Re: regex question....
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 17:56, wrote: > Joshua Gimer wrote: > >> On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Gary Kline wrote: >> > I have tried :1,$/s/[0-9]][0-9][0-9]/foo/g >> Why not just %s/[0-9]*/foo/g > > Too broad -- it will match the null string. (* means "zero or more > instances of" whatever preceded it.) > > Best RE I know for integers is > > [1-9][0-9]* > > (or replace the 1 with a 0 if the strings in question might have > leading zeros). > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > Also, the + operator means '1 or more' but needs escaped: %s/[0-9]\+/foo/g ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: ssh authentication error
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 10:06, Jerrin wrote: > Hi, > > On a mac system i generated the key using ssh-keygen -t dsa and copied > .ssh/id_dsa.pub to /home/user/.ssh/authorized_keys on a Freebsd server, but > it prompts for the password Check perms on /home/user/.ssh/authorized_keys chmod 640 or 600, not 644 If that doesn't work, try to ssh with a -v or -vv, that might give you more of a clue ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: mounting UFS CD-ROMs
You could try the conv=swab option to dd dd if=/dev/acd0 of=5853-5864.iso conv=swab On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 18:04, Noah Pratt wrote: > On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 8:44 PM, Michael Powell wrote: >> Noah Pratt wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have a whole bunch of UFS CD-ROMs, but I'm unable to mount them on >>> my FreeBSD 8 system. >>> I thought it would be possible. From the FAQ: >>> http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/faq/disks.html >>> >>> UFS CD-ROMs can be mounted directly on FreeBSD. Mounting disk >>> partitions from Digital UNIX and other systems that support UFS may be >>> more complex, depending on the details of the disk partitioning for >>> the operating system in question. >>> >>> >>> I tried the direct route: >>> >>> 6930p# file -s /dev/acd0t01 >>> /dev/acd0: Unix Fast File system [v1] (big-endian), last mounted on >> ^^ >> [snip] >>> >>> 6930p# uname -a >>> FreeBSD 6930p.domain.com 8.0-STABLE FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE #1: Mon May 17 >>> 01:26:14 PDT 2010 >>> r...@6930p.domain.com:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 >>> >>> >>> Am I missing something that ought to be obvious? [probable] >>> Is it no longer possible to mount UFS filesystems? [unlikely ;-) ] >>> Is there something specific about *this* UFS filesystem that prevents >>> it from working? >>> >> >> I suspect maybe the disk was written using Solaris on SPARC, which is big- >> endian. Most PC architectures are little-endian. >> >> -Mike > > > > Yes, the CDs were created in Solaris on SPARC. (I think it was a Sparc 10...) > And yes, my FreeBSD system is an Intel Core2Duo. > > In Linux, copying the disc and mounting the disc image via loopback > worked great: > ubuntu# cat /dev/cdrom > cd-image > ubuntu# mount -t ufs -o ro,loop cd-image /mnt > > It looks like NetBSD has a kernel build option FFS_EI, to enable > fsck_ffs -B to convert the byte order. > (I don't have a NetBSD system to test though.) > > I even found a Windows program called R-Studio ( http://www.r-tt.com/ > ) that was able to recover data from these discs. > > Can the filesystem's endianness be converted in FreeBSD? > > > > Thanks a lot! > > -Noah > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD's UFS vs Ext4
Using a phoronix link as an example, ext4 still has some pretty bad data loss bugs: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Nzk0OA imo: data security of ufs > speed of ext4 ymmv ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: I am not understanding something about pf
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Doug Hardie wrote: > I am running 7.2-Stable with pf. I have the following pf.conf: > > no rdr inet proto tcp from to any port smtp > no rdr inet proto tcp from to any port smtp > rdr pass inet proto tcp from any to any port smtp -> 127.0.0.1 port spamd > > This is the basic spamd configuration with an extra table > which lists hosts to go directly to the mail server. > Everything works properly. Hosts not in either spamd table go to spamd and > those in either spamd table go directly to the mail server. However, the pf > statistics don't seem to make sense to me. I always see the following: > > no rdr inet proto tcp from to any port = smtp > [ Evaluations: 1193433 Packets: 0 Bytes: 0 States: 0 > ] > [ Inserted: uid 0 pid 73310 ] > no rdr inet proto tcp from to any port = smtp > [ Evaluations: 110124Packets: 0 Bytes: 0 States: 0 > ] > [ Inserted: uid 0 pid 73310 ] > rdr pass inet proto tcp from any to any port = smtp -> 127.0.0.1 port 8025 > [ Evaluations: 110124Packets: 63Bytes: 3516States: 1 > ] > [ Inserted: uid 0 pid 73310 ] > > Where the first two entries never show any Packets and the third shows > everything. Does "no rdr" work differently than "rdr" with the statistics? > I understood from the Book of PF that the rules were evaluated such that > the last matching rule is used. Hence I think that with the above conf file > the spamd-white-local