Re: uname -r output values?
On 21 Dec 2012, at 18:51, Fbsd8 fb...@a1poweruser.com wrote: Fleuriot Damien wrote: On Dec 21, 2012, at 2:36 PM, Fbsd8 fb...@a1poweruser.com wrote: When issuing the uname -r command what are the different values possible to expect? So far I have this list. Where X.X = major release . Sub release numbers Where y = number 1 through 9 X.X-BETAy X.X-RCy X.X-RELEASE X.X-RELEASE-py X.X-PRERELEASE X.X-CURRENT mybsd dam ~ $ uname -r 8.2-STABLE How did you create this 8.2-STABLE system? I don't see any .iso file for Instructions given already by Devin. Basically, STABLE is a good compromise between running the latest version (10-CURRENT if you're on 9, or 9.x if you're on 8), and running a RELEASE that gets updated very slowly. I've never had bad surprises with STABLE and encourage running it instead of RELEASE if you want the latest patches. Note that on occasion, STABLE will be replaced by BETA or RC. For example 8.2-STABLE became 8.3-RC1 at some point, then 8.3-RC1 ceased to exist altogether and was renamed to 8.3-STABLE (discounting any other release candidates here). ___ 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: uname -r output values?
mybsd dam ~ $ uname -r 8.2-STABLE On Dec 21, 2012, at 2:36 PM, Fbsd8 fb...@a1poweruser.com wrote: When issuing the uname -r command what are the different values possible to expect? So far I have this list. Where X.X = major release . Sub release numbers Where y = number 1 through 9 X.X-BETAy X.X-RCy X.X-RELEASE X.X-RELEASE-py X.X-PRERELEASE X.X-CURRENT ___ 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: uname -r output values?
Fleuriot Damien wrote: On Dec 21, 2012, at 2:36 PM, Fbsd8 fb...@a1poweruser.com wrote: When issuing the uname -r command what are the different values possible to expect? So far I have this list. Where X.X = major release . Sub release numbers Where y = number 1 through 9 X.X-BETAy X.X-RCy X.X-RELEASE X.X-RELEASE-py X.X-PRERELEASE X.X-CURRENT mybsd dam ~ $ uname -r 8.2-STABLE How did you create this 8.2-STABLE system? I don't see any .iso file for this. ___ 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: uname ?
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 03:09:00PM +0800, joeb1 wrote: It looks to me that the uname -m and uname -p always have the same value, such as i386. Is there some fine-grained difference or some un-documented difference between them or some combination were the values would be different? I don't have one handy, so I don't have any way to test this right now, but I wonder if an AMD machine might give a different answer to one of those than an Intel machine, given a 32-bit 386 instruction set processor for both. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.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: uname ?
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 11:30:51AM -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 03:09:00PM +0800, joeb1 wrote: It looks to me that the uname -m and uname -p always have the same value, such as i386. Is there some fine-grained difference or some un-documented difference between them or some combination were the values would be different? I don't have one handy, so I don't have any way to test this right now, but I wonder if an AMD machine might give a different answer to one of those than an Intel machine, given a 32-bit 386 instruction set processor for both. I *guess* they will be different for some targets in this list: $ make targets -C /usr/src Supported TARGET/TARGET_ARCH pairs for world and kernel targets amd64/amd64 arm/arm arm/armeb i386/i386 ia64/ia64 mips/mipsel mips/mipseb mips/mips64el mips/mips64eb mips/mipsn32eb pc98/i386 powerpc/powerpc powerpc/powerpc64 sparc64/sparc64 Yuri pgp3oTUsEpBMa.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: uname -r and patchlevel
On 01/06/2010 2:33 ?.?., n dhert wrote: Can somebody explain about the -plevel one sees in the output of the uname -r ? Under *exactly* what conditions the patch level changes to a new value after you applied a freebsd-update install ? If you are using the GENERIC kernel AND the kernel was updated as part of the freebsd-update process, the patch level is changed. You will need to reboot. If you are using the GENERIC kernel AND the kernel was not updated as part of the freebsd-update process, the patch level reported is unchanged if you are using a CUSTOM kernel, the reported patch level is not changed until you rebuild your kernel with the new sources as updated by freebsd-update. After rebuilding your kernel it always reflects the latest -p version, even if there were no actual kernel changes. The reported -p level is contained in this file: /usr/src/sys/conf/newvers.sh and this is always updated when an update comes through. If you rebuild your custom kernel (or even GENERIC) it will always report the value from this file. ___ 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: uname -a
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:08:08AM -0400, alexus thus spake: su-3.2# uname -a FreeBSD dd.alexus.org 7.3-RELEASE FreeBSD 7.3-RELEASE #13: Tue Mar 23 20:47:52 UTC 2010 xx...@x.xxx.:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 su-3.2# why is it showing up #13 here? back when I had 7.2-RELEASE-pX i've had #12, I then did following: rm -rf /usr/src csup /usr/share/examples/cvsup/standard-supfile cd /usr/src make buildworld make buildkernel ... reboot now it show shows 7.3 and #13, i thought if i get rid of /usr/src and re-csup it it should reset to #1? or #0 Did you perform a 'make installkernel' ? -- http://alexus.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 -- Jason Helfman System Administrator experts-exchange.com http://www.experts-exchange.com/M_4830110.html ___ 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: uname -a
Hi, alexus wrote: su-3.2# uname -a FreeBSD dd.alexus.org 7.3-RELEASE FreeBSD 7.3-RELEASE #13: Tue Mar 23 20:47:52 UTC 2010 xx...@x.xxx.:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 su-3.2# why is it showing up #13 here? back when I had 7.2-RELEASE-pX i've had #12, I then did following: rm -rf /usr/src csup /usr/share/examples/cvsup/standard-supfile cd /usr/src make buildworld make buildkernel ... reboot now it show shows 7.3 and #13, i thought if i get rid of /usr/src and re-csup it it should reset to #1? or #0 The kernel version is incremented from /usr/obj, not /usr/src. To revert it to #0, remove /usr/obj. Regards, -- Glen Barber ___ 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: Uname borked on ??-Release...
On Mar 4, 2008, at 2:14 PM, Kris Kennaway wrote: Kevin Kinsey wrote: Kris Kennaway wrote: Kevin Kinsey wrote: What about strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 6.2-RELEASE? Kris As I would expect, it returns nothing at all. Your problem makes no sense then :) The kern.osrelease returns a string compiled into the kernel (see conf/newvers.sh), so if it returns 6.2-RELEASE then that string must be present. Kris So, have you checked to make sure your uname is accurate and not just an echoing shell script of sorts? You never know, maybe someone hijacked your uname before you upgraded and the hijacked version wasn't written properly(which is odd since it's BSD licensed, where if it were GPL they'd have to release the code for their evil uname so can't use a GPL version). You could try greping over the entire filesystem for 6.2-RELEASE to find out where it could be coming from. Depending on the setup of your system, you could try zeroing all the spare blocks(I imagine `dd if=/dev/zero of=zero` would do the trick) and then seeing if the string's from some really hidden file. So many ways to have fun, but I don't want to be in your shoes. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uname borked on ??-Release...
On Wednesday 05 March 2008 10:11:42 Joshua Isom wrote: On Mar 4, 2008, at 2:14 PM, Kris Kennaway wrote: Kevin Kinsey wrote: Kris Kennaway wrote: Kevin Kinsey wrote: What about strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 6.2-RELEASE? Kris As I would expect, it returns nothing at all. Your problem makes no sense then :) The kern.osrelease returns a string compiled into the kernel (see conf/newvers.sh), so if it returns 6.2-RELEASE then that string must be present. Kris So, have you checked to make sure your uname is accurate and not just an echoing shell script of sorts? You never know, maybe someone hijacked your uname before you upgraded and the hijacked version wasn't written properly(which is odd since it's BSD licensed, where if it were GPL they'd have to release the code for their evil uname so can't use a GPL version). Then sysctl would be a shell script too. The only way I can see this happening, is that /boot at loader time, is not the same /boot after kernel is loaded. For this reason, it would be nice if kern.bootfile would list ad0s1a:/boot/kernel/kernel. -- Mel Problem with today's modular software: they start with the modules and never get to the software part. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uname borked on ??-Release...
Kevin Kinsey wrote: Kris Kennaway wrote: snip I get the following from uname -a: FreeBSD archangel.daleco.biz 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #6: Sat Jun 2 09:22:50 CDT 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: /usr/obj/backup/src/sys/GENERIC i386 However, I rebuilt world, more or less without issues, twice in February with RELENG_6 in the supfile. This didn't change uname's output, and that worried me a bit. So, to make matters bette^H^H^H^Hadder, I csup'ped to RELENG_7_0 the day after it was released, read /usr/src/UPDATING, and the webpage detailing the upgrade, and did another buildworld/kernel cycle. Now I have no idea if I'm on 6 or 7 (seems like 7, but many ports issues, and I've rebuilt them all), and it's just becoming a major PITA. You didnt succeed in installing the new kernel. 'make installkernel' is the step in which this occurs. Thank you and Phillip for answering my post. However, I've done this 3 times now, and I don't skip that step. There have been no errors in the process, either. I've rebooted the system, and I'm still being told I'm running 6.2 by uname. In addition, pkg_add thinks I should be looking for 6-latest packages instead of 7, and the list of annoyances continues. And, hmm, symbols? I'm guessing that knob is ON in FBSD7? Once again, proof that something's wrong, as I didn't build debugging kernels in FBSD6 ... so I'm thinking this is a 7 kernel? It just doesn't make sense to me. It *is* a Monday, after all. If installkernel didn't succeed, shouldn't there be any other evidence? Could skipping a mergemaster at some point have this effect? Possibly you have 6.x sources still. Or you are not actually booting /boot/kernel/kernel but some other kernel. Check sysctl kern.bootfile. You can also do strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 7.0-RELEASE to verify the kernel version string. #sysctl kern.bootfile kern.bootfile: /boot/kernel/kernel #strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 0-RELEASE @(#)FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE #1: Thu Feb 28 12:22:38 CST 2008 FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE #1: Thu Feb 28 12:22:38 CST 2008 7.0-RELEASE #ls -l /boot/kernel/kernel -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 9294687 Feb 28 12:22 /boot/kernel/kernel* Well, fudging around with uname's source shows that it's basically calling some sysctls, so maybe the question is, with what I have above, why do I still have: sysctl -a | grep kern.osre kern.osrelease: 6.2-RELEASE kern.osrevision: 199506 kern.osreldate: 602000 You rebooted, right? :) Kris ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uname borked on ??-Release...
