Re: FATAL: erealloc(): Unable to allocate 577925121 bytes
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2005-09-27 05:39:10 -0400: when trying to d/l the following file 1 www www 551M Sep 16 13:23 20050818002.zip via apache1.3.33/php 4.3.11, i get that in the logs i thought it was because i dont have enough swap so i did [...] See ulimit(1), search for ulimit in sh(1), and please, ask this kind of questions on, well, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- How many Vietnam vets does it take to screw in a light bulb? You don't know, man. You don't KNOW. Cause you weren't THERE. http://bash.org/?255991 ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: tcsh fix
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2004-11-12 04:11:22 +0100: The only real problem with having bash as /bin/sh is that people tend to write scripts using bash-specific features and forget that such scripts are not portable to systems using a less powerful /bin/sh. Or the other way around. Bash (at least the one from RHEL 3.0) is seriously broken, these two things are more than it can handle (as opposed to our /bin/sh): $(case $foo in x) do_x;; y) do_y;; esac) out=`mktemp ...` $otherscript $out 21 where $otherscript contains $(x | tee /dev/stderr | y) I stumbled upon these when I was porting periodic(8) to RHEL. So, my description would be that people run into problems when they write scripts using sh-specific features and forget that such scripts are not portable to systems using a less powerful bash. ;) -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Protection from the dreaded rm -fr /
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2004-10-03 02:02:26 +0300: On 2004-10-02 17:22, Garance A Drosihn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 8:57 PM +0300 10/2/04, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: On 2004-10-02 21:23, Lee Harr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about: chflags sunlnk / ? Setting sunlink on / will only protect the / directory, not its descendants, so you don't gain much. We could add a new flag srunlnk, or maybe even srm-r. The rm command will always have to stat() the file it is given (just to see if it is a directory), so it could check to see if this flag is turned on. If it is turned on, then 'rm' could refuse to honor any '-rf' request on that directory. [...] Hmmm. This sounds much better indeed :-) have rm -r[f] behave just like find $@ -flags +sunlnk -prune -o -delete (I hope this is correct; if not: if the file has sunlnk among its chflags, skip it and its descendants) this is something I would, if not like, at least tolerate. specialcasing / stinks. it reminds me of all the RHEL machines I deal with at work that have alias rm rm -i, and I can only thank my luck this hasn't costed me an arm; ls | while read f; do rm -i $f; done is very dangerous, at least in bash. I have once deleted parts of my ~ with rm -fr *, but rm -fr / never happened to me, prolly because of my strong dependence on the shell completion. (I hope I'm not too drunk.) -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: panic: random.ko
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2004-04-22 08:02:04 +0100: Roman Neuhauser writes: Did you type the exact THREE commands as shown above? Of course, it's been three weeks since I had that problem so I would be insane to claim I have exact recollection. I might have been typing unload boot /boot/kernel/kernel over and over again in an attempt to convince myself that I had made a typo, but I doubt that. Nevertheless, would that make a difference? Yes. Indeed, booting GENERIC with unload load kernel boot (or load /boot/kernel/kernel) works now, and would have worked then if I didn't screw up somehow. Sorry for the waste of time. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: panic: random.ko
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2004-04-04 19:02:07 -0700: On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 02:35:53AM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote: Booting a kernel with random compiled in, and load_random=YES in loader.conf causes a panic very similar to the one described here: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-alpha/2003-August/000656.html Hi Mark, please fix random.ko :-) Sounds like a generic module problem that is known to exist on FreeBSD. Don't do that is the solution. You can unload the preloaded kernel and/or modules from the loader to prevent it from panicking at boot, then modify loader.conf. The fun part (and reason I asked whether there was a way to tell loader to ignore loader.con) was that unload didn't help, it showed the kernel and modules were unloaded, but subsequent load kernel boot or boot kernel loaded the the modules again, and I had to disable-module for every individual module, about twelve times. Is that normal behavior, or was there a pilot error somewhere? -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: panic: random.ko
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2004-04-21 12:03:36 +0100: Kris Kennaway writes: loader to ignore loader.con) was that unload didn't help, it showed the kernel and modules were unloaded, but subsequent load kernel boot or boot kernel loaded the the modules again, and I had to disable-module for every individual module, about twelve times. Is that normal behavior, or was there a pilot error somewhere? I think it's expected behaviour. My fingers know what to do to stop this, but my brain can't remember it right now :-) unload load /boot/kernel/kernel boot does it for me. Of course I run unload as the first step. It wrote it unloaded the modules, and the started loading them again booting the new kernel. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: panic: random.ko
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2004-04-21 23:54:43 +0100: Roman Neuhauser writes: unload load /boot/kernel/kernel boot does it for me. Of course I run unload as the first step. It wrote it unloaded the modules, and the started loading them again booting the new kernel. Did you type the exact THREE commands as shown above? Of course, it's been three weeks since I had that problem so I would be insane to claim I have exact recollection. I might have been typing unload boot /boot/kernel/kernel over and over again in an attempt to convince myself that I had made a typo, but I doubt that. Nevertheless, would that make a difference? It's more likely (= I'm quite sure) I tried both versions more than once; I *really* wanted to avoid typing disable-module foo twelve or so times, which I ended up doing. Also note that we're talking about CURRENT in case that could mean a difference. Hm, I still have the exact same kernel/world on the machine. I'll try it out in the morning, and will let you know. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MFCs needed in src/sys/sys/cdefs.h
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2004-04-10 01:01:26 -0400: At 10:50 PM +0200 4/9/04, Roman Neuhauser wrote: This is an extended version of my previous email to hackers@ which hasn't attracted any attention. This time I'm mailing the authors too. I must have missed the earlier message... Perhaps because I was only talking about the peter's commit? :) Two revisions need MFC in src/sys/sys/cdefs.h: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/sys/cdefs.h.diff?r1=1.78r2=1.79 Silences gobs of warnings in just about any libtool-using software. Fix for CURRENT commited: (5 months, 1 week ago) by peter. I have no opinion on this. It looks fine to me. It's unfortunate we're frozen now, but I don't really care if it gets merged now or when the freeze is lifted, someone just MFC it please. I was tinkering with some ports last week, and the sheer number of occurrences of those warnings almost made me roll over. Google didn't prove very useful beyound showing that the internet is full of them (think archived failed build reports, various bento-like systems, etc), all FreeBSD. As for the change you made, I agree it's not worth the trouble. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MFCs needed in src/sys/sys/cdefs.h
This is an extended version of my previous email to hackers@ which hasn't attracted any attention. This time I'm mailing the authors too. Two revisions need MFC in src/sys/sys/cdefs.h: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/sys/cdefs.h.diff?r1=1.78r2=1.79 Silences gobs of warnings in just about any libtool-using software. Fix for CURRENT commited: (5 months, 1 week ago) by peter. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/sys/cdefs.h.diff?r1=1.74r2=1.75 This one fixes __RCSID(), __RCSID_SOURCE(), etc in the same manner as __FBSDID(). The commit message even says it should be MFCed after one week, but that never happened. Commited (8 months, 2 weeks ago) by gad. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/bin/sh bug? munges here-doc eof markers
Why does /bin/sh insert 0x81, or 129, or SYNBASE, before every non-word character in here-doc delimiters? It grows 'END-of-vietnamese/x-unikey/files/patch-src::unikey-gtk::Makefile.am' which is 69 characters, well below EOFMARKLEN (79) to 80 characters. Should I file a PR? [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~/tmp 1048:0 sh shar 21 - |head -1|hd -c 37 39 3a 20 88 45 4e 44 81 2d 6f 66 81 2d 76 69 |79: .END.-of.-vi| 000 7 9 : 210 E N D 201 - o f 201 - v i 0010 65 74 6e 61 6d 65 73 65 81 2f 78 81 2d 75 6e 69 |etnamese./x.-uni| 010 e t n a m e s e 201 / x 201 - u n i 0020 6b 65 79 81 2f 66 69 6c 65 73 81 2f 70 61 74 63 |key./files./patc| 020 k e y 201 / f i l e s 201 / p a t c 0030 68 81 2d 73 72 63 81 3a 81 3a 75 6e 69 6b 65 79 |h.-src.:.:unikey| 030 h 201 - s r c 201 : 201 : u n i k e y 0040 81 2d 67 74 6b 81 3a 81 3a 4d 61 6b 65 66 69 6c |.-gtk.:.:Makefil| 040 201 - g t k 201 : 201 : M a k e f i l 0050 65 2e 61 6d 0a|e.am.| 050 e . a m \n 055 -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
panic: random.ko
