MDB ("Memory-Mapped Database"), a read-optimized database library
Hi, I wonder if this is an interesting library for FreeBSD for some userland applications. Perhaps an embedded app running on very low end hardware might benefit. Interesting use of an old idea in any case. http://www.openldap.org/pub/hyc/mdm-slides.pdf - Mark ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Replacing BIND with unbound
On 20 Aug 2012, at 10:12, Doug Barton wrote: > On 08/20/2012 01:55, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > >> We will continue to reject this until there are more firm plans, >> proper documentation on the security support side, which I cannot >> remember Simon got an answer for. > > I gave a clear answer. If there are any pieces missing it's up to Simon > to follow up with Dag-Erling. >> I continue to say that I am not willing to trade one for another >> for the sake of just changing the name. > > Have you seriously not been paying attention to the numerous reasons why > BIND in the base is no longer a good fit? Perhaps bunging together a quick wiki-page to point busier individuals at would be handy? - Mark ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Replacing BIND with unbound
On 10 Jul 2012, at 08:12, Doug Barton wrote: > On 07/09/2012 14:47, Mark Blackman wrote: >> I never use '-t' with dig. drill *told* me I should use '-t' >> then completely failed to acknowledge I had done so. > > Have you reported this bug? Nope, you? - Mark ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Replacing BIND with unbound
On 9 Jul 2012, at 23:01, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Mark Blackman writes: >> I never use '-t' with dig. drill *told* me I should use '-t' then >> completely failed to acknowledge I had done so. >> >> Marks-Macbook% drill -t www.google.com >> [...] >> ;; WARNING: The answer packet was truncated; you might want to >> ;; query again with TCP (-t argument), or EDNS0 (-b for buffer size) > > So you got a truncated response and used -t, it didn't help, and drill > printed the boilerplate warning message that it always prints when it > gets a truncated response. I don't know about you, but I would call > that a cosmetic nit. > > Unless, of course, you had tcpdump running while you did this and it > turns out that drill sent a UDP request in spite of -t? It works fine > (i.e. it uses UDP by default, and TCP when asked to) for me. Yes, I worked out it was boilerplate for the general condition. A cosmetic nit that makes me do a double-take on my first usage strikes me as rough around the edges. YMMV. drill certainly looks like a drop-in replacement for the common case as you suggest. But if it's not called 'dig' and I've never heard of 'drill', I'm unlikely to reach for 'drill', hence the alias suggestion. I *had* never heard of 'drill' until this thread came up. > FWIW, the reply I got was not truncated. Perhaps there is a transparent > DNS proxy somewhere between you and 178.250.72.130 - quite common with > broadband CPE. I have detected there is some kind of stealth DNS interception at work in the past, although I think it's more central than the CPE. Mark___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Replacing BIND with unbound
On 9 Jul 2012, at 22:37, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Mark Blackman writes: >> my DNS resolution is broken, so my ports can't download any tarballs. >> In this case, I reach for dig to see which part of the DNS resolution >> chain is failing me. >> >> At the bare minimum, 'dig' should be an alias for 'drill', which I have >> to say isn't working brilliantly for me on OS X. It suggests I use '-t' >> and then keeps suggesting I use '-t' even when I do use it. >> >> drill feels a bit rough around the edges to me. > > This reminds me of the (probably apocryphal) American grade school > teacher who complained that the metric system was so inexact; for > instance, a meter is _approximately_ a yard, a kilometer is > _approximately_ two thirds of a kilometer, etc. > > By which I mean, of course, that you are blaming drill not for its own > shortcomings, but for those of the wrapper you use to _approximate_ dig > with drill. > > The -t option doesn't mean the same for drill as for dig. A proper dig > wrapper for drill would have to translate one to the other. However, > you should never need the -t option when using dig; I suspect that it > exists only for people who are so used to host that they want to use the > same command line except for s/host/dig/. I never use '-t' with dig. drill *told* me I should use '-t' then completely failed to acknowledge I had done so. Marks-Macbook% drill -t www.google.com ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, rcode: NOERROR, id: 14583 ;; flags: qr rd ra ; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 7, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;; www.google.com. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: www.google.com. 44089 IN CNAME www.l.google.com. www.l.google.com. 147 IN A 173.194.67.106 www.l.google.com. 147 IN A 173.194.67.147 www.l.google.com. 147 IN A 173.194.67.104 www.l.google.com. 147 IN A 173.194.67.105 www.l.google.com. 147 IN A 173.194.67.103 www.l.google.com. 147 IN A 173.194.67.99 ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: ;; Query time: 34 msec ;; SERVER: 178.250.72.130 ;; WHEN: Mon Jul 9 22:46:13 2012 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 148 ;; WARNING: The answer packet was truncated; you might want to ;; query again with TCP (-t argument), or EDNS0 (-b for buffer size) ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Replacing BIND with unbound (Was: Re: Pull in upstream before 9.1 code freeze?)