Kris Kennaway wrote: Kevin Kinsey wrote: Kris Kennaway wrote: snip I get the following from uname -a: FreeBSD archangel.daleco.biz 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #6: Sat Jun 2 09:22:50 CDT 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: /usr/obj/backup/src/sys/GENERIC i386 However, I rebuilt world, more or less without issues, twice in February with RELENG_6 in the supfile. This didn't change uname's output, and that worried me a bit. So, to make matters bette^H^H^H^Hadder, I csup'ped to RELENG_7_0 the day after it was released, read /usr/src/UPDATING, and the webpage detailing the upgrade, and did another buildworld/kernel cycle. Now I have no idea if I'm on 6 or 7 (seems like 7, but many ports issues, and I've rebuilt them all), and it's just becoming a major PITA. You didnt succeed in installing the new kernel. 'make installkernel' is the step in which this occurs. Thank you and Phillip for answering my post. However, I've done this 3 times now, and I don't skip that step. There have been no errors in the process, either. I've rebooted the system, and I'm still being told I'm running 6.2 by uname. In addition, pkg_add thinks I should be looking for 6-latest packages instead of 7, and the list of annoyances continues. And, hmm, symbols? I'm guessing that knob is ON in FBSD7? Once again, proof that something's wrong, as I didn't build debugging kernels in FBSD6 ... so I'm thinking this is a 7 kernel? It just doesn't make sense to me. It *is* a Monday, after all. If installkernel didn't succeed, shouldn't there be any other evidence? Could skipping a mergemaster at some point have this effect? Possibly you have 6.x sources still. Or you are not actually booting /boot/kernel/kernel but some other kernel. Check sysctl kern.bootfile. You can also do strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 7.0-RELEASE to verify the kernel version string. #sysctl kern.bootfile kern.bootfile: /boot/kernel/kernel #strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 0-RELEASE @(#)FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE #1: Thu Feb 28 12:22:38 CST 2008 FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE #1: Thu Feb 28 12:22:38 CST 2008 7.0-RELEASE #ls -l /boot/kernel/kernel -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 9294687 Feb 28 12:22 /boot/kernel/kernel* Well, fudging around with uname's source shows that it's basically calling some sysctls, so maybe the question is, with what I have above, why do I still have: sysctl -a | grep kern.osre kern.osrelease: 6.2-RELEASE kern.osrevision: 199506 kern.osreldate: 602000 You rebooted, right? :) Kris Yes, sir! Every time I do it, and then some. ;-) At this moment, whilst building Yet Another Kernel(tm): #uptime 7:13AM up 15:30, 3 users, load averages: 0.97, 0.37, 0.14 That would've been yesterday's reboot to install the kernel I remade after Phillip's first response in this thread; or, perhaps the one when I replaced the re(4) NIC when it stopped working for unknown reasons (but, eh, with this issue, seems nothing is guaranteed to escape). Kevin Kinsey ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uname borked on ??-Release...
Kevin Kinsey wrote: Kris Kennaway wrote: snip I get the following from uname -a: FreeBSD archangel.daleco.biz 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #6: Sat Jun 2 09:22:50 CDT 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: /usr/obj/backup/src/sys/GENERIC i386 However, I rebuilt world, more or less without issues, twice in February with RELENG_6 in the supfile. This didn't change uname's output, and that worried me a bit. So, to make matters bette^H^H^H^Hadder, I csup'ped to RELENG_7_0 the day after it was released, read /usr/src/UPDATING, and the webpage detailing the upgrade, and did another buildworld/kernel cycle. Now I have no idea if I'm on 6 or 7 (seems like 7, but many ports issues, and I've rebuilt them all), and it's just becoming a major PITA. You didnt succeed in installing the new kernel. 'make installkernel' is the step in which this occurs. Thank you and Phillip for answering my post. However, I've done this 3 times now, and I don't skip that step. There have been no errors in the process, either. I've rebooted the system, and I'm still being told I'm running 6.2 by uname. In addition, pkg_add thinks I should be looking for 6-latest packages instead of 7, and the list of annoyances continues. And, hmm, symbols? I'm guessing that knob is ON in FBSD7? Once again, proof that something's wrong, as I didn't build debugging kernels in FBSD6 ... so I'm thinking this is a 7 kernel? It just doesn't make sense to me. It *is* a Monday, after all. If installkernel didn't succeed, shouldn't there be any other evidence? Could skipping a mergemaster at some point have this effect? Possibly you have 6.x sources still. Or you are not actually booting /boot/kernel/kernel but some other kernel. Check sysctl kern.bootfile. You can also do strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 7.0-RELEASE to verify the kernel version string. #sysctl kern.bootfile kern.bootfile: /boot/kernel/kernel #strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 0-RELEASE @(#)FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE #1: Thu Feb 28 12:22:38 CST 2008 FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE #1: Thu Feb 28 12:22:38 CST 2008 7.0-RELEASE #ls -l /boot/kernel/kernel -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 9294687 Feb 28 12:22 /boot/kernel/kernel* Well, fudging around with uname's source shows that it's basically calling some sysctls, so maybe the question is, with what I have above, why do I still have: sysctl -a | grep kern.osre kern.osrelease: 6.2-RELEASE kern.osrevision: 199506 kern.osreldate: 602000 ?? What about strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 6.2-RELEASE ? Kris ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uname borked on ??-Release...
Kris Kennaway wrote: Kevin Kinsey wrote: Kris Kennaway wrote: snip I get the following from uname -a: FreeBSD archangel.daleco.biz 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #6: Sat Jun 2 09:22:50 CDT 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: /usr/obj/backup/src/sys/GENERIC i386 However, I rebuilt world, more or less without issues, twice in February with RELENG_6 in the supfile. This didn't change uname's output, and that worried me a bit. So, to make matters bette^H^H^H^Hadder, I csup'ped to RELENG_7_0 the day after it was released, read /usr/src/UPDATING, and the webpage detailing the upgrade, and did another buildworld/kernel cycle. Now I have no idea if I'm on 6 or 7 (seems like 7, but many ports issues, and I've rebuilt them all), and it's just becoming a major PITA. You didnt succeed in installing the new kernel. 'make installkernel' is the step in which this occurs. Thank you and Phillip for answering my post. However, I've done this 3 times now, and I don't skip that step. There have been no errors in the process, either. I've rebooted the system, and I'm still being told I'm running 6.2 by uname. In addition, pkg_add thinks I should be looking for 6-latest packages instead of 7, and the list of annoyances continues. And, hmm, symbols? I'm guessing that knob is ON in FBSD7? Once again, proof that something's wrong, as I didn't build debugging kernels in FBSD6 ... so I'm thinking this is a 7 kernel? It just doesn't make sense to me. It *is* a Monday, after all. If installkernel didn't succeed, shouldn't there be any other evidence? Could skipping a mergemaster at some point have this effect? Possibly you have 6.x sources still. Or you are not actually booting /boot/kernel/kernel but some other kernel. Check sysctl kern.bootfile. You can also do strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 7.0-RELEASE to verify the kernel version string. #sysctl kern.bootfile kern.bootfile: /boot/kernel/kernel #strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 0-RELEASE @(#)FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE #1: Thu Feb 28 12:22:38 CST 2008 FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE #1: Thu Feb 28 12:22:38 CST 2008 7.0-RELEASE #ls -l /boot/kernel/kernel -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 9294687 Feb 28 12:22 /boot/kernel/kernel* Well, fudging around with uname's source shows that it's basically calling some sysctls, so maybe the question is, with what I have above, why do I still have: sysctl -a | grep kern.osre kern.osrelease: 6.2-RELEASE kern.osrevision: 199506 kern.osreldate: 602000 What about strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 6.2-RELEASE? Kris As I would expect, it returns nothing at all. Kevin Kinsey ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uname borked on ??-Release...
Kevin Kinsey wrote: Kris Kennaway wrote: Kevin Kinsey wrote: Kris Kennaway wrote: snip I get the following from uname -a: FreeBSD archangel.daleco.biz 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #6: Sat Jun 2 09:22:50 CDT 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: /usr/obj/backup/src/sys/GENERIC i386 However, I rebuilt world, more or less without issues, twice in February with RELENG_6 in the supfile. This didn't change uname's output, and that worried me a bit. So, to make matters bette^H^H^H^Hadder, I csup'ped to RELENG_7_0 the day after it was released, read /usr/src/UPDATING, and the webpage detailing the upgrade, and did another buildworld/kernel cycle. Now I have no idea if I'm on 6 or 7 (seems like 7, but many ports issues, and I've rebuilt them all), and it's just becoming a major PITA. You didnt succeed in installing the new kernel. 'make installkernel' is the step in which this occurs. Thank you and Phillip for answering my post. However, I've done this 3 times now, and I don't skip that step. There have been no errors in the process, either. I've rebooted the system, and I'm still being told I'm running 6.2 by uname. In addition, pkg_add thinks I should be looking for 6-latest packages instead of 7, and the list of annoyances continues. And, hmm, symbols? I'm guessing that knob is ON in FBSD7? Once again, proof that something's wrong, as I didn't build debugging kernels in FBSD6 ... so I'm thinking this is a 7 kernel? It just doesn't make sense to me. It *is* a Monday, after all. If installkernel didn't succeed, shouldn't there be any other evidence? Could skipping a mergemaster at some point have this effect? Possibly you have 6.x sources still. Or you are not actually booting /boot/kernel/kernel but some other kernel. Check sysctl kern.bootfile. You can also do strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 7.0-RELEASE to verify the kernel version string. #sysctl kern.bootfile kern.bootfile: /boot/kernel/kernel #strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 0-RELEASE @(#)FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE #1: Thu Feb 28 12:22:38 CST 2008 FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE #1: Thu Feb 28 12:22:38 CST 2008 7.0-RELEASE #ls -l /boot/kernel/kernel -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 9294687 Feb 28 12:22 /boot/kernel/kernel* Well, fudging around with uname's source shows that it's basically calling some sysctls, so maybe the question is, with what I have above, why do I still have: sysctl -a | grep kern.osre kern.osrelease: 6.2-RELEASE kern.osrevision: 199506 kern.osreldate: 602000 What about strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 6.2-RELEASE? Kris As I would expect, it returns nothing at all. Your problem makes no sense then :) The kern.osrelease returns a string compiled into the kernel (see conf/newvers.sh), so if it returns 6.2-RELEASE then that string must be present. Kris ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uname borked on ??-Release...