Booting a kernel with random compiled in, and load_random=YES in loader.conf causes a panic very similar to the one described here: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-alpha/2003-August/000656.html Hi Mark, please fix random.ko :-) If a backtrace would be useful, I can retype it in an email. On a related note, how do I make loader(8) ignore loader.conf? -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Loosing STDOUT after file rotation
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2004-04-01 16:53:19 -0500: I have a program that I have the is supposed to run forever. I log any output to a log file. It is run in a startup script like thie: program_name $err_log 21 The problem is that after newsyslog rotates the $err_log file, no more data is written to the file. I can not stop and restart the program. I can accept a signal. But what do I need to do in program_name to allow the data to be written after the rotation of the file. the program still writes to the original file. file != filename. you need to have newsyslog send the daemon a signal; the program needs to reopen the path in the signal handler. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
warning: `_POSIX_C_SOURCE' is not defined
Would some kind soul please MFC this? http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/sys/cdefs.h.diff?r1=1.78r2=1.79 -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subversion follow-up
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2004-03-10 08:35:17 -0600: Unless somebody chimes in and just really wants me to stick this out to the bitter end, I'm about to kill my attempted import of the FreeBSD src/ repository into a test Subversion instance. The process has just passed the 1 month mark: USER PID %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TT STAT STARTEDTIME COMMAND craig 19802 80.5 2.1 15600 10848 pv RN+ 9Feb04 33187:46.67 python ./cvs2svn.py and is still processing commits from mid-2001. Each commit has gotten progressively slower. As my other experiment (importing periodic snapshots from certain branches) has been working beautifully, I'm certain at this point that it's not Subversion itself, but rather the cvs2svn script that is slowing down. I may try again if I hear that the script has been improved in the future. I'm using a barely pre-1.0 version of it that was checked out of the development branch, so I'm reasonably sure not much has changed between it and the 1.0 released one. Have you taken this to the kind guys at [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm sure they would want to hear. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subversion/CVS experiment summary
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2004-02-12 16:48:25 -0400: On Mon, 9 Feb 2004, Michael Reifenberger wrote: Hi, first, this seems to be a good analysis of SVN and a good starting point for thinking about moving away from CVS. I missed the original thread here, so this point may have already been made ... but ... we tried to use subversion for a project recently, and made a *big* mistake of upgrading to a newer version from what we started with ... and could no longer access the repository ... apparently there is a 'dump / reload' procedure that we weren't aware of at the time, but this is something that should be watched for ... dump/reload cycles required by a new version from time to time are announced prominently. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: beastie boot menu, 4th (forth)
I'd like to thank everyone who's replied to my questions regarding the beastie menu and 4th. my mail has attracted far more attention than I expected. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Where is FreeBSD going?
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2004-01-08 16:36:30 -0800: On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 06:36:42PM +0100, Roman Neuhauser wrote: That might be technically true, but the precise semantics of (semi-)freeze aren't as widely known as you seem to think. E. g. yesterday or today I received an email from a committer in response to my two mails to ports@ (the first urging a repocopy requested in a PR some time ago, the other retracting the request because of the freeze) saying (paraphrased) to my surprise I was told repocopies are allowed during freeze. Some people just prefer to err on the safe side. Repo-copies are not allowed during the freeze, but are any other time. ok, so someone (at least two people) out there is confused about this, and this only further proves my statement about the uncertainty. Porter's handbook, and FDP Primer, while valuable (esp. the former) leave many questions unanswered. (I'm not going to further this rant, but will gladly provide feedback to anyone who asks.) I would have thought the procedure to rectify this would be obvious: The procedure really is obvious, but there's only so much time in a day. Also, I would have thought the Porter's handbook would e. g. contain info on preventing installation of .la files (I gathered from the ports@ list that they shouldn't be installed), isn't this lack quite obvious? No, please raise this on the ports list. ok, cc'd to ports, Mail-Followup-To set. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Where is FreeBSD going?
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2004-01-09 15:32:53 +0300: On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 17:29:34 + Doug Rabson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The three main showstoppers for moving FreeBSD to subversion would be: [...] 2. Support for $FreeBSD$ - user-specified keywords are not supported and won't be until after svn-1.0 by the looks of things. subversion properties (svn propset) would allow you to do this in a satisfactory manner. Please explain how props can be used to embed custom keywords in bodies of the files in a satisfactory manner, e. g. on svn export. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
beastie boot menu, 4th (forth)
I have two related questions, one being more appropriate for current@, the other for hackers@, but they're quite the same thing, so sorry for the cross-post, I hope it's tolerable (I bet this won't solicit many replies :). I dislike the boot menu in CURRENT, and would prefer something that * doesn't rob me of the text output so far * displays no mascots or other visual noise Here's the question perhaps more appropriate for hackers@: I looked into ripping the ascii-art out, but am quite scared. However, forth looks like it's an interesting (love/hate kind of thing) language, and I'd like to get my hands on it. Can anyone recommend good (or just any, really) introductory material? google quickly degrades into misses, and just a few even of those. And here's the one for current@: Failing the above query, does anyone have a replacement that meets my requirements? (But I'd really prefer hacking it myself, so links to tutorials are awarded with more points than off-the-shelf programs. :) TIA HAND! -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: beastie boot menu, 4th (forth)
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2004-01-09 15:32:35 -0700: Roman Neuhauser wrote: I have two related questions, one being more appropriate for current@, the other for hackers@, but they're quite the same thing, so sorry for the cross-post, I hope it's tolerable (I bet this won't solicit many replies :). I dislike the boot menu in CURRENT, and would prefer something that * doesn't rob me of the text output so far * displays no mascots or other visual noise The only point for putting the mascot onto the screen was to fill unused space next to the menu. I you want to keep the menu and remove the mascot, just remove the line in beastie-menu that calls print-beastie. For astetics, you could then reformat the menu dimensions to take up the whole screen. Of course, leaving the menu on the screen at all defeats your first goal mentioned above. so there's no way of having something output without clearing the screen? then I might just disable the menu completely, supposing there's an alternative similar to (or same as) the boot prompt in STABLE, which I have no problem with. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Where is FreeBSD going?
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2004-01-08 18:33:40 +1100: On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 09:08:38PM +0100, Roman Neuhauser wrote: Limitations of CVS don't exactly help either. The fact that you need direct access to the repository to be able to copy a tree with history (repocopy) as opposed to this operation being part of the interface[1], which means being lucky enough to find a committer, and get them commit the stuff within the blink of an eye ports is open, further constrains people's ability to work on FreeBSD with some satisfaction. I'm not sure what is meant by this paragraph. CVS doesn't support renaming files or directories - which can be a nuisance. As used within the Project, repocopy means manually copying parts of the repository to simulate file/directory duplication or renaming. This ability is restricted to a very small subset of committers - normal committers have to request repocopies as do non-committers. I somewhat lumped two things together there: * general port updates from lot of people going through a handful of committers, which on one hand helps QA by adding eye balls, but OTOH slows the process down. * repocopies go through a fraction of the abovementioned handful Now, I'm by no means advocating everybody should get ssh login on [dnp]cvs.freebsd.org; I just can't wait for the day when FreeBSD uses a SCM that handles tags and branches efficiently (so that people can freely create branches of areas they hack), that has permissions model with file- or directory-level granularity (so that people can be granted commit e. g. in /ports/x11-wm/openbox and nowhere else), etc. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Where is FreeBSD going?
