doing with dma :)

you want a full featured smtp server:
pkg install ${FAVORITESMTP:-opensmtpd}

regards,
Bapt


Can I also suggest that ntp.org shouldn't be in the base either? :P
___
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: Import of DragonFly Mail Agent

[Joe Holden]

On 24/02/2014 10:56, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

In message 530b2500.5030...@rewt.org.uk, Joe Holden writes:


Can I also suggest that ntp.org shouldn't be in the base either? :P


I absolutely agree, but the replacement is less clear in that case.


I'd suggest openntpd as a candidate as it would require less work than 
dntpd since that has some kernel changes.


At ~400K it is pretty lightweight and doesn't listen at all by default, 
suitable as a default ntpd that just maintains time - one can always 
install ntp.org from ports should they need more features (such as 
access control and monlist, etc)

___
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: Import of DragonFly Mail Agent

[Joe Holden]

On 24/02/2014 11:08, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:

On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 11:04:48AM +, Joe Holden wrote:

On 24/02/2014 10:56, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

In message 530b2500.5030...@rewt.org.uk, Joe Holden writes:


Can I also suggest that ntp.org shouldn't be in the base either? :P


I absolutely agree, but the replacement is less clear in that case.



I'd suggest openntpd as a candidate as it would require less work than
dntpd since that has some kernel changes.

At ~400K it is pretty lightweight and doesn't listen at all by default,
suitable as a default ntpd that just maintains time - one can always
install ntp.org from ports should they need more features (such as
access control and monlist, etc)


openntpd not able to authenticate the sources it is using and thus lack a big
ntp feature as a client.

regards,
Bapt

hm, I can't say I have noticed this as being a problem where I've used 
it, are there any scenarios where this is a showstopper?

___
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: ntpd replacement (Was: Re: Import of DragonFly Mail Agent)

[Joe Holden]

On 24/02/2014 11:18, Ollivier Robert wrote:

According to Joe Holden on Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 11:13:23AM +:

hm, I can't say I have noticed this as being a problem where I've
used it, are there any scenarios where this is a showstopper?


Non-support for auth is a concern, lack of NTPv4 protocol support is another.  
Base ntpd also include SNTP which is a lightweight NTPv3 client.

I suspect if you can't be reasonably sure about the integrity of your 
network traffic you have other problems anyway... one can run ntpd -s to 
get a similar function to ntpdate/sntp.


But again, for 99% of installs as a client, auth and/or ntpv4 doesn't 
matter and much like sendmail/dma, one can always install ntp.org from 
ports if they require authentication (I've never seen it used).

___
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: ntpd replacement (Was: Re: Import of DragonFly Mail Agent)

[Joe Holden]

On 24/02/2014 11:26, Joe Holden wrote:

On 24/02/2014 11:18, Ollivier Robert wrote:

According to Joe Holden on Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 11:13:23AM +:

hm, I can't say I have noticed this as being a problem where I've
used it, are there any scenarios where this is a showstopper?


Non-support for auth is a concern, lack of NTPv4 protocol support is
another.  Base ntpd also include SNTP which is a lightweight NTPv3
client.


I suspect if you can't be reasonably sure about the integrity of your
network traffic you have other problems anyway... one can run ntpd -s to
get a similar function to ntpdate/sntp.

But again, for 99% of installs as a client, auth and/or ntpv4 doesn't
matter and much like sendmail/dma, one can always install ntp.org from
ports if they require authentication (I've never seen it used).


The other point I should make here is that if you care that much about 
time security you shouldn't be contacting ntp servers over 3rd party 
networks anyway, at least not without some IP-level 
encryption/authentication, or use a source that can't easily be used as 
an attack surface, such as GPS/MSF etc.


___
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: ntpd replacement (Was: Re: Import of DragonFly Mail Agent)

[Joe Holden]

On 24/02/2014 13:52, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

In message 530b2dee.3030...@rewt.org.uk, Joe Holden writes:


The other point I should make here is that if you care that much about
time security you shouldn't be contacting ntp servers over 3rd party
networks anyway, at least not without some IP-level
encryption/authentication, or use a source that can't easily be used as
an attack surface, such as GPS/MSF etc.


Please check how NTP is authenticated before giving bad advice,
it's all in the RFC.

v3 or v4? It is an optional part of the spec in both cases and again 
isn't required for 99% of people using ntpd as a client, which was the 
entire point of this exercise in the first place.  If the argument is 
that X feature is missing then we may as well replace sendmail with exim 
as it has even more features, for example.