Your problem makes no sense then :) Up until now, you've told me a couple things I might not have already known :-D The kern.osrelease returns a string compiled into the kernel (see conf/newvers.sh), so if it returns 6.2-RELEASE then that string must be present. I'd like to think so, but, I don't. If you've feeling masochistic, you can see that evidence below. When does the sysctl get set? During boot, I assume? Is there any caching of sysctl data that might persist over a reboot? Even better, have I been [EMAIL PROTECTED] lol. Be the first time in forever, but I've griped and griped to my ISP about the security of their CPE, to no avail. Being as named is now crapping out (bad system call), I'm thinking I'll try a Windows solution (not that I'd consider using a Winbox here, but I may backup the data, wipe the disk, and try again) unless lightning strikes and I figure it out pretty soon. Fortunately, this isn't a mission-critical BIND server. I do need to get httpd/PHP back up, tho, because it's hard to print HTML invoices for February when you can't serve HTML ;-) The system's so unstable I'm not sure I wanna waste any more time fighting with it at this point. Kevin Kinsey #sysctl kern.bootfile kern.bootfile: /boot/kernel/kernel #strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep -i bsd freebsd6_ftruncate freebsd4_fhstatfs freebsd4_sendfile sysctl__security_bsd_children bsd_partition_le_dec bsd_partition_le_enc freebsd4_sigaction freebsd4_statfs freebsd6_lseek elf32_freebsd_fixup bsd_disklabel_le_dec elf32_freebsd_sysvec freebsd6_mmap freebsd6_pwrite freebsd6_truncate szfreebsd4_sigcode bsd_disklabel_le_enc freebsd4_fstatfs freebsd6_pread freebsd4_getfsstat freebsd4_sigreturn openbsd_poll FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD PseudoRAID FreeBSD ATA driver RAID FreeBSD check1 failed WARNING!! - Using FreeBSD PseudoRAID metadata FBSD [EMAIL PROTECTED] Warning: card matches multiple entries. Report to [EMAIL PROTECTED] FreeBSD Project /usr/src/sys/dev/isp/isp_freebsd.c Qlogic ISP Driver, FreeBSD Version %d.%d, Core Version %d.%d FreeBSD WaveLAN/IEEE node bsd_taste(%s,%s) BSD::labelsum g_bsd freebsd freebsd-swap freebsd-ufs freebsd-vinum freebsd-zfs security.bsd.suser_enabled BSD security policy /usr/src/sys/kern/sched_4bsd.c 4BSD FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: %d CPUs KAME-BSD 1.1 TrustedBSD audit controls FreeBSD Kernel Dump FreeBSD ELF32 freebsd4_sigreturn: eflags = 0x%x freebsd4_sigreturn: cs = 0x%x minidump FreeBSD/i386 Adaptec FreeBSD 4.0.0 Unix SCSI I2O HBA Driver 2FREEBSD LSI-LOGIC NULDEV0001 Copyright (c) 1992-2008 The FreeBSD Project. FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation. @(#)FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE #0: Tue Mar 4 07:26:00 CST 2008 FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE #0: Tue Mar 4 07:26:00 CST 2008 FreeBSD #strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep -i release|more module_release mmcbr_release_host_desc bus_release_resource_desc bus_generic_release_resource amr_releasecmd hptrr_ldm_release_vbus isa_dma_release gdt_mpr_release_event isp_mbox_release sctp_release_pr_sctp_chunk bus_release_resources an_release_resources pcib_release_msi xpt_release_ccb ed_release_resources mmcbus_release_bus_method_default aac_release_command hptrr_ldm_release_lock bus_generic_rl_release_resource pcib_release_msi_method_default sbrelease pci_release_msi_method_default fdc_release_resources xpt_release_devq msi_release pcib_release_msix_desc ahc_release_seeprom xpt_release_simq nlminfo_release_p hptrr_ldm_release_vdev mmcbus_release_bus_desc ata_pci_release_resource ahd_release_seeprom agp_release cam_periph_release scsi_reserve_release_unit linker_release_module msix_release ie_release_resources release_timer2 rman_release_resource isa_release_resource kbd_release mmcbr_release_host_method_default pcib_release_msi_desc vid_release ppb_release_bus pmap_release sleepq_release ex_release_resources cbb_release_resource fe_release_resource pcib_release_msix_method_default pci_release_msi_desc bus_release_resource mfi_release_command dpt_release_resources pcib_release_msix osrelease cam_release_devq e1000_release_nvm_generic sbrelease_locked bus_release_resource_method_default pci_release_msi_method cs_release_resources stg_release_resource softdep_releasefile resource_list_release e1000_release_nvm kse_release Invalid release of active persistent reservation RELEASE(06) RELEASE ELEMENT(06) RELEASE(10 RELEASE ELEMENT(10) LQIRetry for LQICRCI_LQ to release ACK already released dma memory Release ioctl lock twa_ioctl: RELEASE_LOCK: Lock not held! RELEASE_LOCK: Releasing lock! vendor=0x%04x product=0x%04x devclass=0x%02x devsubclass=0x%02x release=0x%04x sernum=%s vendor=0x%04x product=0x%04x devclass=0x%02x devsubclass=0x%02x release=0x%04x sernum=%s intclass=0x%02x intsubclass=0x%02x kse_release: called outside of threading. exiting Kernel release date osrelease Operating system release module_release: bad reference count resource_list_delete: resource has not been released resource_list_release: can't find
Re: Uname borked on ??-Release...
Kevin Kinsey wrote: Your problem makes no sense then :) Up until now, you've told me a couple things I might not have already known :-D The kern.osrelease returns a string compiled into the kernel (see conf/newvers.sh), so if it returns 6.2-RELEASE then that string must be present. I'd like to think so, but, I don't. If you've feeling masochistic, you can see that evidence below. When does the sysctl get set? The string is set at kernel compile time and the sysctl that points to it is read-only. During boot, I assume? Is there any caching of sysctl data that might persist over a reboot? Even better, have I been [EMAIL PROTECTED] lol. Be the first time in forever, but I've griped and griped to my ISP about the security of their CPE, to no avail. It is possible, I guess it makes more sense than anything else. Kris ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uname borked on ??-Release...
On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 14:40:56 -0600 Kevin Kinsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Being as named is now crapping out (bad system call), I'm thinking I'll try a Windows solution (not that I'd consider using a Winbox here, but I may backup the data, wipe the disk, and try again) unless lightning strikes and I figure it out pretty soon. Fortunately, this isn't a mission-critical BIND server. I do need to get httpd/PHP back up, tho, because it's hard to print HTML invoices for February when you can't serve HTML ;-) The system's so unstable I'm not sure I wanna waste any more time fighting with it at this point. I concur; when the time to diagnose and correct a problem exceeds the amount of time to simply start over, I would definitely choose to start over fresh. Besides getting a potentially more stable system, you will also effectively remove a lot of debris that you probably no longer need. I have been in the same situation a few times and it just seemed like a more logical action to take. -- Gerard [EMAIL PROTECTED] God must have loved calories, she made so many of them. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Uname borked on ??-Release...
Kevin Kinsey wrote:
Question: why is uname reporting the {wrong} build?
cd /usr/src
sudo make installkernel
--
Philip M. Gollucci ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
o:703.549.2050x206
Senior System Admin - Riderway, Inc.
http://riderway.com / http://ridecharge.com
1024D/EC88A0BF 0DE5 C55C 6BF3 B235 2DAB B89E 1324 9B4F EC88 A0BF
Work like you don't need the money,
love like you'll never get hurt,
and dance like nobody's watching.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uname borked on ??-Release...
Kevin Kinsey wrote: Hello, Been bashing myself on the head for a few days, so I'm looking for a little help. If you've a big stick, read on (and apologies if poor formatting, I'm using an unfamiliar keyboard, unfamiliar mailer, and I'm not even sure if this system is running FreeBSD anymore :-D ) I get the following from uname -a: FreeBSD archangel.daleco.biz 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #6: Sat Jun 2 09:22:50 CDT 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: /usr/obj/backup/src/sys/GENERIC i386 However, I rebuilt world, more or less without issues, twice in February with RELENG_6 in the supfile. This didn't change uname's output, and that worried me a bit. So, to make matters bette^H^H^H^Hadder, I csup'ped to RELENG_7_0 the day after it was release, read /usr/src/UPDATING, and the webpage detailing the upgrade, and did another buildworld/kernel cycle. Now I have no idea if I'm on 6 or 7 (seems like 7, but many ports issues, and I've rebuilt them all), and it's just becoming a major PITA. You didnt succeed in installing the new kernel. 'make installkernel' is the step in which this occurs. Kris ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uname borked on ??-Release...
Kris Kennaway wrote: Kevin Kinsey wrote: snip I get the following from uname -a: FreeBSD archangel.daleco.biz 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #6: Sat Jun 2 09:22:50 CDT 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: /usr/obj/backup/src/sys/GENERIC i386 However, I rebuilt world, more or less without issues, twice in February with RELENG_6 in the supfile. This didn't change uname's output, and that worried me a bit. So, to make matters bette^H^H^H^Hadder, I csup'ped to RELENG_7_0 the day after it was released, read /usr/src/UPDATING, and the webpage detailing the upgrade, and did another buildworld/kernel cycle. Now I have no idea if I'm on 6 or 7 (seems like 7, but many ports issues, and I've rebuilt them all), and it's just becoming a major PITA. You didnt succeed in installing the new kernel. 'make installkernel' is the step in which this occurs. Kris Thank you and Phillip for answering my post. However, I've done this 3 times now, and I don't skip that step. There have been no errors in the process, either. AAMOF, in response to Phillip's mail, I just did it again, as you can see (z* is to omit snipping): ll /boot/kernel/z* -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 712006 Mar 3 15:16 /boot/kernel/zfs.ko* -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 3471592 Mar 3 15:16 /boot/kernel/zfs.ko.symbols* -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel38175 Mar 3 15:16 /boot/kernel/zlib.ko* -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel58834 Mar 3 15:16 /boot/kernel/zlib.ko.symbols* I've rebooted the system, and I'm still being told I'm running 6.2 by uname. In addition, pkg_add thinks I should be looking for 6-latest packages instead of 7, and the list of annoyances continues. And, hmm, symbols? I'm guessing that knob is ON in FBSD7? Once again, proof that something's wrong, as I didn't build debugging kernels in FBSD6 ... so I'm thinking this is a 7 kernel? It just doesn't make sense to me. It *is* a Monday, after all. If installkernel didn't succeed, shouldn't there be any other evidence? Could skipping a mergemaster at some point have this effect? (I don't *always* do that, unless I'm making a pretty big move, and the first build cycle was production code IIRC) What about issues with newvers.sh (or whatever it is?) Any other think-outside-the-box stuff? What could cause an installkernel operation to fail but appear to succeed? KDK -- I just rewrote my .sig. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uname borked on ??-Release...