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2004-01-07 23:17:31 -0800: On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 09:08:38PM +0100, Roman Neuhauser wrote: The ports freeze seems to last too long with recent releses. Or maybe it's just I've gotten more involved, but out of the last four months (2003/09/07-today), ports tree has been completely open for whopping 28 days. That might be technically true, but it's misleading and doesn't support the point you're trying to make. During this period the ports collection has only been frozen for a couple of weeks, and the majority of commit activities were not restricted for the rest of the period in question. That might be technically true, but the precise semantics of (semi-)freeze aren't as widely known as you seem to think. E. g. yesterday or today I received an email from a committer in response to my two mails to ports@ (the first urging a repocopy requested in a PR some time ago, the other retracting the request because of the freeze) saying (paraphrased) to my surprise I was told repocopies are allowed during freeze. Some people just prefer to err on the safe side. Porter's handbook, and FDP Primer, while valuable (esp. the former) leave many questions unanswered. (I'm not going to further this rant, but will gladly provide feedback to anyone who asks.) I would have thought the procedure to rectify this would be obvious: The procedure really is obvious, but there's only so much time in a day. Also, I would have thought the Porter's handbook would e. g. contain info on preventing installation of .la files (I gathered from the ports@ list that they shouldn't be installed), isn't this lack quite obvious? -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Where is FreeBSD going?
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2004-01-07 14:29:35 +: Paul Robinson writes: And for those of you who normally shout Submit a patch - well, I'm thinking about it. :-) I've been thinking of your objection to the submit a patch reply, and I offer this as a proto-thought on how it can be applied to non-coders: As FreeBSD is a volunteer project, I suspect part of the problem is getting said volunteers to do things that they would otherwise not do. Submit a patch can be easily(?) extendted to cover a much wider area of volunteer-organised work than simply code. Under specifically _patches_, there are code, documentation and web page patches, but there is also a need for organizational skills. The PR database frequently gets blitzed by keen folks who get lots of PRs closed, follwed by burnout. We are doing rather well with our release-engineering team (Go Scott L!), and our currently active admin@ crowd are doing a great job, but we could still use skills, and these are not necessarily of the coding kind. Help us (users, port maintainers and random porters w/o commit) help you (committers). There are two areas I can (and do in one of them) participate: ports and documentation. Activities in both areas result in patches, and those need a committer. PRs need more hands, more people who can commit stuff. Quite a few port maintainers could have commit, even limited to just parts of the ports tree (IOW just their ports). The ports freeze seems to last too long with recent releses. Or maybe it's just I've gotten more involved, but out of the last four months (2003/09/07-today), ports tree has been completely open for whopping 28 days. Limitations of CVS don't exactly help either. The fact that you need direct access to the repository to be able to copy a tree with history (repocopy) as opposed to this operation being part of the interface[1], which means being lucky enough to find a committer, and get them commit the stuff within the blink of an eye ports is open, further constrains people's ability to work on FreeBSD with some satisfaction. While minor stuff can be managed by keeping multiple working copies, thorough documentation (or just any, really) on setting up local cvs mirror and using $CVS_LOCAL_BRANCH_NUM is sorely missing; or did I get it right quite recently that this is discouraged because of software issues (ISTR it was jdp@ who said it)? Porter's handbook, and FDP Primer, while valuable (esp. the former) leave many questions unanswered. (I'm not going to further this rant, but will gladly provide feedback to anyone who asks.) [1] has core@ considered subversion (devel/subversion)? -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/etc/services strange
According to http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers, tcp/udp port 1000 is for cadlock2. Our /etc/services claims 1000/tcp is cadlock, and 1000/ucp ock. Also: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=conf/54371 -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: /etc/services strange
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-10-08 09:49:21 +0100: On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 10:25:25AM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote: According to http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers, tcp/udp port 1000 is for cadlock2. Our /etc/services claims 1000/tcp is cadlock, and 1000/ucp ock. Also: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=conf/54371 Committed to -HEAD. I don't want to disrupt RELENG_4 (or re) with unnecessary changes at the moment. thanks! -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Any workarounds for Verisign .com/.net highjacking?
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-09-16 16:58:06 -0400: At 10:23 AM -1000 9/16/03, Clifton Royston wrote: In the meantime I'm trying to figure out if there's some simple hack to disregard these wildcard A records, short of requesting zone transfers of the root nameservers (e.g. via peering with f.root-servers.net) and purging those records out of the zone before loading it. Any ideas, either under djbdns or Bind 9? The story at http://daily.daemonnews.org/view_story.php3?story_id=4068 notes that there is a patch for dnscache at: http://tinydns.org/djbdns-1.05-ignoreip.patch see this one: http://tinydns.org/djbdns-1.05-ignoreip2.patch and this PR: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/56951 I have no idea of how well either of these work. Use your own discretion at applying them. djbdns-1.05-ignoreip2.patch seems to work very well here, on three boxes; fourth one will follow later today. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: TODO list?
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-06-30 15:57:51 +0400: On Sat, 28 Jun 2003, 19:29-0400, Zak Johnson wrote: On 2003-06-28 20:27+0400, Maxim Konovalov wrote: for instance? misc/25851 I am not familiar with sysinstall code, sorry. bin/32433 Fixed in -current. I see you assigned the PR to yourself to remind you of MFC. Thanks for caring for STABLE. It's not all that common. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mounting
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-06-23 11:45:37 -0400: On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, Socketd wrote: Would it be possible to have this configuration and not having the system fail (because of lacking rights or something): /var/mail noexec nosuid would be fine here also. # [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-06-24 16:31:33 +0100: On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, Socketd wrote: /tmp and /var/tmp noexec (I know /tmp has to be execuable to make world) nosymfollow. I've not found anything that this breaks (except a gazillion symlink race exploits). This questions will be probably extremely stupid: why aren't these defaults? -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: make: variable expansion in .for/.endfor
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-05-16 15:30:01 +0300:
On Sun, Apr 27, 2003 at 02:48:12PM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-04-26 14:53:36 +0300:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 08:44:00PM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
Try the following makefile: it works if called with -DONE, but does not
if called with -DTWO. Should I treat it as a bug and file a PR?
LIST= foo bar baz
.if defined(ONE)
. for v in ${LIST}
.if !defined(WITHOUT_${v:U})
WITH_${v:U}=yes
.endif
. endfor
.endif
.if defined(TWO)
. for v in ${LIST}
V=${v:U}
.if !defined(WITHOUT_${V})
WITH_${V}=yes
.endif
. endfor
.endif
a:
@echo \$${WITH_FOO}: ${WITH_FOO}
@echo \$${WITH_BAR}: ${WITH_BAR}
@echo \$${WITH_BAZ}: ${WITH_BAZ}
.PHONY: a
I think this is a known bug, and it seems to even be documented
in the BUGS section of -STABLE's make(1) manual page.
I don't think this is covered. Can you point out the relevant text?
Yes, BUGS section talks about a different problem (...)
FWIW, the code snippet above works perfectly under 5.x make(1).
I recall this problem was fixed (perhaps, it was even me, not
sure). Sorry, but I don't have enough time to invest into
backporting the bugfix into RELENG_4, the latter is becoming
less priority for me as 5.x evolves.
If you'll be able to extract it from HEAD (there is a huge
backlog of non-backported fixes for make(1) there), I will
happily commit it for you.
$ uname -r
5.1-BETA
$ make -DONE
${WITH_FOO}: yes
${WITH_BAR}: yes
${WITH_BAZ}: yes
$ make -DTWO
${WITH_FOO}: yes
${WITH_BAR}: yes
${WITH_BAZ}: yes
I've spent two hours in cvsweb but haven't noticed a commit message
that would indicate a relation to this problem, and the source code
is obviously over my head.
But it looks like the problem is in the order of processing loops,
and applying modifiers... or something:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ 1024:0 cat tmp/scratch4
LIST= foo bar baz
.for v in ${LIST}
V= ${v:U}
V_${v}= ${V}
v_${v}= ${v}
.endfor
all:
.for v in ${LIST}
@echo \$${V_${v}}: ${V_${v}}
.endfor
.for v in ${LIST}
@echo \$${v_${v}}: ${v_${v}}
.endfor
.PHONY: all
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ 1025:0 make -f tmp/scratch4
${V_foo}: BAZ
${V_bar}: BAZ
${V_baz}: BAZ
${v_foo}: foo
${v_bar}: bar
${v_baz}: baz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ 1026:0 uname -a
FreeBSD freepuppy.bellavista.cz 4.8-STABLE FreeBSD 4.8-STABLE #2: Thu Jun 5
12:57:47 CEST 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/FREEPUPPY2_5 i386
Does this help identifying the responsible code? I'd really like to
continue using 4.x for some time, and this bitrot in make is quite
unfortunate for me.