But most importantly, explain how it was bad advice?  There are 
provisions for integrity checking (not authentication) and autokey.  My 
point was that if you need to authenticate ntp to avoid mitm-style 
attacks then perhaps the setup you have is wrong.  If there is something 
huge I have missed then feel free to correct me!

___
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: ntpd replacement (Was: Re: Import of DragonFly Mail Agent)

[Joe Holden]

On 24/02/2014 15:40, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

In message 530b666a.1000...@rewt.org.uk, Joe Holden writes:


Please check how NTP is authenticated before giving bad advice,
it's all in the RFC.


v3 or v4? It is an optional part of the spec in both cases and again
isn't required for 99% of people using ntpd as a client, which was the
entire point of this exercise in the first place.


Authentication of NTP is rapidly gaining focus these days, for obvious
reasons, so I think adopting software now which don't support it would
be needlessly shortsighted.

3 years ago I would have agree with you, but not now.

Fair enough, that isn't the real problem we are facing but rather than 
derail this thread even further I think it would be best to discuss that 
another day :)

___
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: how do i cross build world/kernel with clang?

[Joe Holden]

Are you still playing with this?  Reason I ask is that I tried to build
world with clang for the crack and it bails with:

/usr/obj/mips.mips64/pseudosrc/tmp/usr/bin/ld:
/usr/obj/mips.mips64/pseudosrc/tmp/usr/lib/crtn.o: warning: linking PIC
files with non-PIC files
exect.So: In function `exect':
(.text+0x18): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `__cerror'
setjmp.So: In function `botch':
(.text+0x124): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `abort'
_setjmp.So: In function `botch':
(.text+0xac): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `abort'
_sigwait.So: In function `err':
(.text+0x18): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `__cerror'
_getlogin.So: In function `err':
(.text+0x18): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `__cerror'
aio_mlock.So: In function `err':
(.text+0x18): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `__cerror'
pipe2.So: In function `err':
(.text+0x18): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `__cerror'
accept4.So: In function `err':
(.text+0x18): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `__cerror'
chflagsat.So: In function `err':
(.text+0x18): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `__cerror'
connectat.So: In function `err':
(.text+0x18): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `__cerror'
bindat.So: In function `err':
(.text+0x18): additional relocation overflows omitted from the output
clang: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see
invocation)
*** Error code 1

Built on HEAD amd64 as of a few hours ago...

Cheers
Joe

 -Original Message-
 From: owner-freebsd-m...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-
 m...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Chadd
 Sent: 01 September 2013 03:30
 To: freebsd-current; freebsd-m...@freebsd.org
 Subject: how do i cross build world/kernel with clang?

 Hi!

 How do i cross-build a mips world/kernel with clang?

 ie, how do I tell the build system to build a mips targetted clang instead
of gcc
 and use that to build everything?

 Thanks,


 -adrian
 ___
 freebsd-m...@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-mips
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-mips-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: how do i cross build world/kernel with clang?

[Joe Holden]

Doh should have checked the thread before sending - is there any news on
this?

 -Original Message-
 From: owner-freebsd-m...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-
 m...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Joe Holden
 Sent: 15 September 2013 23:28
 To: 'Adrian Chadd'; 'freebsd-current'; freebsd-m...@freebsd.org
 Subject: RE: how do i cross build world/kernel with clang?

 Are you still playing with this?  Reason I ask is that I tried to build
world with
 clang for the crack and it bails with:

 /usr/obj/mips.mips64/pseudosrc/tmp/usr/bin/ld:
 /usr/obj/mips.mips64/pseudosrc/tmp/usr/lib/crtn.o: warning: linking PIC
 files with non-PIC files
 exect.So: In function `exect':
 (.text+0x18): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `__cerror'
 setjmp.So: In function `botch':
 (.text+0x124): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `abort'
 _setjmp.So: In function `botch':
 (.text+0xac): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `abort'
 _sigwait.So: In function `err':
 (.text+0x18): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `__cerror'
 _getlogin.So: In function `err':
 (.text+0x18): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `__cerror'
 aio_mlock.So: In function `err':
 (.text+0x18): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `__cerror'
 pipe2.So: In function `err':
 (.text+0x18): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `__cerror'
 accept4.So: In function `err':
 (.text+0x18): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `__cerror'
 chflagsat.So: In function `err':
 (.text+0x18): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `__cerror'
 connectat.So: In function `err':
 (.text+0x18): relocation truncated to fit: R_MIPS_PC16 against `__cerror'
 bindat.So: In function `err':
 (.text+0x18): additional relocation overflows omitted from the output
 clang: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see
 invocation)
 *** Error code 1

 Built on HEAD amd64 as of a few hours ago...