Kevin Kinsey wrote: Kris Kennaway wrote: Kevin Kinsey wrote: snip I get the following from uname -a: FreeBSD archangel.daleco.biz 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #6: Sat Jun 2 09:22:50 CDT 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: /usr/obj/backup/src/sys/GENERIC i386 However, I rebuilt world, more or less without issues, twice in February with RELENG_6 in the supfile. This didn't change uname's output, and that worried me a bit. So, to make matters bette^H^H^H^Hadder, I csup'ped to RELENG_7_0 the day after it was released, read /usr/src/UPDATING, and the webpage detailing the upgrade, and did another buildworld/kernel cycle. Now I have no idea if I'm on 6 or 7 (seems like 7, but many ports issues, and I've rebuilt them all), and it's just becoming a major PITA. You didnt succeed in installing the new kernel. 'make installkernel' is the step in which this occurs. Kris Thank you and Phillip for answering my post. However, I've done this 3 times now, and I don't skip that step. There have been no errors in the process, either. AAMOF, in response to Phillip's mail, I just did it again, as you can see (z* is to omit snipping): ll /boot/kernel/z* -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 712006 Mar 3 15:16 /boot/kernel/zfs.ko* -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 3471592 Mar 3 15:16 /boot/kernel/zfs.ko.symbols* -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel38175 Mar 3 15:16 /boot/kernel/zlib.ko* -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel58834 Mar 3 15:16 /boot/kernel/zlib.ko.symbols* I've rebooted the system, and I'm still being told I'm running 6.2 by uname. In addition, pkg_add thinks I should be looking for 6-latest packages instead of 7, and the list of annoyances continues. And, hmm, symbols? I'm guessing that knob is ON in FBSD7? Once again, proof that something's wrong, as I didn't build debugging kernels in FBSD6 ... so I'm thinking this is a 7 kernel? It just doesn't make sense to me. It *is* a Monday, after all. If installkernel didn't succeed, shouldn't there be any other evidence? Could skipping a mergemaster at some point have this effect? (I don't *always* do that, unless I'm making a pretty big move, and the first build cycle was production code IIRC) What about issues with newvers.sh (or whatever it is?) Any other think-outside-the-box stuff? What could cause an installkernel operation to fail but appear to succeed? Possibly you have 6.x sources still. Or you are not actually booting /boot/kernel/kernel but some other kernel. Check sysctl kern.bootfile. You can also do strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 7.0-RELEASE to verify the kernel version string. Kris ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uname borked on ??-Release...
Kris Kennaway wrote: snip I get the following from uname -a: FreeBSD archangel.daleco.biz 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #6: Sat Jun 2 09:22:50 CDT 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: /usr/obj/backup/src/sys/GENERIC i386 However, I rebuilt world, more or less without issues, twice in February with RELENG_6 in the supfile. This didn't change uname's output, and that worried me a bit. So, to make matters bette^H^H^H^Hadder, I csup'ped to RELENG_7_0 the day after it was released, read /usr/src/UPDATING, and the webpage detailing the upgrade, and did another buildworld/kernel cycle. Now I have no idea if I'm on 6 or 7 (seems like 7, but many ports issues, and I've rebuilt them all), and it's just becoming a major PITA. You didnt succeed in installing the new kernel. 'make installkernel' is the step in which this occurs. Thank you and Phillip for answering my post. However, I've done this 3 times now, and I don't skip that step. There have been no errors in the process, either. I've rebooted the system, and I'm still being told I'm running 6.2 by uname. In addition, pkg_add thinks I should be looking for 6-latest packages instead of 7, and the list of annoyances continues. And, hmm, symbols? I'm guessing that knob is ON in FBSD7? Once again, proof that something's wrong, as I didn't build debugging kernels in FBSD6 ... so I'm thinking this is a 7 kernel? It just doesn't make sense to me. It *is* a Monday, after all. If installkernel didn't succeed, shouldn't there be any other evidence? Could skipping a mergemaster at some point have this effect? Possibly you have 6.x sources still. Or you are not actually booting /boot/kernel/kernel but some other kernel. Check sysctl kern.bootfile. You can also do strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 7.0-RELEASE to verify the kernel version string. #sysctl kern.bootfile kern.bootfile: /boot/kernel/kernel #strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 0-RELEASE @(#)FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE #1: Thu Feb 28 12:22:38 CST 2008 FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE #1: Thu Feb 28 12:22:38 CST 2008 7.0-RELEASE #ls -l /boot/kernel/kernel -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 9294687 Feb 28 12:22 /boot/kernel/kernel* Well, fudging around with uname's source shows that it's basically calling some sysctls, so maybe the question is, with what I have above, why do I still have: sysctl -a | grep kern.osre kern.osrelease: 6.2-RELEASE kern.osrevision: 199506 kern.osreldate: 602000 ?? Thanks in advance, Kevin Kinsey ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname question after update
On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 10:37:19AM -0800, Jay Chandler wrote: I have two boxes I've updated so far to 6.2. uname -a returns two different strings: FreeBSD box1.mydomain.com 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #0: Fri Jan 12 20:01:29 PST 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP i386 FreeBSD box2.mydomain.com 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #4: Sat Jan 13 15:40:40 PST 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP i386 What does the #0 / #4 mean? The number of times you have recompiled your kernel. Kris pgplfEQ9ZsDJ6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: uname question after update
Kris Kennaway wrote: On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 10:37:19AM -0800, Jay Chandler wrote: I have two boxes I've updated so far to 6.2. uname -a returns two different strings: FreeBSD box1.mydomain.com 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #0: Fri Jan 12 20:01:29 PST 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP i386 FreeBSD box2.mydomain.com 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #4: Sat Jan 13 15:40:40 PST 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP i386 What does the #0 / #4 mean? The number of times you have recompiled your kernel. Kris Thank you, Kris. *smacks forehead* Monday morning indeed... -- Jay Chandler Network Administrator, Chapman University 714.628.7249 / [EMAIL PROTECTED] Today's Excuse: emissions from GSM-phones ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname question after update
On Jan 15, 2007, at 10:37 AM, Jay Chandler wrote: FreeBSD box1.mydomain.com 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #0: Fri Jan 12 20:01:29 PST 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/ src/sys/SMP i386 FreeBSD box2.mydomain.com 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #4: Sat Jan 13 15:40:40 PST 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/ sys/SMP i386 What does the #0 / #4 mean? The number of times you have rebuilt the kernel. (This number gets reset when the OS version gets bumped, I believe.) -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname question after update
Chuck Swiger wrote: On Jan 15, 2007, at 10:37 AM, Jay Chandler wrote: FreeBSD box1.mydomain.com 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #0: Fri Jan 12 20:01:29 PST 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP i386 FreeBSD box2.mydomain.com 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #4: Sat Jan 13 15:40:40 PST 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP i386 What does the #0 / #4 mean? The number of times you have rebuilt the kernel. (This number gets reset when the OS version gets bumped, I believe.) ---Chuck Hmm.. that's a new 'feature'. Can that be disabled in any way? -Garrett ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname question after update
On 1/15/07, Garrett Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chuck Swiger wrote: On Jan 15, 2007, at 10:37 AM, Jay Chandler wrote: FreeBSD box1.mydomain.com 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #0: Fri Jan 12 20:01:29 PST 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP i386 FreeBSD box2.mydomain.com 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #4: Sat Jan 13 15:40:40 PST 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP i386 What does the #0 / #4 mean? The number of times you have rebuilt the kernel. (This number gets reset when the OS version gets bumped, I believe.) ---Chuck Hmm.. that's a new 'feature'. Can that be disabled in any way? -Garrett ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] It is not new. -- The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has occurred. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname question after update
On Monday 15 January 2007 21:37, Jay Chandler wrote: I have two boxes I've updated so far to 6.2. uname -a returns two different strings: FreeBSD box1.mydomain.com 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #0: Fri Jan 12 20:01:29 PST 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP i386 FreeBSD box2.mydomain.com 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #4: Sat Jan 13 15:40:40 PST 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP i386 What does the #0 / #4 mean? how many times kernel 'SMP' was compiled on this box. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname question after update
On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 11:43:52AM -0800, Garrett Cooper wrote: [...] Hmm.. that's a new 'feature'. Can that be disabled in any way? -Garrett That's not new, it's been around for more than a decade. You can `disable' it by cleaning out the kernel build directory prior to building a new kernel. -- Jonathan Chen [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- When you don't know what you are doing, do it neatly. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname question after update
On Jan 15, 2007, at 11:43 AM, Garrett Cooper wrote: The number of times you have rebuilt the kernel. (This number gets reset when the OS version gets bumped, I believe.) ---Chuck Hmm.. that's a new 'feature'. Can that be disabled in any way? This feature, whatever you might think of it, isn't new. :-) But yes, it could be disabled; see /usr/src/sys/conf/newvers.sh and the number kept in /usr/obj/usr/src/include/version. Delete /usr/obj/ usr/src/include/version between kernel recompiles and you will always get a version # of 0. -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname question after update
Jonathan Chen wrote: On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 11:43:52AM -0800, Garrett Cooper wrote: [...] Hmm.. that's a new 'feature'. Can that be disabled in any way? -Garrett That's not new, it's been around for more than a decade. You can `disable' it by cleaning out the kernel build directory prior to building a new kernel. Oh, duh. I didn't realize that that occurred every time I cleaned up prior to a kernel compile . Thanks! -Garrett ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname question after update
On 15 янв. 2007, at 21:43, Garrett Cooper wrote: Chuck Swiger wrote: On Jan 15, 2007, at 10:37 AM, Jay Chandler wrote: FreeBSD box1.mydomain.com 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #0: Fri Jan 12 20:01:29 PST 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/ src/sys/SMP i386 FreeBSD box2.mydomain.com 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #4: Sat Jan 13 15:40:40 PST 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/ src/sys/SMP i386 What does the #0 / #4 mean? The number of times you have rebuilt the kernel. (This number gets reset when the OS version gets bumped, I believe.) ---Chuck Hmm.. that's a new 'feature'. Can that be disabled in any way? This is not a 'new' feature. This was so for very long time. You can also reset the number by cleaning out /usr/obj directory. Version file vers.c is generated by src/sys/conf/newvers.sh script. You can hack this script for it not to increase kernel number. -- AIM-UANIC | AIM-RIPE +-[ FreeBSD ]-+ Alexander Mogilny | The Power to Serve! | [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: uname question after update