--
If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore
your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mdoc(7) question
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-02-11 14:25:35 -0800: Roman Neuhauser wrote: Thanks guys. Is there a clean way to make sure that the description will always begin on the line below the tag line? IOW, with .Bl -tag, if the actual tag width is less than that of -width's argument, these two items will fold, and description will begin on the tag line. That's not what I want. Man pages kind of need to look like all other man pages. So while it's possible to do what you want, with enough effort, it is likely not a good idea for you to do it. point taken. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: anoncvs.freebsd.org reachability
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-02-10 14:40:41 -0800: In the meantime, is there an easy way to switch over my existing CVS tree to a mirror? (And is there a mirror?) If you're talking about a working copy, then it's really easy: find $wcdir -type d -name CVS | while read d; do sed -i '' s/$oldhost/$newhost/ $d/Root done -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: mdoc(7) question
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-02-10 12:17:44 -0600: In the last episode (Feb 10), Roman Neuhauser said: I'm writing a man page for a utility I'm writing, and I want the option listing look like this: OPTIONS -h, --help Print a brief help message. -n, --dry-run Don't actually connect to the server. DDL generated by mktable.php is output on stdout. -H, --host=host Connect to server on host. This is what I have right now: .Sh OPTIONS .Bl -ohang -compact Try .Bl -tag -width indenthere instead. That creates a list with tags or headers, and the description indented by the width of the word indent. # [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-02-11 00:24:12 +0200: How about this? Here is a list: .Bl -tag -width indent .It Fl h , Fl \-help Option description here. .It Fl p , Fl \-print Option description here. .El Thanks guys. Is there a clean way to make sure that the description will always begin on the line below the tag line? IOW, with .Bl -tag, if the actual tag width is less than that of -width's argument, these two items will fold, and description will begin on the tag line. That's not what I want. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: mdoc(7) question
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-02-11 08:29:54 -0600: In the last episode (Feb 11), Roman Neuhauser said: Thanks guys. Is there a clean way to make sure that the description will always begin on the line below the tag line? IOW, with .Bl -tag, if the actual tag width is less than that of -width's argument, these two items will fold, and description will begin on the tag line. That's not what I want. .br ( line break, just like html's br/ ) should work: .Bl -tag -width indent .It Fl H .br Print a brief help message. .El yeah, that was it. thanks. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
mdoc(7) question
Hi there, two quick mdoc(7) questions: I'm writing a man page for a utility I'm writing, and I want the option listing look like this: OPTIONS -h, --help Print a brief help message. -n, --dry-run Don't actually connect to the server. DDL generated by mktable.php is output on stdout. -H, --host=host Connect to server on host. The best I could achieve without resorting to (FMPOV) hacks was the same amount of indentation for the option, and the description: -H, --host=host Connect to server on host. what is the canonical way of doing this? BTW, I'm not happy with the way I got the vertical space between the options (with .Pp), but that might be my html background. Is this ok, or should I do it another way? This is what I have right now: .Sh OPTIONS .Bl -ohang -compact .It Fl h , Fl -help Print a brief help message. .Pp .It Fl n , Fl -dry-run Don't actually connect to the server. DDL generated by .Nm is output on stdout. .Pp .It Fl H , Fl -host Ns = Ns Ar host .br Connect to server on .Ar host . .Pp -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: replacing GNU grep with UNIX grep.
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-02-03 13:20:04 +0100: Sergey Babkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Also the GNU grep has a lot more options, the most interesting of them being -r. Unfortunately, GNU grep's -r option is broken (it does not handle symnlinks correctly). Try textproc/freegrep from ports instead. I believe the Subversion team has a BSD-like-licensed grep library. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: replacing GNU grep with UNIX grep.
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-02-09 17:29:57 -0500: On Sunday, February 9, 2003, at 05:12 PM, Roman Neuhauser wrote: # [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-02-03 13:20:04 +0100: Sergey Babkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Also the GNU grep has a lot more options, the most interesting of them being -r. Unfortunately, GNU grep's -r option is broken (it does not handle symnlinks correctly). Try textproc/freegrep from ports instead. I believe the Subversion team has a BSD-like-licensed grep library. no, we don't. we have a BSD-like-licensed diff library that's coming along nicely, and hopefully will replace gnu diff/diff3 in subversion fairly soon, but not grep. doh, I'm an idiot. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: sendmail: how to get the named of FreeBSD4.7 standards compliant?
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-12 21:33:32 -0800: On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 10:48:46PM +0100, Roman Neuhauser wrote: # [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-10 11:32:22 -0800: To: Roman Neuhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] you sent me a copy again, please, don't do it. 1. I don't want one, I'll read your message on the list. Then make this clear -- YOU don't provide a Reply-to: or Followup-to:. So Terry (and myself) aren't to blame. I *do* make it clear: 1. I *do* send out the MFT header, but the freebsd.org MTA's strip it. 2. I make my preference clear in the signature. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: sendmail: how to get the named of FreeBSD4.7 standards compliant?
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-12 21:57:25 -0800: David O'Brien wrote: On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 10:48:46PM +0100, Roman Neuhauser wrote: # [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-10 11:32:22 -0800: To: Roman Neuhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] you sent me a copy again, please, don't do it. 1. I don't want one, I'll read your message on the list. Then make this clear -- YOU don't provide a Reply-to: or Followup-to:. So Terry (and myself) aren't to blame. I guess he doesn't like it showing up in his mail logs, since if it's via my ISP's mail server, the one to him directly bounces anyway. Gotta wonder why anyone would care, if they never see the thing anyway... 8-). No, that's not the reason. I just don't like getting cc's. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: sendmail: how to get the named of FreeBSD4.7 standards compliant?
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-13 11:49:15 -0600: In the last episode (Jan 13), Roman Neuhauser said: # [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-12 21:33:32 -0800: On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 10:48:46PM +0100, Roman Neuhauser wrote: # [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-10 11:32:22 -0800: To: Roman Neuhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] you sent me a copy again, please, don't do it. 1. I don't want one, I'll read your message on the list. Then make this clear -- YOU don't provide a Reply-to: or Followup-to:. So Terry (and myself) aren't to blame. I *do* make it clear: 1. I *do* send out the MFT header, but the freebsd.org MTA's strip it. Whoa. Who broke that? No idea. I'm slowly trying to resolve this with [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: sendmail: how to get the named of FreeBSD4.7 standards compliant?
thanks for not cc'ing me.
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-10 15:18:43 -0800:
Roman Neuhauser wrote:
So, do you manually put yahoo.com SOA records in your DNS?
no.
How do you answer requests for yahoo.com.
it's simple:
[ ... I have a DNS caching server that forwards all requests,
except those to bellavista.cz; for those, it does
content redirection on the request to another server
whose sole purpose in life is to answer those requests,
while refusing all other requests ... ]
actually, the DNS cache is recursive: it doesn't forward, it
resolves the names itself.
[ ... ]
my real setup is this: 10.0.0.1 is the router, and I have a DNS
cache on 10.0.0.25, and a content server authoritative for
bellavista.cz on 10.0.0.26. or at least it thinks it's
authoritative, and the cache is configured to short-circuit all
queries about bellavista.cz to 10.0.0.26.
now, this setup might actually look a bit different. suppose the
outside IP of my router (62.168.44.50) is listed as an authoritative
server for bellavista.cz, and suppose I forward all traffic for
62.168.44.50:53 to 10.0.0.26:53. the content nameserver can then
provide different answers based on the client's IP address.
nonrecursive queries (RD bit cleared; gimme an authoritative
answer) about lilith.bellavista.cz comming from 10.0.0/24 will be
answered with 10.0.0.1, while those coming from anywhere else will
get 62.168.44.50. and so on.
In bind, this is called a view. I noted previously that this
can be accomplished with bind version 9.
so I heard.
The thing that makes this different is that you are consuming
multiple internal IP addresses for your seperate DNS servers.
While this is possible, it's generally not recommended, because
of Windows stupidity.
I still don't understand this claim. The Windows boxen will never
ask the authoritative server, so I don't see any problem. There's
obviously none [that would affect my users], as this is exactly what
I do, and no machines have any trouble with resolving. That means
several FreeBSD boxes, several NT 5, NT 5.1, and a W98 box. No
problems whatsoever.