 Cheers
 Joe

  -Original Message-
  From: owner-freebsd-m...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-
  m...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Chadd
  Sent: 01 September 2013 03:30
  To: freebsd-current; freebsd-m...@freebsd.org
  Subject: how do i cross build world/kernel with clang?
 
  Hi!
 
  How do i cross-build a mips world/kernel with clang?
 
  ie, how do I tell the build system to build a mips targetted clang
  instead
 of gcc
  and use that to build everything?
 
  Thanks,
 
 
  -adrian
  ___
  freebsd-m...@freebsd.org mailing list
  http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-mips
  To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-mips-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


 ___
 freebsd-m...@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-mips
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-mips-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: route get fails

[Joe Holden]

On 24/08/2013 13:30, Kimmo Paasiala wrote:

On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Pawel Pekala pa...@freebsd.org wrote:

Hi,

For some time now I get this:

[corn:~] route get
route: writing to routing socket: Invalid argument

Is this just my build or anyone can confirm this?

--
pozdrawiam / with regards
Paweł Pękala


Nothing wrong there, you're not providing a required argument that is
the destination IP address. In my opinion route(8) should return a
proper error message in this case. OS X route(8) behaves exactly the
same BTW.

-Kimmo
You probably want netstat -rnfinet[6] here, judging from your surprise 
that 'route get' returns the above.


___
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: It's not as annoying as you may think.

[Joe Holden]

Install Windows, OSS is not suitable for audio production, except maybe 
at a push, OS X.


Super Bisquit wrote:

I can't use the SoundBlaster PCI card on the laptop. Also, I need to be
able to switch between the FreeBSD sound drivers and OSS drivers. What do I
need to do to the kernel configuration file to allow this? Some ports will
build with GCC and others with clang. What is the switch/command argument
in make to allow this?
I am very much aware of the capabilities of the processors and what works
best on them. Effects such as loops are repetitive and that works just fine
for the RISC load-store mechanism on Power 32 and 64 bit architectures. I
do not currently have a PS3.
The set up is for a friend who is not able to afford all of those great
programs. I have spare machines. I am aware of and have used a lot of
sound, audio, and conversion programs.





On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 11:35 PM, Michael Copeland 
mich...@kryptos-security.com wrote:


Well the last I checked, clang was still busted on ppc32. YMMV.

I still don't think you're gonna get much use out of a ppc machine for any
form of effects unless you're just talking about using it as an equalizer.
For that matter, you could do almost all of it on the i386 laptop. Why do
you need to add in so many machines for this? For the record, you're not
going to get any form of realtime audio effects from that ppc machine,
unless you're running an old version of garage band from 10.5.8 on it, even
then it's not going to be quick. If you're hellbent on using a ppc machine,
get a ps3 for that purpose.



___
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: ipfilter(4) needs maintainer

[Joe Holden]

wishmaster wrote:


 --- Original message ---
From: Gary Palmer gpal...@freebsd.org
Date: 14 April 2013, 19:06:59

 

On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 09:48:33AM -0600, Warren Block wrote:

Is it possible to move ipfilter into a port?

That may work short term, but the ENOMAINTAINER problem will quickly creep
up again as kernel APIs change.  If the author has lost interest in
maintaining the FreeBSD port of ipfilter then unless someone steps forward
to carry on the work, I don't see much of a future for ipfilter in
FreeBSD

Do we honestly need three packet filters?
  
Yes! This is the most clever thought in this thread. Why we need 3 firewalls? Two packet filters it's excess too.

 We have two packet filters: one with excellent syntax and functionality 
but with outdated bandwidth control mechanism (aka ALTQ); another - with nice 
traffic shaper/prioritization (dummynet)/classification (diffused) but with 
complicated implementation  in not trivial tasks.
May be the next step will be discussion about one packet filter in the 
system?..

Cheers,
For non-nat ipfw is still superior in every way, numbered rules (think: 
scripts), dummynet, much faster than pf, syntax is a lot nicer and 
predictable...


Does anyone even use ipf? it doesn't even work on Linux anymore, junk it 
and keep pf+ipfw, job done.