Chuck Swiger wrote: On Jan 15, 2007, at 11:43 AM, Garrett Cooper wrote: The number of times you have rebuilt the kernel. (This number gets reset when the OS version gets bumped, I believe.) ---Chuck Hmm.. that's a new 'feature'. Can that be disabled in any way? This feature, whatever you might think of it, isn't new. :-) But yes, it could be disabled; see /usr/src/sys/conf/newvers.sh and the number kept in /usr/obj/usr/src/include/version. Delete /usr/obj/usr/src/include/version between kernel recompiles and you will always get a version # of 0. ---Chuck Oh, wait. I thought that the 2 version strings were concatenated, but after looking at the original post the guy noted that uname -a was invoked on 2 different machines. Duh. -Garrett ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname -a output does not change after kernel upgrade
Used the default email when sending this message and therefore it did not reached [EMAIL PROTECTED] Original Message Subject: Re: uname -a output does not change after kernel upgrade Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 00:08:45 +0300 From: Jurgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Daniel Gerzo [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Daniel Gerzo wrote: How can I now which kernel is loaded? sysctl -a | grep kernel OK, I have new userland and old kernel. Those command proves that. # sysctl -a | grep kernel kern.bootfile: /boot/kernel/kernel kern.module_path: /boot/kernel;/boot/modules # sysctl -a | grep kern.version kern.version: FreeBSD 5.3-RELEASE #1: Fri Apr 29 23:04:18 EEST 2005 I remembered that I had created /boot.config file with following content, but now when I checked it, ir was not there. --- cat /boot.config --- 1:ad(6,a)/boot/loader this doesn't have anything with kernel config I think. actually, I know only one way how to implicitly set the kernel boot file. One can do so by adding line kernel=path/to/kernel into /boot/loader.conf I have to sata disks ad4 and ad6 and I created /boot.config to boot from ad6 instedad of ad4. BTW I'm not quite sure about those parameters in that string 1:ad(6,a)/boot/loader. Is it better that I start new conversation with new Subject and describe how I got all this mess? That's up to you. Personally I don't think it is needed. You should firstly try to build a new kernel AND install it. If you are using your own kernel config file, you should add KERNCONF=CONFIGNAME to the make (build|install)kernel command. I have built and installed the new kernel. I added KERNCONF=CONFIGNAME to /etc/make.conf. There is new kernel and modules in # ls -la /boot/kernel/kernel -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 3328239 May 21 18:45 /boot/kernel/kernel Here is some file information and gmirror configuration: - # df Filesystem 1K-blocksUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/mirror/gm0s1a253734 5496017847624%/ devfs 1 1 0 100%/dev /dev/mirror/gm0s1d253678 58233326 0%/tmp /dev/mirror/gm0s1f 135891276 1911080 123108894 2%/usr /dev/mirror/gm0s1e 50777034 63142 46651730 0%/var # gmirror list Geom name: gm0s1 State: DEGRADED Components: 2 Balance: round-robin Slice: 4096 Flags: NONE SyncID: 5 ID: 4196295632 Providers: 1. Name: mirror/gm0s1 Mediasize: 200046518272 (186G) Sectorsize: 512 Mode: r4w4e1 Consumers: 1. Name: ad6s1 Mediasize: 200046518784 (186G) Sectorsize: 512 Mode: r4w4e2 State: ACTIVE Priority: 0 Flags: DIRTY SyncID: 5 ID: 3302562170 # gmirror status NameStatus Components mirror/gm0s1 DEGRADED ad6s1 - --- And a bit from dmesg --- ad4: 190782MB ST3200826AS/3.01 [387621/16/63] at ata2-master SATA150 ad6: 190782MB ST3200826AS/3.01 [387621/16/63] at ata3-master SATA150 GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Tasting fd0. GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Tasting ad4. GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Tasting ad6. GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Tasting ad4s1. magic: GEOM::MIRROR version: 1 name: gm0s1 mid: 4196295632 did: 3946315095 all: 2 syncid: 3 priority: 0 slice: 4096 balance: round-robin mediasize: 200046518272 sectorsize: 512 syncoffset: 0 mflags: NONE dflags: NONE hcprovider: MD5 hash: 4efc7c98de71a4d10b891fd4bc4e2c80 GEOM_MIRROR[1]: Creating device gm0s1 (id=4196295632). GEOM_MIRROR[0]: Device gm0s1 created (id=4196295632). GEOM_MIRROR[1]: Adding disk ad4s1 to gm0s1. GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Adding disk ad4s1. GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Disk ad4s1 connected. GEOM_MIRROR[1]: Disk ad4s1 state changed from NONE to NEW (device gm0s1). GEOM_MIRROR[0]: Device gm0s1: provider ad4s1 detected. GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Tasting ad6s1. magic: GEOM::MIRROR version: 1 name: gm0s1 mid: 4196295632 did: 3302562170 all: 2 syncid: 5 priority: 0 slice: 4096 balance: round-robin mediasize: 200046518272 sectorsize: 512 syncoffset: 0 mflags: NONE dflags: NONE hcprovider: MD5 hash: 9be4ddc54abbe5e0221f020517cac964 GEOM_MIRROR[1]: Adding disk ad6s1 to gm0s1. GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Adding disk ad6s1. GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Disk ad6s1 connected. GEOM_MIRROR[1]: Disk ad6s1 state changed from NONE to NEW (device gm0s1). GEOM_MIRROR[0]: Device gm0s1: provider ad6s1 detected. GEOM_MIRROR[1]: Device gm0s1 state changed from STARTING to RUNNING. GEOM_MIRROR[1]: Disk ad6s1 state changed from NEW to ACTIVE (device gm0s1). GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Access ad6s1 r0w1e1 = 0 GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Tasting ad4s1a. GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Access ad6s1 r0w-1e-1 = 0 GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Metadata on ad6s1 updated. GEOM_MIRROR[0]: Device gm0s1: provider ad6s1 activated. GEOM_MIRROR[1]: Disk ad4s1 state changed from NEW to SYNCHRONIZING (device gm0s1). GEOM_MIRROR[0]: Device gm0s1: provider mirror/gm0s1 launched. GEOM_MIRROR[0]: Device gm0s1: rebuilding provider ad4s1
Re: uname -a output does not change after kernel upgrade
I have fixed the problem. 1) Removed the first SATA disk (ad4) and booted from ad6. Then I got correct kernel and userland (5.4-STABLE) 2) Swapped SATA cables to boot from ad6 (it became ad4). --- # uname -a FreeBSD server.example.com 5.4-STABLE FreeBSD 5.4-STABLE #2: Sat May 21 18:45:32 EEST 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/i386/compile/SERVER i386 # gmirror list Geom name: gm0s1 State: DEGRADED Components: 2 Balance: round-robin Slice: 4096 Flags: NONE GenID: 0 SyncID: 8 ID: 4196295632 Providers: 1. Name: mirror/gm0s1 Mediasize: 200046518272 (186G) Sectorsize: 512 Mode: r5w4e1 Consumers: 1. Name: ad4s1 Mediasize: 200046518784 (186G) Sectorsize: 512 Mode: r1w1e1 State: ACTIVE Priority: 0 Flags: DIRTY GenID: 0 SyncID: 8 ID: 3302562170 2. Name: ad6s1 Mediasize: 200046518784 (186G) Sectorsize: 512 Mode: r1w1e1 State: SYNCHRONIZING Priority: 0 Flags: DIRTY, SYNCHRONIZING GenID: 0 SyncID: 8 Synchronized: 2% ID: 3946315095 # gmirror status NameStatus Components mirror/gm0s1 DEGRADED ad4s1 ad6s1 (2%) --- Thank you for help! Jurgis freebsd-questions wrote: Used the default email when sending this message and therefore it did not reached [EMAIL PROTECTED] Original Message Subject: Re: uname -a output does not change after kernel upgrade Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 00:08:45 +0300 From: Jurgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Daniel Gerzo [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Daniel Gerzo wrote: How can I now which kernel is loaded? sysctl -a | grep kernel OK, I have new userland and old kernel. Those command proves that. # sysctl -a | grep kernel kern.bootfile: /boot/kernel/kernel kern.module_path: /boot/kernel;/boot/modules # sysctl -a | grep kern.version kern.version: FreeBSD 5.3-RELEASE #1: Fri Apr 29 23:04:18 EEST 2005 I remembered that I had created /boot.config file with following content, but now when I checked it, ir was not there. --- cat /boot.config --- 1:ad(6,a)/boot/loader this doesn't have anything with kernel config I think. actually, I know only one way how to implicitly set the kernel boot file. One can do so by adding line kernel=path/to/kernel into /boot/loader.conf I have to sata disks ad4 and ad6 and I created /boot.config to boot from ad6 instedad of ad4. BTW I'm not quite sure about those parameters in that string 1:ad(6,a)/boot/loader. Is it better that I start new conversation with new Subject and describe how I got all this mess? That's up to you. Personally I don't think it is needed. You should firstly try to build a new kernel AND install it. If you are using your own kernel config file, you should add KERNCONF=CONFIGNAME to the make (build|install)kernel command. I have built and installed the new kernel. I added KERNCONF=CONFIGNAME to /etc/make.conf. There is new kernel and modules in # ls -la /boot/kernel/kernel -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 3328239 May 21 18:45 /boot/kernel/kernel Here is some file information and gmirror configuration: - # df Filesystem 1K-blocksUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/mirror/gm0s1a253734 5496017847624%/ devfs 1 1 0 100%/dev /dev/mirror/gm0s1d253678 58233326 0%/tmp /dev/mirror/gm0s1f 135891276 1911080 123108894 2%/usr /dev/mirror/gm0s1e 50777034 63142 46651730 0%/var # gmirror list Geom name: gm0s1 State: DEGRADED Components: 2 Balance: round-robin Slice: 4096 Flags: NONE SyncID: 5 ID: 4196295632 Providers: 1. Name: mirror/gm0s1 Mediasize: 200046518272 (186G) Sectorsize: 512 Mode: r4w4e1 Consumers: 1. Name: ad6s1 Mediasize: 200046518784 (186G) Sectorsize: 512 Mode: r4w4e2 State: ACTIVE Priority: 0 Flags: DIRTY SyncID: 5 ID: 3302562170 # gmirror status NameStatus Components mirror/gm0s1 DEGRADED ad6s1 - --- And a bit from dmesg --- ad4: 190782MB ST3200826AS/3.01 [387621/16/63] at ata2-master SATA150 ad6: 190782MB ST3200826AS/3.01 [387621/16/63] at ata3-master SATA150 GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Tasting fd0. GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Tasting ad4. GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Tasting ad6. GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Tasting ad4s1. magic: GEOM::MIRROR version: 1 name: gm0s1 mid: 4196295632 did: 3946315095 all: 2 syncid: 3 priority: 0 slice: 4096 balance: round-robin mediasize: 200046518272 sectorsize: 512 syncoffset: 0 mflags: NONE dflags: NONE hcprovider: MD5 hash: 4efc7c98de71a4d10b891fd4bc4e2c80 GEOM_MIRROR[1]: Creating device gm0s1 (id=4196295632). GEOM_MIRROR[0]: Device gm0s1 created (id=4196295632). GEOM_MIRROR[1]: Adding disk ad4s1 to gm0s1. GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Adding disk ad4s1. GEOM_MIRROR[2]: Disk ad4s1 connected. GEOM_MIRROR[1]: Disk ad4s1 state changed from NONE to NEW (device gm0s1). GEOM_MIRROR[0]: Device
Re: uname -a output does not change after kernel upgrade
Hi freebsd-questions, Saturday, May 21, 2005, 8:41:19 PM, you wrote about: Hi, I have upgraded FreeBSD server from 5.3-RELEASE to 5.4-STABLE (tag=RELENG_5) but when I run 'uname -a' it displays the same message as before: --- server-98 uname -a FreeBSD server.example.com 5.3-RELEASE FreeBSD 5.3-RELEASE #1: Fri Apr 29 23:04:18 EEST 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/i386/compile/SERVER i386 --- What I did: # cvsup -g -L 2 stable-supfile # cd /usr/src # make buildworld # make buildkernel # make installkernel ^^ Are you really sure you have done this step? maybe you have somewhere like /boot/loader.conf setuped, that the default boot kernel is not located at /boot/kernel? It seems you have booted the old kernel. # shutdown -r now # (stopped apache, postfix and other daemons) # cd /usr/src (I did not run 'mergemaster -p' here, could it be the cause of that problem?) # make installworld # mergemaster --- cat /etc/make.conf --- PERL_VER=5.8.6 PERL_VERSION=5.8.6 CPUTYPE=i686 NO_X=true KERNCONF=SERVER -- After that I also rebuilt the kernel by # cd /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/ # config SERVER # cd ../../compile/SERVER # make depend # make # make install But nothing changed. Any ideas? Jurgis -- Best Regards, DanGer, ICQ: 261701668 | e-mail protecting at: http://www.2pu.net/ http://danger.rulez.sk | proxy list at:http://www.proxy-web.com/ | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve! [ Gone With The Wind...Years Ago. ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname -a output does not change after kernel upgrade