All these systems delegate name resolution to 10.0.0.25, which is a
*cache*, through /etc/resolv.conf or its windowsland counterpart.
The cache at 10.0.0.25 resolves names by recursing the name server
hierarchy rooted at {a..m}.root-servers.net with the exception of
bellavista.cz, which is short-circuited to 10.0.0.26.
As far as splitting the responses by source IP address: that only
works by default if all machines in the domain are interior to
the local network, and all machines which are externally visible
are dual-homed. Many DSL lines these days are done via a /2,
which means they are limited to 2 routable addresses.
No, it only works by default if all the DNS *caches* are interior to
the local network, because the content DNS server is queried by the
cache, not the Windows client.
As far as whether or not the external interface is a real primary,
a stealth primary, or a stealth secondary, really depends on the
configuration of the connection.
...
Basically, you need to be able to GUI-config the device
you keep trying to divert the point of discussion. the OP has had
Bind ans Sendmail configured without a GUI configurator; nowhere did
he mention a need for one.
again, the content server only knows about names within/under
bellavista.cz, it doesn't need to know the root servers. the cache
is recursive, so it does.
Clearly, you have either written your own cache, or you are using
DJB's cache, with patches.
I use djbdns without any patches. I might not have expressed myself
clearly:
the content server only knows about names within/under
bellavista.cz, it doesn't need to know the root servers. the cache
is recursive, so it does need to know them.
Hmm? Are you talking about having both a cache and a content server
on a router? The interior Windows clients of course only query the
cache, so you can have the content server on 127.0.0.1. And, BTW, I
don't see why I couldn't have more than one address on the inside
interface, cache on one, content/authoritative server on another.
Because your Windows clients could contact only one of them.
sure. Windows clients ask the cache, which in turn asks the content
server.
This works, if you cache maintains a fixed IP address, and if
you can configure Microsoft's DHCP server to give out the IP
address of your cache for it's DNS.
the OP has FreeBSD on both the router/NAT and the inside box.
nowhere did he mention using windows or DHCP.
Where was *your* second nameserver again? I see a nameserver on
10.0.0.{1,2}; where is your
Re: sendmail: how to get the named of FreeBSD4.7 standards compliant?
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-09 12:48:03 -0800:
To: Roman Neuhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
please don't cc me.
Roman Neuhauser wrote:
! This is called a split horizon DNS, and you need to run two
! DNS servers, one interior, and one exterior, both authoritative
! for your domain, in order for this to work. The problem is that
! you are forwarding a request that should be local, and you are
! doing it because your local server does not pass the authority
! test for your local domain.
Well, I think I got it now. What I did not know was that any
nameserver installation is expected to always have some kind
of root nameserver accessible (either the real ones from the
internet, or elseways a local shortcut) in order to function
properly.
This is wrong in at least two ways.
An authoritative content server doesn't need to know root servers,
because they're out of it's business.
The authoritative server must also be a forwarding server.
This is because of both the way the resolver library itself works
You talked about nameservers and split horizon,
I talked about nameservers and split horizon.
Now you talk about Bind. Don't change the playground, please.
I don't know how the Bind library works, but I know that the
authoritative server I use has now idea of roots.
(single preference), and the fact that on a border router, you
have only a single IP address on which to bind a DNS service,
and therefore can offer only a single DNS service to interior
machines.
Hmm? Are you talking about having both a cache and a content server
on a router? The interior Windows clients of course only query the
cache, so you can have the content server on 127.0.0.1. And, BTW, I
don't see why I couldn't have more than one address on the inside
interface, cache on one, content/authoritative server on another.
While technically, some UNIX clients permit multiple
definitaions in this case, practically, you can't take advantage
of this, because you must deal with interior Windows clients
machines, where this is not permitted.
I don't know what you're talking about. Could you rephrase it?
A non-recursive (forwarding-only) resolver doesn't need to know
root servers, just the upstream resolver it forwards all requests
to.
Realize that this is not possible, with the current resolver
library, since all programs will reference the single /etc/resolv.conf.
Now it seems *you* don't know what your talking about.
1.2.3.5 -- ISP's name server (in fact, recursive cache)
^
|
v
1.2.3.4
10.0.0.{1,2} -- my router, with a forwarding cache on 10.0.0.1
^ and a content server (for, say, domain.local)
| on 10.0.0.2
v
10.0.0.{3..10} -- fbsd/windows boxes
all my boxes, including the router, have 10.0.0.1 in
/etc/resolv.conf, and the cache on the router is configured to
forward all recursive queries to 1.2.3.5
what's the problem?
If you reference a completely authoritative interior server, with
no forwarding, and the resolver stops there, then the exterior
server is not referenced.
A properly configured authoritative server will:
1. drop recursive queries
2. drop queries for data it's not authoritative for
anything else is asking for trouble
This is complicated,
I don't think so.
both as noted above, for Windows clients (it would require a second IP
address on the interior network, minimally, to resolve),
which is:
1. not true in the sense that you can have the authoritative server
on 127.0.0.1 which is always there
2. trivial to add
and by the fact that the IP address of the external interface is
unknown until after link-up,
hm? what does the external IP have to do with this?
which will generally occur well after the DHCP lease is granted to
interior machines. This is even urther complicated by the fact
that the DHCP server is likely to be a Windows Primary Domain
Controller, and therefore not the border device, itself.
i don't see how that's related.
Note that even though your resolver is internally authoritative,
this is an oxymoron. a resolver (cache) cannot not be authoritative.
The only way for this to actually work is to split the authority
for the example.com domain between two nameservers -- one interior,
and one exterior. Partial delegation is simply not supported by
the current DNS model.
I don't know what partial delegation is, but I *do* know that I have
a split horizon here with one nameserver.
Unfortuanately, a transiently connected DNS server will not receive
notifications from a primary DNS server, particularly when it is
offline, but also for any state changes occurring while it is
offline, unless it attempts a zone transfer (e.g. on link up).
Zone transfers are not desirable
Re: sendmail: how to get the named of FreeBSD4.7 standards compliant?
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-10 11:32:22 -0800: To: Roman Neuhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] you sent me a copy again, please, don't do it. 1. I don't want one, I'll read your message on the list. 2. it's futile: your provider's MTA breaks RFC 2821: 2.3.5: ... The domain name, as described in this document and in [22], is the entire, fully-qualified name (often referred to as an FQDN). A domain name that is not in FQDN form is no more than a local alias. Local aliases MUST NOT appear in any SMTP transaction. compare: Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 20:34:09 +0100 (CET) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mail Delivery System) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Postmaster) Subject: Postfix SMTP server: errors from +stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net[207.217.120.188] Transcript of session follows. Out: 220 mail.bellavista.cz ESMTP Postfix In: EHLO stork Out: 504 stork: Helo command rejected: need fully-qualified hostname In: HELO stork Out: 504 stork: Helo command rejected: need fully-qualified hostname In: QUIT Out: 221 Bye your messages to freebsd.org go through one more hop that's configured properly, so they get through. now... Roman Neuhauser wrote: You talked about nameservers and split horizon, I talked about nameservers and split horizon. Now you talk about Bind. Don't change the playground, please. You weren't really talking about split horizon, I think; a horizon in this case is any place you can't see over without a referral happening. I don't know how the Bind library works, but I know that the authoritative server I use has now idea of roots. So, do you manually put yahoo.com SOA records in your DNS? no. How do you answer requests for yahoo.com. it's simple: say you want to go to www.freebsd.org. your resolver sends a DNS query to 10.0.0.1:53 where 10.0.0.1 is configured in your /etc/resolv.conf. this query has the RD bit set. the DNS cache at 10.0.0.1:53 (let's say it's just been flushed) does need to know the roots, but were talking about authoritative servers. read on. your resolver sent out a recursive lookup (RD [Recursion Desired] bit set). let's say the DNS cache at 10.0.0.1 doesn't forward, it recurses itself instead. this is an example of such a lookup (198.41.0.4 is a.root-servers.net): roman@freepuppy ~ 1015:0 dnsq a www.freebsd.org 198.41.0.4 1 www.freebsd.org: 339 bytes, 1+0+9+9 records, response, noerror query: 1 www.freebsd.org authority: org 172800 NS a7.nstld.com authority: org 172800 NS l7.nstld.com authority: org 172800 NS g7.nstld.com authority: org 172800 NS f7.nstld.com authority: org 172800 NS m5.nstld.com authority: org 172800 NS j5.nstld.com authority: org 172800 NS i5.nstld.com authority: org 172800 NS c5.nstld.com authority: org 172800 NS e5.nstld.com additional: a7.nstld.com 172800 A 192.5.6.36 additional: l7.nstld.com 172800 A 192.41.162.36 additional: g7.nstld.com 172800 A 192.42.93.36 additional: f7.nstld.com 172800 A 192.35.51.36 additional: m5.nstld.com 172800 A 192.55.83.34 additional: j5.nstld.com 172800 A 192.48.79.34 additional: i5.nstld.com 172800 A 192.43.172.34 additional: c5.nstld.com 172800 A 192.26.92.34 additional: e5.nstld.com 172800 A 192.12.94.34 this says: I don't know the IP of www.freebsd.org (IOW, I'm not authoritative for it), but these are the authoritative servers for .org., go ask there. so the cache picks one those, and continues: roman@freepuppy ~ 1016:0 dnsq a www.freebsd.org 192.5.6.36 1 www.freebsd.org: 145 bytes, 1+0+4+1 records, response, noerror query: 1 www.freebsd.org authority: freebsd.org 172800 NS ns0.freebsd.org authority: freebsd.org 172800 NS ns1.downloadtech.com authority: freebsd.org 172800 NS ns1.iafrica.com authority: freebsd.org 172800 NS ns2.downloadtech.com additional: ns0.freebsd.org 172800 A 216.136.204.126 this says: I'm not authoritative for www.freebsd.org, but I know these servers are authoritative for freebsd.org. go ask there. oh, and one of them
Re: sendmail: how to get the named of FreeBSD4.7 standards compliant?