On 9 Jul 2012, at 22:01, Doug Barton wrote: > On 07/09/2012 06:45, Mark Blackman wrote: > >> Indeed, 'dig' and 'host' must be present and working as expected >> in a minimally installed system. > > So if you don't like the versions that get imported, install bind-tools > from ports. my DNS resolution is broken, so my ports can't download any tarballs. In this case, I reach for dig to see which part of the DNS resolution chain is failing me. At the bare minimum, 'dig' should be an alias for 'drill', which I have to say isn't working brilliantly for me on OS X. It suggests I use '-t' and then keeps suggesting I use '-t' even when I do use it. drill feels a bit rough around the edges to me. - Mark ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Replacing BIND with unbound (Was: Re: Pull in upstream before 9.1 code freeze?)
On 9 Jul 2012, at 08:34, Avleen Vig wrote: > > Agreed. The idea of a "minimally functional system" itself might be > flawed. Do you consider having `dig` and `host` essential in a > minimally functioning system? I do. > It's pretty f'king hard to resolve problems with installing the > bind-utils port, if you don't know how to test your DNS :-) > > The issue is also one of barrier-to-entry. By removing `dig` and > `host`, I think we're making things unnecessarily more difficult for > people who don't *know* FreeBSD. `dig` and `host` a universally > standard tools for doing DNS lookups. Taking them away in base to > replace them with something else just seems like something that won't > really *help* users. Indeed, 'dig' and 'host' must be present and working as expected in a minimally installed system. - Mark ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Freebsd 9.0 can't detect ethernet card
On 5 Mar 2012, at 12:30, Damien Fleuriot wrote: > Hello Elman, > > > None of us was born a seer so you might want to tell the model of the > network card. > > > > On 3/5/12 12:16 PM, Elman wrote: >> Hallo hacker. >> >> I try install freebsd 9.0 in server Hp proliant ML370 G6, in process >> install, freebsd can't detect ethernet card in automatic. Freebsd doesn't >> support the ethernet card driver in HP ML370 G6? http://h30499.www3.hp.com/t5/ProLiant-Servers-Netservers/NC375i-on-Proliant-Server/td-p/1116100 Suggests its a Qlogic NetXen3 but I can't immediately tell if that's supported. It looks like it's *not*, but HP is a rather big vendor not to have support for, so I'm guessing I've just overlooked it ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD has serious problems with focus, longevity, and lifecycle
On 27 Jan 2012, at 03:26, Mark Linimon wrote: > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 10:52:44PM +0000, Mark Blackman wrote: >> I suspect poor old RE is putting too much work into BETAs and RCs for >> point releases. > > The counter-argument is that we have a lot more leeway to make mistakes > on a .0 release. We're not going to be cut any slack at all for shipping > a badly regressed point release. > > Some minor regressions are inevitable in software, but they do indeed > need to be minor. > > For how we're doing with regressions in general, see: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~linimon/studies/prs/prs_for_tag_regression.html > > Now, it's true that many of the recent PRs are against 9.0, and many of > the ones that aren't may be stale (certainly most of the pre-2010 ones), > but these are the types of things that users really notice and become > unhappy about. All good points, although I'd guess there's some diminishing returns argument for progressive RCs/BETAs, however probably only the RE team have a good feeling for the sweet spot. - Mark ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD has serious problems with focus, longevity, and lifecycle
On 26 Jan 2012, at 22:49, Mark Linimon wrote: > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 10:23:43PM +0000, Mark Blackman wrote: >> http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/releng/release-proc.html >> >> "New releases of FreeBSD are released from the -STABLE branch at >> approximately four month intervals." > > That was our intention at one point. Obviously we've not stuck to that. > (IMHO doing releases quite that frequently is probably beyond what we can > do with volunteer staffing, but I'm not on re@ so take it as you will.) > > In any case, various people within the project have now absorbed the > lesson that "10 months between releases is too long", and are trying to > figure out what to do about it. Indeed, I was just reviewing the last couple of years of release and the thing that struck me was the number of BETAs and RCs for each point release. I suspect poor old RE is putting too much work into BETAs and RCs for point releases. - Mark___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD has serious problems with focus, longevity, and lifecycle