Daniel, How can I now which kernel is loaded? I'm actually struggling with RAID-1 and gmirror issue that I wanted to ask when 'uname -a' issue is fixed. Here is --- cat /boot/loader.conf -- geom_mirror_load=YES kern.geom.mirror.debug=2 kern.geom.mirror.timeout=0 I remembered that I had created /boot.config file with following content, but now when I checked it, ir was not there. --- cat /boot.config --- 1:ad(6,a)/boot/loader It looks like you ar right and I realy have booted the old kernel. Because when I wanted to remove second hdd from mirror I got such a result: server# gmirror forget /dev/ad4s1 Userland and kernel parts are out of sync. Is it better that I start new conversation with new Subject and describe how I got all this mess? It is connected with gmirror I'm using and the problem that I could not get it up and running properly. Thanks for help! Jurgis Daniel Gerzo wrote: # cd /usr/src # make buildworld # make buildkernel # make installkernel ^^ Are you really sure you have done this step? maybe you have somewhere like /boot/loader.conf setuped, that the default boot kernel is not located at /boot/kernel? It seems you have booted the old kernel. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname -a output does not change after kernel upgrade
Hello freebsd-questions, Saturday, May 21, 2005, 8:41:19 PM, you typed the following: Hi, I have upgraded FreeBSD server from 5.3-RELEASE to 5.4-STABLE (tag=RELENG_5) but when I run 'uname -a' it displays the same message as before: --- server-98 uname -a FreeBSD server.example.com 5.3-RELEASE FreeBSD 5.3-RELEASE #1: Fri Apr 29 23:04:18 EEST 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/i386/compile/SERVER i386 --- What I did: # cvsup -g -L 2 stable-supfile # cd /usr/src # make buildworld # make buildkernel # make installkernel # shutdown -r now # (stopped apache, postfix and other daemons) # cd /usr/src (I did not run 'mergemaster -p' here, could it be the cause of that problem?) # make installworld # mergemaster --- cat /etc/make.conf --- PERL_VER=5.8.6 PERL_VERSION=5.8.6 CPUTYPE=i686 NO_X=true KERNCONF=SERVER -- After that I also rebuilt the kernel by # cd /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/ # config SERVER # cd ../../compile/SERVER # make depend # make # make install another strike: did you rebooted after installing a new kernel? ;-) But nothing changed. -- Best Regards, DanGer, ICQ: 261701668 | e-mail protecting at: http://www.2pu.net/ http://danger.rulez.sk | proxy list at:http://www.proxy-web.com/ | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve! [ MASOCHIST (mas-oh-kist) noun: Windows user. ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname -a output does not change after kernel upgrade
Yes, I rebooted but uname -a showed that it was the old kernel. I was not sure about it and proceeded with userland. Daniel Gerzo wrote: After that I also rebuilt the kernel by # cd /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/ # config SERVER # cd ../../compile/SERVER # make depend # make # make install another strike: did you rebooted after installing a new kernel? ;-) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: uname -v shows no difference after buildkernel and installkernel etc
On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:32:19 +1000, August Simonelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 22:11:47 -0500, Donald J. O'Neill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: August, I've been following this thread today. It's very interesting. It appears to me, you mentioned your mistake in your first post. did a mergemaster and didn't accept any changes (it was a fresh system) rebooted and logged in Without accepting those changes, you kept what you had. It wasn't a This is what is confusing me about mergemaster. Isn't it just for comparing and deciding which config files one wants kept? That is, if I have a modifed pkgtools.conf or rc.conf or whatever I should be able to merge it up with the newly rebuilt system (which would have fresh versions of such files). Or I could just tell it to keep my old config files cause they have all my modifications. I do get that the new conf files may have changes we need, so merging is better. Now, why am i babbling about this? Cause when doing the mergemaster on this system my fingers got really fat and I'm not sure how I answered. Maybe this lead to my problem. Would that cause a) the wrong kernel to be installed or just b) the wrong kernel to be reported (ie did i screw up the update of the file that stores the kernel details?). Also, just for clarification, it WAS a fresh system, so, in theory, mergemaster would not have had any changes to make (except if it updates some text string somwhere that is the basis for the uname -v, as in my and b options above). Sorry if this is painfully ignorant; I'm learning slowly! :-) fresh system and needed the information from mergemaster. If you didn't clear out /usr/obj, it might be possible to rerun mergemaster and accept the changes. I would keep MYCUSTOM somewhere other than /root/kernels. Personally, I use /home/save4rebuild, and keep a copy of everything else I think I might need. I've had to reinstall /, /var, /tmp, /usr, but I always manage to keep /home safe. This seems to be what most people are saying ... and i think it makes more sense. I have officially adopted save4rebuild for my systems! :-) back to me rebuild (celeron 433 is a bit slw). well, the rebuild has worked fine. i think my symlinking was indeed messed up. i followed everyone's advice and didn't use a symlink; I kept my custom config in the same location as GENERIC and just copied it elsewhere for backup purposes. one last question for those tracking the this thread: can i now delete the custom kernel config file i created in /usr/src/sys/i386/src/ ? or does the system need it there to boot? i would guess not, more that the file is only used in building and installing ... thanks again for all the good advice ... august ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: uname -v shows no difference after buildkernel and installkernel etc
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 04:40:50PM +1000, August Simonelli wrote: snip well, the rebuild has worked fine. i think my symlinking was indeed messed up. i followed everyone's advice and didn't use a symlink; I kept my custom config in the same location as GENERIC and just copied it elsewhere for backup purposes. one last question for those tracking the this thread: can i now delete the custom kernel config file i created in /usr/src/sys/i386/src/ ? or does the system need it there to boot? i would guess not, more that the file is only used in building and installing ... thanks again for all the good advice ... august Yes, you can safely delete the custom kernel config file if you want to. It is only used when the kernel is being built. Though, you'd do well to keep a copy of it somewhere for later reference, and it sounds as if you have already made a backup copy somewhere anyway. Nathan -- PGP Public Key: pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xD8527E49 pgpKQ0kTcQHif.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Re: uname -v shows no difference after buildkernel and installkernel etc
On 2004-08-25 16:40, August Simonelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: well, the rebuild has worked fine. i think my symlinking was indeed messed up. i followed everyone's advice and didn't use a symlink; I kept my custom config in the same location as GENERIC and just copied it elsewhere for backup purposes. I usually keep my kernel configs in another location and symlink the one that is going to be used at build time under `/usr/src/sys/i386/conf'. Something like this: $ ( cd /usr/src/sys/i386/conf ; /bin/ls -lF CELERON SOLERO ) lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 31 May 14 2003 CELERON@ - /a/kernconf/CELERON lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 30 Aug 14 01:49 SOLERO@ - /a/kernconf/SOLERO one last question for those tracking the this thread: can i now delete the custom kernel config file i created in /usr/src/sys/i386/src/ ? or does the system need it there to boot? i would guess not, more that the file is only used in building and installing ... thanks again for all the good advice ... The kernel config file is used only at compile time, to build the new kernel image. You don't need to keep it if you don't want to rebuild a kernel with the same options. I would probably keep it around just in case I need to rebuild a kernel with the same set of options though. After all, it's just a text file: $ ls -ld /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/GENERIC -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel - 10250 Aug 13 22:08 /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/GENERIC The extra time it's going to take to copy GENERIC, edit and recreate a custom config file isn't worth the trouble IMHO just to save 10-20 KB of disk space. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname -v shows no difference after buildkernel and installkernel etc
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 08:20:51PM +1000, August Simonelli wrote: Hi all, I recently did the following: installed FreeBSD 5.2.1 from the iso cvsup'd the source (using tag=RELENG_5_2) followed section 19 of the handbook followed section 8 for the kernel rebuild and did a custom kernel (placing in /root/kernels and linking it, as per section 8.3) everything went well did a mergmaster and didn't accept any changes (it was a fresh system) rebooted and logged in did uname -v and got the same output as before all the above (Feb build date (5.2.1, right?), reference to GENERIC kernel not my custom kernel - my search of the list archives tells me it should show the local machine and a recent date in this output) Do I need to update somewhere to tell the system to boot the new kernel? If so, I totally missed that in the handbook (whoops). This also leads me to ask how one best confirms the system has changed? Thanks in advance for any help, August What does your symlink look like? So you put the newly built kernel in /root/kernels, then did something like?: # ln -s /root/kernels/mykernel /boot/kernel/kernel Nathan -- PGP Public Key: pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xD8527E49 pgpFzABVfReyJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: uname -v shows no difference after buildkernel and installkernel etc
August What does your symlink look like? So you put the newly built kernel in /root/kernels, then did something like?: # ln -s /root/kernels/mykernel /boot/kernel/kernel I followed the example in 8.3: # cd /usr/src/sys/i386/conf # mkdir /root/kernels # cp GENERIC /root/kernels/MYKERNEL # ln -s /root/kernels/MYKERNEL so now I have the following symlink: /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/MYCUSTOM - /root/kernels/MYCUSTOM and I built and installed with that as my KERNCONF value. I do still have GENERIC sitting in that directory. Does it use GENERIC first by default? Thanks again, august ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname -v shows no difference after buildkernel and installkernel etc
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 08:32:48AM +1000, August Simonelli wrote: August What does your symlink look like? So you put the newly built kernel in /root/kernels, then did something like?: # ln -s /root/kernels/mykernel /boot/kernel/kernel I followed the example in 8.3: # cd /usr/src/sys/i386/conf # mkdir /root/kernels # cp GENERIC /root/kernels/MYKERNEL # ln -s /root/kernels/MYKERNEL so now I have the following symlink: /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/MYCUSTOM - /root/kernels/MYCUSTOM and I built and installed with that as my KERNCONF value. I do still have GENERIC sitting in that directory. Does it use GENERIC first by default? Thanks again, august I apologize, when you said: ... did a custom kernel (placing in /root/kernels ... I took it too literally, thinking that for some odd reason you had put the actual built (binary) kernel into /root/kernels and were symlinking from /boot/kernel to that directory, as opposed to simply putting the kernel config file there. However, is it just a typing mistake that you say you link to MYKERNEL, but you say the actual links points to MYCUSTOM? Also, what does an `ls -l /boot/kernel/kernel` reveal? Does the modification time coincide with the time you actually built your custom kernel? Nathan Side note - I once tried the advice to put custom kernel config files at a subdirectory of /root, but personally found this more confusing in the long run. In about 5 years of running FreeBSD and building custom kernels I have never deleted the entire /usr/src directory and subsequently realized I had blasted my only copy of a custom kernel config. I personally found it to be one more layer of indirection that hassled me from time to time, and it was one more thing I had to remember. If I were worried about the possibility of deleting my custom kernel config files accidentally while one day recursively removing /usr/src, then I would personally prefer to just copy that kernel config to some other location for safe keeping. It's just my personal preference. One of the things that is so distressing to me about certain GNU/Linux distros is all the levels of indirection and seeming complexity - symlinks pointing to symlinks and things of that nature. -- PGP Public Key: pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xD8527E49 pgpmAI2l9MNw5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: uname -v shows no difference after buildkernel and installkernel etc