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-06 17:36:52 +0100: ! Background: This environment should be configured to use ! an internet connection for internet-relevant things, but to ! work flawlessly without such a connection as long as matters ! do concern only systems within the LAN. ! ! This is called a split horizon DNS, and you need to run two ! DNS servers, one interior, and one exterior, both authoritative ! for your domain, in order for this to work. The problem is that ! you are forwarding a request that should be local, and you are ! doing it because your local server does not pass the authority ! test for your local domain. Well, I think I got it now. What I did not know was that any nameserver installation is expected to always have some kind of root nameserver accessible (either the real ones from the internet, or elseways a local shortcut) in order to function properly. This is wrong in at least two ways. An authoritative content server doesn't need to know root servers, because they're out of it's business. A non-recursive (forwarding-only) resolver doesn't need to know root servers, just the upstream resolver it forwards all requests to. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message.see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
inconsistency in /usr/bin/make
Hi there,
continuing my make adventure, I've stumbled across the following
inconsistency. I would even call it a bug.
In any event, could someone point me to a place in the make(1) man page
where it says that the S and C modifiers dereference variables given in
both the pattern and replacement, while the N and M modifiers insist on
being fed literal strings? I couldn't find it. Thanks! :)
--
If you cc me or take the list(s) out completely I'll most likely
ignore your message.
NAME= foo.c
RE= ^.+\.c$
GLOB= *.c
SUBST= SUBST
FILES= foo.a foo.b foo.c
.BEGIN:
echo '$${FILES} - ${FILES}'
echo '$${NAME} - ${NAME}'
echo '$${RE}- ${RE}'
echo '$${SUBST} - ${SUBST}'
echo '$${GLOB} - ${GLOB}'
all: works broken
works:
echo ${.TARGET}:
echo '$${FILES:S/$${NAME}/$${SUBST}/} - ${FILES:S/${NAME}/${SUBST}/}'
echo '$${FILES:C/$${RE}/$${SUBST}/} - ${FILES:C/${RE}/${SUBST}/}'
broken:
echo ${.TARGET}:
echo '$${FILES:M$${GLOB}}- ${FILES:M${GLOB}}'
echo '$${FILES:N$${GLOB}}- ${FILES:N${GLOB}}'
Re: inconsistency in /usr/bin/make
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-10-14 14:36:22 +0300: On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 11:57:18AM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote: In any event, could someone point me to a place in the make(1) man page where it says that the S and C modifiers dereference variables given in both the pattern and replacement, while the N and M modifiers insist on being fed literal strings? I couldn't find it. Thanks! :) The last paragraph of the S modifier talks about variable expansion inside the old_string and new_string. There is no similar talk in the M and N descriptions. Even the OpenBSD's make(1) is subject to this same restriction. Ok, so that's the missing part. Anyway, is there a technical reason why this is so? -- If you cc me or take the list(s) out completely I'll most likely ignore your message. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: inconsistency in /usr/bin/make
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-10-14 16:09:47 +0300:
On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 02:14:23PM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-10-14 14:36:22 +0300:
On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 11:57:18AM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
In any event, could someone point me to a place in the make(1)
man page where it says that the S and C modifiers dereference
variables given in both the pattern and replacement, while the N
and M modifiers insist on being fed literal strings? I couldn't
find it. Thanks! :)
The last paragraph of the S modifier talks about variable
expansion inside the old_string and new_string. There is no
similar talk in the M and N descriptions. Even the OpenBSD's
make(1) is subject to this same restriction.
Ok, so that's the missing part. Anyway, is there a technical
reason why this is so?
Yes, there is. You forgot to send us the patch. :-)
:) carefully, there. i'm only looking for a [tng]roff tutorial so
that I can start sending patches for the man page. :)
aside: not to insult anyone or anything like that, plus I'm aware
make is not a programming language interpreter, but it's really
braindamaged. consider this:
.for FOO in foo bar baz
FOO=${FOO}
.if !empty(FOO:S/baz//)
BAR+= ${FOO}
.endif
.endfor
all:
@echo BAR: ${BAR}
comment out the second line to break it.