___
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: Dynamic Ticks/HZ

[Joe Holden]

Davide Italiano wrote:

On Nov 4, 2012 10:40 PM, Joe Holden li...@rewt.org.uk wrote:

Davide Italiano wrote:

On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Joe Holden li...@rewt.org.uk wrote:

Hi guys,

Has some default changed between 9.1-RC2 and HEAD?

On identical machines, one with 9.1-RC2 and one with HEAD from yesterday
(GENERIC) I see the following in systat -v:

9.1:
65 cpu0:timer
10 cpu1:timer

HEAD:
1127 cpu0:timer
22 cpu1:timer

These are Supermicro i3 boxes and as far as I can see they have matching
BIOS config.

Thanks,
J
___
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


Which is your refresh rate for systat?
I generally measure sampling every one second (i.e. systat -vm 1).
Also, are you making your measurements when the system is idle?
In order to trace the source(s) of these interrupts you might consider
to collect data via KTR.


I'm also using a one second refresh rate, the system is entirely idle and

the interupt rate is almost entirely static at 1127, occasionally it will
drop to 1119.

From what I understand the timer is hz/ticks which became dynamic in 9.0,

although that behaviour doesn't appear to be in HEAD anymore, at least on
this hardware.

Thanks,
J


It should be available, AFAIK. As I can see from your previous post you get
about 20 interrupts on cpu1. This number is about 1/100 of the value you
get on a !tickless kernel.
If you provide the required ktr infos, probably someone will take a look.
doh, running kernel wasn't as GENERIC as I thought it was, looks like 
device polling not only breaks dynamic ticks but also reduces rx ability 
significantly, exactly 150,000 pps per 1000hz on igb versus 650,000 without


Is this a known issue? (and if device polling isn't as useful as it once 
was, should it be removed?)

___
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: Dynamic Ticks/HZ

[Joe Holden]

Luigi Rizzo wrote:

On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 08:11:41AM -0500, Ryan Stone wrote:

On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 4:40 AM, Joe Holden li...@rewt.org.uk wrote:


doh, running kernel wasn't as GENERIC as I thought it was, looks like
device polling not only breaks dynamic ticks but also reduces rx ability
significantly, exactly 150,000 pps per 1000hz on igb versus 650,000 without

Is this a known issue? (and if device polling isn't as useful as it once
was, should it be removed?)


Device polling on modern multiqueue NICs isn't very useful because you're
limited to a single thread for handling packets.  I have a patch that fixes
this that I've let fall by the wayside.


the 150,000 is result of the combination of the default value of
sysctl  kern.polling.burst_max and kern.polling.idle_poll=0
(i think this is the default value for the latter).

The 150 was sized for the peak pps on a 100Mbit/s interface,
back in 2001. You should at least be able to raise the number
and see what kind of throughput you can achieve.

This said, modern nics also have interrupt moderation so you
don't really need polling.

cheers
luigi

Hi Luigi,

This makes sense, am I likely to achieve better throughput (in the 
forwarding path at this point) with netisr rather than polling, 
especially as mentioned above the igb does indeed have multiple queues 
for rx?


On another note, is netmap usable in the forwarding context at all as it 
is rather awesome


Thanks,
Joe
___
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: Dynamic Ticks/HZ

[Joe Holden]

Alexander Motin wrote:

Hi.

Full interrupt rate on some CPU means that your system is not idle, but 
running some process. Another possibility is that you have DUMMYNET 
compiled into your kernel, which tends to schedule callout for every HZ 
tick, effectively blocking skipping interrupts for one of CPUs.


Check 'top -SH' for running processes, or 'top -SH -m io -o vcsw' for 
processes doing a lot of context switches. That most likely should give 
an answer.



Hi,

It looks like the device polling is what was causing it, once I'd 
removed that from kernconf it returned to normal - full interupt rate is 
ok though if I can increase the rate to a decent level

___
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: Dynamic Ticks/HZ

[Joe Holden]

Luigi Rizzo wrote:

On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 04:25:36PM +, Joe Holden wrote:

Luigi Rizzo wrote:

On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 08:11:41AM -0500, Ryan Stone wrote:

On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 4:40 AM, Joe Holden li...@rewt.org.uk wrote:


doh, running kernel wasn't as GENERIC as I thought it was, looks like
device polling not only breaks dynamic ticks but also reduces rx ability
significantly, exactly 150,000 pps per 1000hz on igb versus 650,000 
without


Is this a known issue? (and if device polling isn't as useful as it once
was, should it be removed?)