I apologize, when you said: ... did a custom kernel (placing in /root/kernels ... I took it too literally, thinking that for some odd reason you had put the actual built (binary) kernel into /root/kernels and were symlinking from /boot/kernel to that directory, as opposed to simply putting the kernel config file there. However, is it just a typing mistake that you say you link to MYKERNEL, but you say the actual links points to Nah, just me being sloppy in my syntax; I got the names right (luckily) during the actual build (or did i ... interesting ...). MYCUSTOM? Also, what does an `ls -l /boot/kernel/kernel` reveal? Does the modification time coincide with the time you actually built your custom kernel? 94214 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 5940286 Feb 24 2004 /boot/kernel/kernel So it's the old one ... now, this is good, because on my other test system the kernel date is correct and uname -v is correct ... so, i've done something wrong and am gonna try it again ... i'm doing it at work and probably too distracted by my annoying users! :-) thanks for you help ... wish me luck on my second attempt! august ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname -v shows no difference after buildkernel and installkernel etc
August, I've been following this thread today. It's very interesting. It appears to me, you mentioned your mistake in your first post. did a mergemaster and didn't accept any changes (it was a fresh system) rebooted and logged in Without accepting those changes, you kept what you had. It wasn't a fresh system and needed the information from mergemaster. If you didn't clear out /usr/obj, it might be possible to rerun mergemaster and accept the changes. I would keep MYCUSTOM somewhere other than /root/kernels. Personally, I use /home/save4rebuild, and keep a copy of everything else I think I might need. I've had to reinstall /, /var, /tmp, /usr, but I always manage to keep /home safe. Don == On Tuesday 24 August 2004 08:08 pm, August Simonelli wrote: Does the modification time coincide with the time you actually built your custom kernel? 94214 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 5940286 Feb 24 2004 /boot/kernel/kernel So it's the old one ... now, this is good, because on my other test system the kernel date is correct and uname -v is correct ... so, i've done something wrong and am gonna try it again ... i'm doing it at work and probably too distracted by my annoying users! :-) thanks for you help ... wish me luck on my second attempt! august ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: uname -v shows no difference after buildkernel and installkernel etc
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 22:11:47 -0500, Donald J. O'Neill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: August, I've been following this thread today. It's very interesting. It appears to me, you mentioned your mistake in your first post. did a mergemaster and didn't accept any changes (it was a fresh system) rebooted and logged in Without accepting those changes, you kept what you had. It wasn't a This is what is confusing me about mergemaster. Isn't it just for comparing and deciding which config files one wants kept? That is, if I have a modifed pkgtools.conf or rc.conf or whatever I should be able to merge it up with the newly rebuilt system (which would have fresh versions of such files). Or I could just tell it to keep my old config files cause they have all my modifications. I do get that the new conf files may have changes we need, so merging is better. Now, why am i babbling about this? Cause when doing the mergemaster on this system my fingers got really fat and I'm not sure how I answered. Maybe this lead to my problem. Would that cause a) the wrong kernel to be installed or just b) the wrong kernel to be reported (ie did i screw up the update of the file that stores the kernel details?). Also, just for clarification, it WAS a fresh system, so, in theory, mergemaster would not have had any changes to make (except if it updates some text string somwhere that is the basis for the uname -v, as in my and b options above). Sorry if this is painfully ignorant; I'm learning slowly! :-) fresh system and needed the information from mergemaster. If you didn't clear out /usr/obj, it might be possible to rerun mergemaster and accept the changes. I would keep MYCUSTOM somewhere other than /root/kernels. Personally, I use /home/save4rebuild, and keep a copy of everything else I think I might need. I've had to reinstall /, /var, /tmp, /usr, but I always manage to keep /home safe. This seems to be what most people are saying ... and i think it makes more sense. I have officially adopted save4rebuild for my systems! :-) back to me rebuild (celeron 433 is a bit slw). august ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname -a was(Cvsup and RELENG_4 or RLENG_4_9)
On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 11:39:10AM -0500, Bob Collins wrote: This is a follow-up question regarding uname -a. After CVSup, making world, making a new kernel etc, when I run uname -a it reports 4.9-RELEASE #0. Should the #0 portion be a higher number? Also what exactly does that number represent? I assume an RC It represents the number of times you've built the kernel using the current sources. -- Jonathan Chen [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by - Douglas Adams ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname -a was(Cvsup and RELENG_4 or RLENG_4_9)
On Tue, Feb 3, 2004, Jonathan Chen clacked the keyboard to produce: On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 11:39:10AM -0500, Bob Collins wrote: This is a follow-up question regarding uname -a. After CVSup, making world, making a new kernel etc, when I run uname -a it reports 4.9-RELEASE #0. Should the #0 portion be a higher number? Also what exactly does that number represent? I assume an RC It represents the number of times you've built the kernel using the current sources. -- Jonathan Chen [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by - Douglas Adams Me too to your sig. Thank you for the clarification. This list and FBSD are truly amazing. Fast answers and lots of help, and I learn something new every day. Thanks all! -- Bob Play is the work of children. It's very serious stuff. And if it's properly structured in a developmental program, children can blossom. -Bob Keeshan aka `Captain Kangaroo' ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname weirdness after kernel/OS update
The following is my most recent email message to someone who was helping me with a very odd uname issue. I hope that this reporting of the final events (oh-god-pleaselet-this-be-done-and-over-with) helps someone else some day. The offer that I make at the end of my message is genuine. If a FreeBSD expert (Greg? *nudge*) wants the /boot files, they can have them. Jaime -- Forwarded message -- Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 15:05:07 -0500 (EST) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: T Kellers [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: compiled kernel file After lots of various ideas, including kernels compiled on different boxes (e.g. the one that you sent) nothing seemed to work. Then, I noticed that not everything in / was being listed when I typed ls at the boot manager. This is when I started getting creative. I used sysinstall's disk slice editor to put a new MBR onto the drive and removed /boot. The next attempt to boot refused to mount any of my SCSI drives and it showed a few files in / that were different than they should be. For example, /proc was missing, /homes (an older attempt to make home directories exist on /homes/students and /homes/staff left this directory behind) was back -- even though I thought that I removed it -- and /home was gone, and the most recent etc-*.tar.gz backup of /etc (which I made before the 12/23/03 cvsup) was missing. It was as if I suddenly took a trip backwards in time for this partition by at least a few months. My best guess is that someone had hidden the real / partition and put their own partition (or disk image?) in its place, using a compromised boot loader. This would explain why using ls at the boot loader produced a different list of files than ls at the single-user shell showed. It also explains why new kernels wouldn't load, making uname give bad results on a new kernel. It was reporting data about the kernel that the cracker had given it! I again removed /boot, /usr/src, and /usr/obj, just in case these were violated, too. I did a new cvsup, make buildworld, make buildkernel, make installkernel, and rebooted into single user mode. The / partition was the way I had left it, not the way it was when the symptoms were noticed. So I kept going and did a make installworld and a mergemaster and then rebooted again. Everything seems to be working well now. uname now says: zeus:jkikpoleuname -a FreeBSD zeus.cairodurham.org 4.9-STABLE FreeBSD 4.9-STABLE #0: Mon Dec 29 13:46:57 EST 2003 root@:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/ZEUS i386 I have changed my root password a few weeks ago. I just removed the toor password (in vipw, I replaced the cypher with a *). My next step is to change the password of any account in the wheel group. I honestly think that someone had broken into this box and made some really creative cracks. I'm not sure about back doors at this point. Using chkrootkit doesn't show anything out of place. (An occasional possible LKM trojan report, but its not consistent and various people claim that apache can cause false positives on that test.) If ANY of the above rings some bells for you, please let me know. Any advice on securing this box would be appreciated, too. Unfortunately, formatting the drive and reinstalling the OS is not an option at this time. :( Feel free to pass this report along to FreeBSD report along to any FreeBSD power-user that can make the OS better by reading this. I'd be happy to provide assorted files off the system (including any of the /boots that I still have) if they will help. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname weirdness after kernel/OS update
On Fri, 26 Dec 2003, Kent Stewart wrote: On Friday 26 December 2003 11:05 am, Jaime wrote: Are you sure that you are building and installing a kernel. That would be about the only thing that wouldn't update your boot message. I am completely certain. I've used make buildkernel KERNCONF=... and make installkernel KERNCONF=... as well as the older /usr/sbin/config method. An ls -l / shows a newer time stamp. Jaime ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname weirdness after kernel/OS update
On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 02:22:27PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 26 Dec 2003, Kent Stewart wrote: On Friday 26 December 2003 11:05 am, Jaime wrote: Are you sure that you are building and installing a kernel. That would be about the only thing that wouldn't update your boot message. I am completely certain. I've used make buildkernel KERNCONF=... and make installkernel KERNCONF=... as well as the older /usr/sbin/config method. An ls -l / shows a newer time stamp. And you did reboot as well, so as to actually use the new kernel? (Just asking since you didn't say explicitly that you had done that.) -- Insert your favourite quote here. Erik Trulsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname weirdness after kernel/OS update
On Fri, 26 Dec 2003, Erik Trulsson wrote: And you did reboot as well, so as to actually use the new kernel? Yes. (Just asking since you didn't say explicitly that you had done that.) Fair enough. We all would have felt pretty dumb if it was something that obvious and yet we didn't check. :) FWIW, I've been using the make-world process since 1997. The only other time that I've ever had a problem (including several years of updating the box in question) was when I had bad hardware. Jaime ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname weirdness after kernel/OS update