--
If you cc me or take the list(s) out completely I'll most likely
ignore your message.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: two make questions
I would like to thank everybody who replied to my post, and especially to Chad David and Chuck Robey. Thanks to your help I have now the system working as I need (with the exception of speed, but that is another issue :) I have another p?make related question, though. I've searched the archives, but cannot find an answer: what is the actual relation between our (FreeBSD) make, and pmake? It looks like our make is an old fork, is that right? Also, is there a package of our make? Does it build on other OSes? I need to run my newly created Makefiles on one sorry RedHat box, and the pmake package just doesn't cut it. So, since I couldn't find any other rpm on redhat.com, what are my chances should I, say, want to use /usr/ports/Mk/* on Linux? (Not that this is actually the case, my Makefiles are pretty simple.) -- begin 666 nonexistent.vbs FreeBSD 4.7-RC 10:44AM up 13 days, 17:58, 16 users, load averages: 0.10, 0.09, 0.08 end To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: two make questions
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-10-01 04:52:14 -0700: Thus spake Roman Neuhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I have another p?make related question, though. I've searched the archives, but cannot find an answer: what is the actual relation between our (FreeBSD) make, and pmake? It looks like our make is an old fork, is that right? Also, is there a package of our make? Does it build on other OSes? I need to run my newly created Makefiles on one sorry RedHat box, and the pmake package just doesn't cut it. So, since I couldn't find any other rpm on redhat.com, what are my chances should I, say, want to use /usr/ports/Mk/* on Linux? (Not that this is actually the case, my Makefiles are pretty simple.) Just about all `make' implementations in use today are mutually incompatible; pmake and gmake are no exceptions. If you want to write portable makefiles, you have to settle for the lowest common denominator, which is POSIX. Though it pains me to say it, if you just care about RedHat and FreeBSD, you might as well write your makefile for gmake and install gmake on FreeBSD from ports. Heh, I'm not going to rewrite the Makefiles when the last remaining RH in house is going to be converted. It's just that it might be two months before I get to it. :] -- begin 666 nonexistent.vbs FreeBSD 4.7-RC 1:56PM up 13 days, 21:11, 16 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.01, 0.00 end To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: two make questions
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-10-01 09:22:50 -0600: On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 10:58:33AM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote: I need to run my newly created Makefiles on one sorry RedHat box, and the pmake package just doesn't cut it. So, since I couldn't find any other rpm on redhat.com, what are my chances should I, say, want to use /usr/ports/Mk/* on Linux? (Not that this is actually the case, my Makefiles are pretty simple.) One of the projects I'm working on is a build system much like FreeBSD's and instead of restricting our features we simply ported pmake from FreeBSD. The Solaris port took me about 10 minutes, while the win32 port was a little more involved (it would be easier without fork() :)), so I doubt a RH port will be difficult (I hesitate to even call it a port). for someone who doesn't really know C (as in: I can read some, but finding out how to make a FreeBSD program work on Linux?)? You can either keep your makefiles very simple (good luck!), or you can port pmake and just move the whole system over. looks like i'll have to wait till i have the time to reinstall the server. -- begin 666 nonexistent.vbs FreeBSD 4.7-RC 5:25PM up 14 days, 40 mins, 18 users, load averages: 0.06, 0.12, 0.10 end To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: two make questions
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-09-28 17:20:56 -0400: On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Roman Neuhauser wrote: yup. or the fact that /usr/share/doc/psd/12.make/paper.ascii.gz documents conditionals in the form #keyword instead of .keyword (that might work, i haven't tried, but shouldn't the tutorial be updated? even if the # forms work they surely look deprecated from the fact that i haven't seen a single use in the system makefiles) Well, what you ought to use is the make(1) man page, which is reasonably decent. The # command introducers don't work because # is the comment introducer. I didn't say (or mean) I got confused by the discrepancy. I read ports' Makefiles (and those in /usr/ports/Mk) quite often, and anyone can quite easily tell contents of the whole /usr/share/doc/psd directory is pretty old, so I had no difficulty figuring out the case. But outdated, misleading documentation can be worse than no documentation IMO. The tutorial should be fixed. hm, i don't think i made myself clear with the previous para. how about this: is the pmake tutorial mentioned above carved in stone or are updates allowed? That's a political question, and probably should be asked on current. The answer you're going to get, though, is to go ahead and write up your changes, and see what kind of a reception they get. You won't get anyone to agree to give you permission to make changes until they see what those changes are. sure. I wasn't suggesting I wanted to commit (don't have commit access, either) any unreviewed changes. -- begin 666 nonexistent.vbs FreeBSD 4.7-RC 11:05AM up 12 days, 18:20, 13 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.03, 0.00 end To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: two make questions
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-09-23 13:08:04 -0400: The odd behavior of variables is only one item from a whole list of them. Go take a look at what use: means, if you want a headache. you mean .USE? looks quite powerful... a can of worms if misused. :) Or, how about the behavior of include, which *does* work, even though the man page says that only .include will work (include is compatible with both BSD make and GNU make, an important point.) yup. or the fact that /usr/share/doc/psd/12.make/paper.ascii.gz documents conditionals in the form #keyword instead of .keyword (that might work, i haven't tried, but shouldn't the tutorial be updated? even if the # forms work they surely look deprecated from the fact that i haven't seen a single use in the system makefiles) hm, i don't think i made myself clear with the previous para. how about this: is the pmake tutorial mentioned above carved in stone or are updates allowed? if it's immutable, is derivative work permitted? i'm thinking about basically rewriting the tutorial in docbook (i have /usr/ports/docproj installed), fixing at least the issues *i* have with the material. what do you think? When you don't have any problem with a file like bsd.port.mk, then you'll be able to claim to know make. BTW, this reminds me: I think there is a bug in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk. I'll send a separate message. -- begin 666 nonexistent.vbs FreeBSD 4.7-RC 7:12PM up 10 days, 2:27, 13 users, load averages: 0.04, 0.03, 0.00 end To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: periodic(8)-produced diffs
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-09-23 16:10:59 +0100:
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 05:05:36PM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
[... re periodic diffs]
And, what would the preferred interface be? Most of periodic.conf
knobs are bools, but I'm not sure
diff_{context,traditional,unified}_format={YES,NO}
is better than
diff_format={context,traditional,unified}
No reason why rc.conf knobs *have* to be bools, what ultimately
matters is the case...esac which parses them. I'd avoid relying on a
default value in /etc/defaults/rc.conf for the sake of robustness.
I prefer unified diffs, personally.
thanks for your input. another thing I'm not sure about: should this
knob be limited to just setting the diff format? there's also the
possibility of going the rc.conf ${program}_flags path.
i guess the question is whether the interface should be limited to a
safe set of settings, or if the users should be able to shoot
themselves in the foot in any way they want.
quite a few diff switches don't make any sense in the actions
performed by the periodic scripts, but IMO it's root's duty to
choose a reasonable set.
i think i'll try the $diff_program_options route, and post the
patch later today or tomorrow.
--
begin 666 nonexistent.vbs
FreeBSD 4.7-RC
5:43PM up 8 days, 58 mins, 18 users, load averages: 0.06, 0.12, 0.07
end
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: two make questions
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-09-23 13:08:04 -0400: On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Roman Neuhauser wrote: Now, saying don't do it is nice, but I'd like to know why. Why doesn't this work? Also, what documentation (besides the source) is there that covers variable scopes? See the second message for the problem description. Wish I could give you some satisfaction because I've been there, done that. Unfortunately, you aren't going to find it. If you decide that the only thing that you can do is fix the docs, you won't even succeed there, because it will only raise a huge volume of complaints (seemingly endless nitpickers) all giving their own take on it, even though they won't fix it themselves. quite common. :| i think i might even try it some day, provided my better understanding of make i hope to gain won't cause me to lose motivation. The only book there is on make is pretty pissed-poor, the make book from O'Reilly. I've been considering writing a book on the 3 main flavors of make for a while now I'm not convinced yet that there's a market for it. I'm pretty sure now, with all the horrible make projects I've undertaken, I could do it. i say go for it. :) The odd behavior of variables is only one item from a whole list of them. Go take a look at what use: means, if you want a headache. Or, how about the behavior of include, which *does* work, even though the man page says that only .include will work (include is compatible with both BSD make and GNU make, an important point.) can't this be fixed? i mean, perfect wording is important, but complete coverage of features is even more, even if not spelled out in the best way, no? :) When you don't have any problem with a file like bsd.port.mk, then you'll be able to claim to know make. yeah, figured that much. the post to hackers@ has really paid off, i already learnt quite a few things about make. -- begin 666 nonexistent.vbs FreeBSD 4.7-RC 8:21AM up 6 days, 15:36, 29 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.02, 0.00 end To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
subscription required?
Hi, does this list require subscription to allow posts? http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/eresources.html#ERESOURCES-MAIL doesn't say so, but neither of my two attempts (before I subscribed) has shown up in the archives. -- begin 666 nonexistent.vbs FreeBSD 4.7-RC 1:55PM up 5 days, 21:10, 22 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.01, 0.04 end To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
two make questions
Hi, I've sent two messages about (p)make to questions@ but have not received any replies, so I ask here. I'm not a C programmer (thus not really familiar with make), and I'm trying to use it for project management (we write apps in php). I've stumbled across a few variable related issues where the actual behavior doesn't exactly map to the available documentation (make(1), and the pmake paper). See the messages below for complete descriptions. Also, since two attempts sent to this list before I subscribed haven't make it through and I'm not sure about the cause, I'm just posting links to the original messages in questions@: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=freebsd-questionsm=103250565427752w=2 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=freebsd-questionsm=103251441702280w=2 Hope you don't mind, and thanks. -- begin 666 nonexistent.vbs FreeBSD 4.7-RC 7:19PM up 5 days, 2:34, 21 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.01, 0.00 end To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: two make questions
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-09-23 10:06:12 -0400: On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Roman Neuhauser wrote: I'm not a C programmer (thus not really familiar with make), and I'm trying to use it for project management (we write apps in php). I've stumbled across a few variable related issues where the actual behavior doesn't exactly map to the available documentation (make(1), and the pmake paper). See the messages below for complete descriptions. http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=freebsd-questionsm=103250565427752w=2 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=freebsd-questionsm=103251441702280w=2 You're trying to treat the make variables as program variables, and that doesn't work, once you assign a value to them, that's the value you get. They *do not* work like variables in C or Basic. The rule to follow is never to attempt to modify a value in a variable. If you need that specific action, either use the .for type constructs, else use shell variables, which will let you do that. Chuck, thanks a lot for your reply. You're right: I'm viewing Makefiles as sequential programs, which obviously (even to me) is not quite true, but I'm having difficulty getting rid of this. Now, saying don't do it is nice, but I'd like to know why. Why doesn't this work? Also, what documentation (besides the source) is there that covers variable scopes? See the second message for the problem description. I can fix the behavior with conditional assignment to DESTDIR (?=) in the Makefile, but still would like to understand what's causing make to behave the way it does. Again, thanks, and HAND. Also, I couldn't find on freebsd.org whether it's required to group-reply on hackers@ (as it is on questions@), so I'm cc'ing you. Sorry if this is not required. You don't need to cc me either way. Roman -- begin 666 nonexistent.vbs FreeBSD 4.7-RC 4:17PM up 5 days, 23:32, 22 users, load averages: 0.03, 0.11, 0.07 end To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
periodic(8)-produced diffs
[repost from questions@; no replies received since 2002-09-17]
Hi there,
various /etc/periodic scripts mail root diffs of a few config files etc.