Device polling on modern multiqueue NICs isn't very useful because you're
limited to a single thread for handling packets.  I have a patch that 
fixes

this that I've let fall by the wayside.

the 150,000 is result of the combination of the default value of
sysctl  kern.polling.burst_max and kern.polling.idle_poll=0
(i think this is the default value for the latter).

The 150 was sized for the peak pps on a 100Mbit/s interface,
back in 2001. You should at least be able to raise the number
and see what kind of throughput you can achieve.

This said, modern nics also have interrupt moderation so you
don't really need polling.

cheers
luigi

Hi Luigi,

This makes sense, am I likely to achieve better throughput (in the 
forwarding path at this point) with netisr rather than polling, 
especially as mentioned above the igb does indeed have multiple queues 
for rx?


at 1Gbit/s you probably don't need multiqueue (I am actually surpised
you can only do 650kpps, but perhaps because you are using ipfw and
not just doing plain forwarding ?)

No ipfw/dummynet (yet), I've been testing by using netblast, may just be 
tx limit of this machine - rebuilding with netmap so I can use pkt-gen


On another note, is netmap usable in the forwarding context at all as it 
is rather awesome


It depends on what you need to do. If you have a v4/v6 router you
won't see any advantage (at the moment; there is some work in the
pipeline but probably it won't be available before spring).

If you just need to implement a firewall to protect the internal
network then it is another story and you can use the ipfw on netmap
that I posted in august.

cheers
luigi


___
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: Dynamic Ticks/HZ

[Joe Holden]

Luigi Rizzo wrote:

On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 04:25:36PM +, Joe Holden wrote:

Luigi Rizzo wrote:

On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 08:11:41AM -0500, Ryan Stone wrote:

On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 4:40 AM, Joe Holden li...@rewt.org.uk wrote:


doh, running kernel wasn't as GENERIC as I thought it was, looks like
device polling not only breaks dynamic ticks but also reduces rx ability
significantly, exactly 150,000 pps per 1000hz on igb versus 650,000 
without


Is this a known issue? (and if device polling isn't as useful as it once
was, should it be removed?)


Device polling on modern multiqueue NICs isn't very useful because you're
limited to a single thread for handling packets.  I have a patch that 
fixes

this that I've let fall by the wayside.

the 150,000 is result of the combination of the default value of
sysctl  kern.polling.burst_max and kern.polling.idle_poll=0
(i think this is the default value for the latter).

The 150 was sized for the peak pps on a 100Mbit/s interface,
back in 2001. You should at least be able to raise the number
and see what kind of throughput you can achieve.

This said, modern nics also have interrupt moderation so you
don't really need polling.

cheers
luigi

Hi Luigi,

This makes sense, am I likely to achieve better throughput (in the 
forwarding path at this point) with netisr rather than polling, 
especially as mentioned above the igb does indeed have multiple queues 
for rx?


at 1Gbit/s you probably don't need multiqueue (I am actually surpised
you can only do 650kpps, but perhaps because you are using ipfw and
not just doing plain forwarding ?)

On another note, is netmap usable in the forwarding context at all as it 
is rather awesome


It depends on what you need to do. If you have a v4/v6 router you
won't see any advantage (at the moment; there is some work in the
pipeline but probably it won't be available before spring).

If you just need to implement a firewall to protect the internal
network then it is another story and you can use the ipfw on netmap
that I posted in august.

cheers
luigi

Hi,

I have a setup where box1 is connected directly to box2 (igb0), with 
pkt-gen however box2 doesn't seem to actually forward any packets, 
sysctl -ip 1 shows 1.48Mpps unreachables generated (matching the input), 
 is there something specific I need to do to test forwarding?


Thanks,
Joe
___
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: Dynamic Ticks/HZ

[Joe Holden]

Joe Holden wrote:

Luigi Rizzo wrote:

On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 04:25:36PM +, Joe Holden wrote:

Luigi Rizzo wrote:

On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 08:11:41AM -0500, Ryan Stone wrote:

On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 4:40 AM, Joe Holden li...@rewt.org.uk wrote:


doh, running kernel wasn't as GENERIC as I thought it was, looks like
device polling not only breaks dynamic ticks but also reduces rx 
ability
significantly, exactly 150,000 pps per 1000hz on igb versus 
650,000 without


Is this a known issue? (and if device polling isn't as useful as 
it once

was, should it be removed?)