On 26 Jan 2012, at 18:22, John Baldwin wrote: > On Thursday, January 26, 2012 11:49:22 am Mark Blackman wrote: >> a) who is "the project" in this case >> and >> b) what does it take for a release to be a release? > > I'll answer the two together. The project is the entity that "owns" > freebsd.org and a release is not a release unless it is present on > ftp.freebsd.org and has a signed announcement e-mail with hashes, etc. > on the freebsd-announce@ mailing list. Without those things there is > no reason for a user to believe that a particular set of bits is a > legitimate FreeBSD release. Additionally, a release should be available > via the appropriate tags in the CVS and SVN repositories available from > freebsd.org machines. Thanks. I wonder who that "entity" is? Everyone with a commit bit, or perhaps just the RE team? Anyway, it's not very important in this context. I also tracked this down, but might be out of date. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/releng/release-proc.html "New releases of FreeBSD are released from the -STABLE branch at approximately four month intervals." To be honest, I'm sure we all agree this sort of discussion is not useful on hackers and obviously at some point needs to turn into work rather than points of view. Mostly it just boils down, "lets see if we can do -STABLE point releases a bit more frequently". - Mark ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD has serious problems with focus, longevity, and lifecycle
On 26 Jan 2012, at 14:37, John Baldwin wrote: > On Thursday, January 19, 2012 4:33:40 pm Adrian Chadd wrote: >> On 19 January 2012 09:47, Mark Saad wrote: >>> >>> >>> What could I do to help make 7.5-RELEASE a reality ? >>> >> >> Put your hand up and volunteer to run the 7.5-RELEASE release cycle. > > That's not actually true or really fair. There has to be some buy-in from > the > project to do an official release; it is not something that a single person > can do off in a corner and then have the Project bless the bits as an > official > release. And raises the interesting question for an outsider of a) who is "the project" in this case and b) what does it take for a release to be a release? Wasn't there a freebsd-releng (or similar) mailing list ages ago? I didn't spot an active one at http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/ - Mark___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD has serious problems with focus, longevity, and lifecycle
On 18 Jan 2012, at 22:59, Igor Mozolevsky wrote: > On 18 January 2012 22:53, Mark Blackman wrote: >> >> On 18 Jan 2012, at 22:50, Igor Mozolevsky wrote: >> >>> On 18 January 2012 22:31, Mark Blackman wrote: >>> >>>> 10.0 - Nov 2013 >>> >>> I think 10.0 should be released based on feature-readiness and not on >>> some arbitrary date… >> >> You can always redefine the feature-set to meet the date. :) > > Yes, but there's a difference between releasing because it's the right > thing to do now vs releasing because it's about time… The terse-ness of the e-mail should have told you it wasn't particularly serious. :) However, it was based around 3 minor releases per year, fitting whatever features make sense, FSVO "sense", into each one, giving HEAD a bit over two years to gestate into something you might one day bet the farm on, which isn't a million miles from what happens anyway. - Mark ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD has serious problems with focus, longevity, and lifecycle
On 18 Jan 2012, at 22:50, Igor Mozolevsky wrote: > On 18 January 2012 22:31, Mark Blackman wrote: > >> 10.0 - Nov 2013 > > I think 10.0 should be released based on feature-readiness and not on > some arbitrary date… You can always redefine the feature-set to meet the date. :) - Mark ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD has serious problems with focus, longevity, and lifecycle
On 18 Jan 2012, at 11:47, Robert Watson wrote: > > > It strikes me that the first basic plan would be a release schedule, however. > :-) 7.4 - no further development 8.3 - Mar 2012 9.1 - May 2012 8.4 - July 2012 9.2 - Sep 2012 8.5 - Nov 2012 9.3 - Jan 2013 8.6 - Mar 2013 9.4 - May 2013 8.7 - July 2013 - Final release 9.5 - Sep 2013 10.0 - Nov 2013 9.6 - Jan 2014 10.1 - Mar 2014 Although, I'm not sure a release every two months would be practical. - Mark___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD has serious problems with focus, longevity, and lifecycle
On 17 Jan 2012, at 21:09, Warner Losh wrote: > > On Jan 17, 2012, at 11:12 AM, John Kozubik wrote: >> Again, I'm not suggesting more snapshots - I am suggesting more real, bona >> fide releases. This will help people. > > I tend to agree with you. Our release engineering process isn't serving the > needs of users as much as it once did. When Walnut Creek was running release > engineering, we had releases often because they wanted to make money from > their subscriptions. This produced reasonably spaced minor releases and > except for 4-5, decently spaced major releases. Even after the torch passed > from walnut creek to others, there was still either residual pressures to > make the releases happen, or inherited mindset that keep on the same pace. > > Today we have lost our way. We have no major vendor pushing the process > along to make it happen faster. What exactly did the major vendor to push things along? Keep nagging? I'd have thought PC-BSD and iXsystems are the natural people to to take over that role in any case. The FreeBSD foundation seems less interested in the "for end-users" angle as well. - Mark___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