grep on my (quite fresh) STABLE box shows that except for
/etc/periodic/daily/210.backup-aliases, all the diff invocations use the
old format. I have two issues with this: first, all the diffs should be
in the same format, and second, root should be able to select their
preferred format in /etc/periodic.conf (yes, i have difficulty reading
anything but unified diffs).
Now, before I go and produce a patch, would such a change be actually
welcome, or am I going to get shot down?
And, what would the preferred interface be? Most of periodic.conf knobs
are bools, but I'm not sure
diff_{context,traditional,unified}_format={YES,NO}
is better than
diff_format={context,traditional,unified}
What do you think?
--
begin 666 nonexistent.vbs
FreeBSD 4.7-RC
5:03PM up 6 days, 18 mins, 22 users, load averages: 0.03, 0.11, 0.08
end
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: two make questions
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-09-23 16:08:11 +0100:
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 04:35:23PM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
thanks a lot for your reply. You're right: I'm viewing Makefiles
as sequential programs, which obviously (even to me) is not quite
true, but I'm having difficulty getting rid of this.
Yeah, it takes a bit of getting used to. Make lets you define a dependency
graph, and various transformations/instructions that can be applied to
each node in that graph. In that respect it's more like a Caesar salad,
the dependencies are the lettuce and the variables are croutons. Making it
work is the dressing; you have to add it yourself ;-)
:)
Managing Projects with Make from O'Reilly is a good introduction but it's
a tad dated.
yeah, i'll be ordering it shortly.
Also, make has a habit of being different from one platform to the
next. I particularly like the BSD pmake, but Solaris make is different
still, and GNU make is a law unto itself.
i know. i'm limiting myself to pmake atm, so other implementations
are out of the scope of my questions.
Now, saying don't do it is nice, but I'd like to know why. Why
doesn't this work? Also, what documentation (besides the source) is
there that covers variable scopes? See the second message for the
problem description.
The scope of a Makefile macro (variable) seems to be limited to the current
invocation,
? see below
unless you explicitly export things as environment variables,
or set them on a command line when re-invoking Make.
i'm not sure what to take of this. consider this makefile:
DESTDIR=
SOURCES=foo bar baz
TARGETS:= ${SOURCES:C;^;${DESTDIR}/;}
SRCFILE=${.TARGET:C,^${DESTDIR}/,,}
.BEGIN:
@echo \$${DESTDIR}: ${DESTDIR}
@echo \$${TARGETS}: ${TARGETS}
all: ${TARGETS}
${TARGETS}: ${SRCFILE}
@echo SRC: ${SRCFILE} - TGT: ${.TARGET}
.PHONY: all ${TARGETS}
roman@freepuppy ~/tmp 1133:0 make all DESTDIR=/tmp/maketest
${DESTDIR}: /tmp/maketest
${TARGETS}: /foo /bar /baz
Graph cycles through /foo
Graph cycles through /bar
Graph cycles through /baz
`all' not remade because of errors.
roman@freepuppy ~/tmp 1133:0
in the invocation above, the commandline assignment overrode the
Makefile value of DESTDIR in the .BEGIN target, but not outside it
(or presumably any target), in the ${TARGETS} and ${SRCFILE} macros.
So: what exactly do you mean by the current invocation?
Depending on what you want to do this can get quite complicated. Have
a look at /usr/src/Makefile which actually reinvokes itself quite a
bit (and includes things from Makefile.inc which may *also* do that!).
I've had more than a few looks in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk, but
getting the building block principles from something that
complicated is not easy.
Nik Clayton mentioned a tool to automatically diagram makefile dependency
graphs by target at the last FreeBSD UKUG meeting, using graphviz, but I
can't recall its name.
I'll google, thanks.
I can fix the behavior with conditional assignment to DESTDIR (?=)
in the Makefile, but still would like to understand what's causing
make to behave the way it does.
If you're including any standard makefile templates you may wish to
review those; as well as /etc/make.conf and /etc/defaults/make.conf.
nothing like that. my Makefiles break withoug the need for this
stuff. :)
You probably also want to look at the MAKEOBJDIRPREFIX behaviour in
the make(1) man page.
will do so.
thanks!
--
begin 666 nonexistent.vbs
FreeBSD 4.7-RC
5:23PM up 6 days, 38 mins, 22 users, load averages: 0.11, 0.07, 0.04
end
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: two make questions
[sent only to Chad by mistake]
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-09-23 10:35:54 -0600:
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 05:35:16PM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
unless you explicitly export things as environment variables,
or set them on a command line when re-invoking Make.
i'm not sure what to take of this. consider this makefile:
DESTDIR=
SOURCES=foo bar baz
TARGETS:= ${SOURCES:C;^;${DESTDIR}/;}
SRCFILE=${.TARGET:C,^${DESTDIR}/,,}
.BEGIN:
@echo \$${DESTDIR}: ${DESTDIR}
@echo \$${TARGETS}: ${TARGETS}
all: ${TARGETS}
${TARGETS}: ${SRCFILE}
@echo SRC: ${SRCFILE} - TGT: ${.TARGET}
.PHONY: all ${TARGETS}
roman@freepuppy ~/tmp 1133:0 make all DESTDIR=/tmp/maketest
${DESTDIR}: /tmp/maketest
${TARGETS}: /foo /bar /baz
Graph cycles through /foo
Graph cycles through /bar
Graph cycles through /baz
`all' not remade because of errors.
roman@freepuppy ~/tmp 1133:0
How about something like this:
#DESTDIR= This overrides the command line setting.
As I said earlier, with DESTDIR= in the Makefile, .BEGIN still
displays the value passed on the command line. These two things
(your statement, and the observed behavior) seem to contradict each
other.
Wait, I know the assignment in my Makefile overrides the commandline
assignment: but only outside targets. I just wanted to point out
that going into a bit more detail can save quite an amount of
confusion. :)
#DESTDIR?=/my/default might work better?
SOURCES= foo bar baz
TARGETS:= ${SOURCES:C;^;${DESTDIR}/;}
# Note: SRCFILE is evaluated at startup, which results in as .TARGET
# is not yet defined, and then it is evaluated in each target..
yup, per the man page.
# Note that DESTDIR will be overriden by the define at the top by the
# time we get into a target.
i'm not sure i'm reading this right, but if i am, you're saying the
opposite of what i'm seeing: DESTDIR is overriden by the command
line assignment.
[further explanation snipped]
Good luck, and I hope that helps.
you bet! awesome, thanks!
Nik Clayton mentioned a tool to automatically diagram makefile dependency
graphs by target at the last FreeBSD UKUG meeting, using graphviz, but I
can't recall its name.
I'll google, thanks.
Let me know if you find this :)
yeah, i'm aware i don't have much to google for. :)
btw, i'm sure i'll run into other delicate features in pmake. is it
okay for me to continue asking here? questions@ doesn't seem to be
*the* place.
--
begin 666 nonexistent.vbs
FreeBSD 4.7-RC
6:49PM up 6 days, 2:04, 29 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.04, 0.06
end
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