Device polling on modern multiqueue NICs isn't very useful because 
you're
limited to a single thread for handling packets.  I have a patch 
that fixes

this that I've let fall by the wayside.

the 150,000 is result of the combination of the default value of
sysctl  kern.polling.burst_max and kern.polling.idle_poll=0
(i think this is the default value for the latter).

The 150 was sized for the peak pps on a 100Mbit/s interface,
back in 2001. You should at least be able to raise the number
and see what kind of throughput you can achieve.

This said, modern nics also have interrupt moderation so you
don't really need polling.

cheers
luigi

Hi Luigi,

This makes sense, am I likely to achieve better throughput (in the 
forwarding path at this point) with netisr rather than polling, 
especially as mentioned above the igb does indeed have multiple 
queues for rx?


at 1Gbit/s you probably don't need multiqueue (I am actually surpised
you can only do 650kpps, but perhaps because you are using ipfw and
not just doing plain forwarding ?)

On another note, is netmap usable in the forwarding context at all as 
it is rather awesome


It depends on what you need to do. If you have a v4/v6 router you
won't see any advantage (at the moment; there is some work in the
pipeline but probably it won't be available before spring).

If you just need to implement a firewall to protect the internal
network then it is another story and you can use the ipfw on netmap
that I posted in august.

cheers
luigi

Hi,

I have a setup where box1 is connected directly to box2 (igb0), with 
pkt-gen however box2 doesn't seem to actually forward any packets, 
sysctl -ip 1 shows 1.48Mpps unreachables generated (matching the input), 
 is there something specific I need to do to test forwarding?


Thanks,
Joe

Nevermind, didn't set destination MAC addr, apologies for the noise!
___
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

Dynamic Ticks/HZ

[Joe Holden]

Hi guys,

Has some default changed between 9.1-RC2 and HEAD?

On identical machines, one with 9.1-RC2 and one with HEAD from yesterday 
 (GENERIC) I see the following in systat -v:


9.1:
65 cpu0:timer
10 cpu1:timer

HEAD:
1127 cpu0:timer
22 cpu1:timer

These are Supermicro i3 boxes and as far as I can see they have matching 
BIOS config.


Thanks,
J
___
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: Dynamic Ticks/HZ

[Joe Holden]

Davide Italiano wrote:

On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Joe Holden li...@rewt.org.uk wrote:

Hi guys,

Has some default changed between 9.1-RC2 and HEAD?

On identical machines, one with 9.1-RC2 and one with HEAD from yesterday
(GENERIC) I see the following in systat -v:

9.1:
65 cpu0:timer
10 cpu1:timer

HEAD:
1127 cpu0:timer
22 cpu1:timer

These are Supermicro i3 boxes and as far as I can see they have matching
BIOS config.

Thanks,
J
___
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


Which is your refresh rate for systat?
I generally measure sampling every one second (i.e. systat -vm 1).
Also, are you making your measurements when the system is idle?
In order to trace the source(s) of these interrupts you might consider
to collect data via KTR.



I'm also using a one second refresh rate, the system is entirely idle 
and the interupt rate is almost entirely static at 1127, occasionally it 
will drop to 1119.


From what I understand the timer is hz/ticks which became dynamic in 
9.0, although that behaviour doesn't appear to be in HEAD anymore, at 
least on this hardware.


Thanks,
J
___
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: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

[Joe Holden]

Arnaud Lacombe wrote:

Hi,

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 2:32 AM, O. Hartmann
ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote:

Just saw this shot benchmark on Phoronix dot com today:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTAyNzA


it might be worth highlighting that despite Oracle Linux 6.1 Server is
using a kernel + compiler almost 2 years old, it still manages to
out-perform the bleeding edge FreeBSD :-)


serenity# gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.2.1 20070831 patched [FreeBSD]

serenity# uname -r
9.0-RC3


Now, from what I've read so far in this thread, it seems that a lot of
people are still in abnegation...

my 0.2c,
 - Arnaud


It may be worth to discuss the sad performance of FBSD in some parts of
the benchmark. A difference of a factor 10 or 100 is simply far beyond
disapointing, it is more than inacceptable and by just reading those
benchmarks, I'd like to drop thinking of using FreeBSD even as a backend
server in scientific and business environments. In detail, some of the
SciMark benches look disappointing. The overall image can't help over
the fact that in C-Ray FreeBSD is better performing.

From the compiler, I'd like say there couldn't be a drop of more than 10
- 15% in performance - but not 10 or 100 times.

I'm just thinking about the discussion of SCHED_ULE and all the saur
spots we discussed when I stumbled over the test.

Regards,
Oliver


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