table would never get used as the connection will > match one of the 2 following rules. > > So I ran another test by putting the first rule last: > > no rdr inet proto tcp from to any port smtp > rdr pass inet proto tcp from any to any port smtp -> 127.0.0.1 port spamd > no rdr inet proto tcp from to any port smtp > > Now entries in are ignored and, the statistics are > quite different: > > no rdr inet proto tcp from to any port = smtp > [ Evaluations: 79Packets: 0 Bytes: 0 States: 0 > ] > [ Inserted: uid 0 pid 86983 ] > rdr pass inet proto tcp from any to any port = smtp -> 127.0.0.1 port 8025 > [ Evaluations: 52Packets: 25Bytes: 1395States: 1 > ] > [ Inserted: uid 0 pid 86983 ] > no rdr inet proto tcp from to any port = smtp > [ Evaluations: 0 Packets: 0 Bytes: 0 States: 0 > ] > [ Inserted: uid 0 pid 86983 ] > > > Now the last rule says its never evaluated. This indicates that its the > first rule that matches that is used rather than the last. However, why are > there never any packets counted in the "no rdr" rules? > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " > freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > Do you have a "pass in proto tcp to port smpt" or some such rule that is capturing the rest of the packets/accounting stats? I believe the "pass" in the second test (rdr pass inet proto tcp from any to any port = smtp -> 127.0.0.1 port 8025) is short circuiting your assumed "last match wins". The full pf.conf would be helpful ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: DNS Question
Also, MX needs to resolve to an A, not a CNAME.. If you are using mail on all these domains, use A records On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Sean Cavanaugh wrote: > >> >how is this illegal? >> >> CNAME rule: >> >> a node with a CNAME cannot contain any other records. >> >> for the node domain.tld: >> >> domain.tld. soa ... >> domain.tld. ns ... >> domain.tld. cname otherdomain.tld. >> >> this node has a CNAME and "other data", so it's illegal, no matter what you >> want to do, or what makes sense to you, or what is convenient for you. >> > > > > > > > ah yes, forgot about that. you are correct on that line. > > > > -Sean > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: problem on pf @ freebsd 7.0
Take a look in /etc/defaults/rc.conf The bits for PF are already there. All you should need is to set pf_enable="YES" A quick guess would be that that /etc/defaults/rc.conf is loaded after /etc/rc.conf, and pf_enable is reset to NO, but that is just a guess. Here is my pf section from /etc/defaults/rc.conf that brings pf up on boot: pf_enable="YES" # Set to YES to enable packet filter (pf) pf_rules="/etc/pf.conf" # rules definition file for pf pf_program="/sbin/pfctl"# where the pfctl program lives pf_flags="" # additional flags for pfctl pflog_enable="YES" # Set to YES to enable packet filter logging pflog_logfile="/var/log/pflog" # where pflogd should store the logfile pflog_program="/sbin/pflogd"# where the pflogd program lives pflog_flags="" # additional flags for pflogd On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 5:24 AM, RW <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 14 May 2008 09:24:52 +0800 > "CyberSans AirBort" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> and guess what? pf is not loading when startup. i have to manually >> restarted the pf using /etc/rc.d/pf restart > > What exactly do you mean by "not loading"? Do you mean not working? > > Are there any pf related error messages in /var/log/messages. > > In some case pf does need a /etc/rc.d/pf resync (or restart) done > at a later stage. e.g if pf.conf uses hostnames that can't be resolved > at that stage of the boot. > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: coretemp 70C = CPU too hot?
Also something to keep in mind, most (all?) new procs have thermal cuttoffs that will kill themselves before any damage happens. If you box hasn't shut down in weird ways or underclocked itself, you are probably good to go. It's something to keep your eye on, but I wouldn't worry too much about it if you aren't experiencing any problems. On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 12:14 AM, Christian Zachariasen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 9:08 AM, Wojciech Puchar < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> As with so many other things in the computer world, it depends. With no >>> case >>> fans, it's weird that the computer gets colder if it has something above >>> and >>> >> >> no it's not. the machines above and below has proper cooling, and transfers >> this machine heat by conduction - rack cases are mostly metal and conduct >> heat well. > > > I've very little experience with computers in racks, but if the machines are > actually touching, then yes, this could be the case. > > The 65 C temperature a previous poster was talking about is not the maximum > operating temperature for the actual processor, it's the maximum temperature > in the case while the computer is operating. As far as I know CPU > temperatures are measured on the actual processor die, and the case > temperature will normally be *much* lower. > > Christian Zachariasen > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