Did you do a make kernel KERNCONF=YOURKERNELFILE, too? I'm only asking because you mentioned make world, and while that rebuilds the OS, it doesn't make (or install) the kernel. I have to ask simple questions; the problem, if not simple, is flat-out weird. Tim Kellers CPE/NJIT On Friday 26 December 2003 02:40 pm, Jaime wrote: On Fri, 26 Dec 2003, Erik Trulsson wrote: And you did reboot as well, so as to actually use the new kernel? Yes. (Just asking since you didn't say explicitly that you had done that.) Fair enough. We all would have felt pretty dumb if it was something that obvious and yet we didn't check. :) FWIW, I've been using the make-world process since 1997. The only other time that I've ever had a problem (including several years of updating the box in question) was when I had bad hardware. Jaime ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname weirdness after kernel/OS update
On Fri, 26 Dec 2003, T Kellers wrote: Did you do a make kernel KERNCONF=YOURKERNELFILE, too? Yes. I followed the directions in the /usr/src/UPDATING file that I have followed at least 8 times previously and successfully on this very same server over the last few years. cvsup -g -L 2 stable-supfile (after editing) cd /usr/src make buildworld make buildkernel KERNCONF=ZEUS make installkernel KERNCONF=ZEUS reboot (single user) make installworld mergemaster reboot I have tried simple kernel recompiles since then. I am currently in the process of recompiling the entire OS via a third instance of the above procedure. I have to ask simple questions; the problem, if not simple, is flat-out weird. I understand. Its just frustrating. Let's start from the other end, though. From where does uname draw its data? With that information, I might be able to track down the problem. Jaime ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname weirdness after kernel/OS update
On Fri, 26 Dec 2003 15:11:20 -0500 (EST) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 26 Dec 2003, T Kellers wrote: Did you do a make kernel KERNCONF=YOURKERNELFILE, too? Yes. I followed the directions in the /usr/src/UPDATING file that I have followed at least 8 times previously and successfully on this very same server over the last few years. cvsup -g -L 2 stable-supfile (after editing) cd /usr/src make buildworld make buildkernel KERNCONF=ZEUS make installkernel KERNCONF=ZEUS reboot (single user) make installworld mergemaster reboot I have tried simple kernel recompiles since then. I am currently in the process of recompiling the entire OS via a third instance of the above procedure. I have to ask simple questions; the problem, if not simple, is flat-out weird. I understand. Its just frustrating. Let's start from the other end, though. From where does uname draw its data? By interogating sysctl's mibs. See uname(3). With that information, I might be able to track down the problem. Jaime ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- IOnut Unregistered ;) FreeBSD user ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname weirdness after kernel/OS update
On Fri, 26 Dec 2003, Tim Kellers wrote: I'm building world/kernel on a spare box right now to see if it shakes an idea or two loose. I'm also wondering if your /usr/src files are actually building a new world, too. Trying to think of what might break if you are running a STABLE world with a pre-release kernel. Top is the classic utility that breaks when your world and kernel don't match, but I'm not sure if that will happen if you don't cross version boundaries. Well, I've compiled with 4.9-RELEASE binaries and 4.9-STABLE (12/24/03) binaries and had no observable effects. Likewise, the symptoms were first noticed when the world and kernel were the same. They have repeted themselves within every combination that I've tried. FWIW, I tried rm -rf /usr/obj and recompile, but that didn't improve things. I also tried mv /usr/src /usr/src.old and then re-cvsup and recompile. That didn't help, either. Jaime ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: uname weirdness after kernel/OS update
Try a rm -rf /usr/src/* and then rebuild using the config method from /usr/src/sys/i386/conf with make depend; make; make install after configuring. HTH Eric F Crist President AdTech Integrated Systems, Inc (612) 998-3588 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 26, 2003 1:22 PM To: Kent Stewart Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: uname weirdness after kernel/OS update On Fri, 26 Dec 2003, Kent Stewart wrote: On Friday 26 December 2003 11:05 am, Jaime wrote: Are you sure that you are building and installing a kernel. That would be about the only thing that wouldn't update your boot message. I am completely certain. I've used make buildkernel KERNCONF=... and make installkernel KERNCONF=... as well as the older /usr/sbin/config method. An ls -l / shows a newer time stamp. Jaime ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: uname weirdness after kernel/OS update
I forgot, you'll need to re-cvsup after you delete your src directory contents. :-O Eric F Crist President AdTech Integrated Systems, Inc (612) 998-3588 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric F Crist Sent: Friday, December 26, 2003 2:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Kent Stewart' Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: uname weirdness after kernel/OS update Try a rm -rf /usr/src/* and then rebuild using the config method from /usr/src/sys/i386/conf with make depend; make; make install after configuring. HTH Eric F Crist President AdTech Integrated Systems, Inc (612) 998-3588 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 26, 2003 1:22 PM To: Kent Stewart Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: uname weirdness after kernel/OS update On Fri, 26 Dec 2003, Kent Stewart wrote: On Friday 26 December 2003 11:05 am, Jaime wrote: Are you sure that you are building and installing a kernel. That would be about the only thing that wouldn't update your boot message. I am completely certain. I've used make buildkernel KERNCONF=... and make installkernel KERNCONF=... as well as the older /usr/sbin/config method. An ls -l / shows a newer time stamp. Jaime ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uname -v incorrect
Hi Charles, 'CUSTOM' is the name of the kernel you built. My machine is called huey, but the build is called DUEY. $ uname -a FreeBSD huey.dekka.com 4.8-STABLE FreeBSD 4.8-STABLE #0: Fri Oct 10 03:02:30 PDT 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/DUEY i386 Charles Howse wrote: Hi, I recently changed the hostname of one of my machines in /etc/rc.conf. Now my uname -v output is still showing the old name. I've run uname -a here so you can see the complete output, the -v stuff comes after the '#0:' Will this change with a rebuild? [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# uname -a FreeBSD larry.howse.homeunix.net 4.8-RELEASE-p13 FreeBSD 4.8-RELEASE-p13 #0: Wed Oct 8 09:38:04 CDT 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CUSTOM i386 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uname -v incorrect
Isn't that output the box it was compiled on and not the current name of your host? On Saturday, October 11, 2003, at 04:45 PM, Charles Howse wrote: Hi, I recently changed the hostname of one of my machines in /etc/rc.conf. Now my uname -v output is still showing the old name. I've run uname -a here so you can see the complete output, the -v stuff comes after the '#0:' Will this change with a rebuild? [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# uname -a FreeBSD larry.howse.homeunix.net 4.8-RELEASE-p13 FreeBSD 4.8-RELEASE-p13 #0: Wed Oct 8 09:38:04 CDT 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CUSTOM i386 Thanks, Charles Got a computer with idle CPU time? Join [EMAIL PROTECTED] and help make history! http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lucas Holt [EMAIL PROTECTED] FoolishGames.com (Jewel Fan Site) JustJournal.com (Free blogging) Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. - Albert Einstein (1879-1955) ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uname -v incorrect
On Sat, Oct 11, 2003 at 03:45:14PM -0500, Charles Howse wrote: Hi, I recently changed the hostname of one of my machines in /etc/rc.conf. Now my uname -v output is still showing the old name. I've run uname -a here so you can see the complete output, the -v stuff comes after the '#0:' Will this change with a rebuild? [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# uname -a FreeBSD larry.howse.homeunix.net 4.8-RELEASE-p13 FreeBSD 4.8-RELEASE-p13 #0: Wed Oct 8 09:38:04 CDT 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CUSTOM i386 The hostname displayed by 'uname -v' is not the name of the host the kernel is running on. It is the name of the host the kernel was built on. A rebuild will indeed change the hostname displayed by 'uname -v'. -- Insert your favourite quote here. Erik Trulsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Uname -v incorrect
On Saturday, October 11, 2003, at 04:45 PM, Charles Howse wrote: Hi, I recently changed the hostname of one of my machines in /etc/rc.conf. Now my uname -v output is still showing the old name. I've run uname -a here so you can see the complete output, the -v stuff comes after the '#0:' Will this change with a rebuild? [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# uname -a FreeBSD larry.howse.homeunix.net 4.8-RELEASE-p13 FreeBSD 4.8-RELEASE-p13 Isn't that output the box it was compiled on and not the current name of your host? The current name of my host is larry.howse.homeunix.net. The current build was done before I changed the hostname, ergo, my original question... Won't it change to #0: different date CDT 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CUSTOM i386 the next time I do a buildworld? ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Uname -v incorrect
Charles Howse wrote: Hi, I recently changed the hostname of one of my machines in /etc/rc.conf. Now my uname -v output is still showing the old name. I've run uname -a here so you can see the complete output, the -v stuff comes after the '#0:' Will this change with a rebuild? [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# uname -a FreeBSD larry.howse.homeunix.net 4.8-RELEASE-p13 FreeBSD 4.8-RELEASE-p13 #0: Wed Oct 8 09:38:04 CDT 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CUSTOM i386 Hi Charles, 'CUSTOM' is the name of the kernel you built. My machine is called huey, but the build is called DUEY. $ uname -a FreeBSD huey.dekka.com 4.8-STABLE FreeBSD 4.8-STABLE #0: Fri Oct 10 03:02:30 PDT 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/DUEY i386 I'm not talking about 'CUSTOM', I'm talking about the [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr... I think that indicates the name of the box the current build was completed on. Therefore, as I indicated in my original question: Won't that change to [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr... the nextime I buildworld? ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Uname -v incorrect
On Sat, Oct 11, 2003 at 03:45:14PM -0500, Charles Howse wrote: Hi, I recently changed the hostname of one of my machines in /etc/rc.conf. Now my uname -v output is still showing the old name. I've run uname -a here so you can see the complete output, the -v stuff comes after the '#0:' Will this change with a rebuild? [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# uname -a FreeBSD larry.howse.homeunix.net 4.8-RELEASE-p13 FreeBSD 4.8-RELEASE-p13 #0: Wed Oct 8 09:38:04 CDT 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CUSTOM i386 The hostname displayed by 'uname -v' is not the name of the host the kernel is running on. It is the name of the host the kernel was built on. A rebuild will indeed change the hostname displayed by 'uname -v'. Thanks! ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: uname(3) return being truncated
On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 03:03:34PM -0400, Lowell Gilbert wrote: According to /usr/include/sys/utsname.h, there is a 32-byte limit on the string that holds the hostname. It looks like it could be boosted without much trouble, but *anything* that used the utsname structure would need to be recompiled. And you'd have to migrate the change forward. Doesn't sound worth it to me... Thanks for the reply, Lowell. I agree - it does sound like a huge faff, especially when explicitly setting $primary_hostname in Exim's config makes the problem disappear. Nothing else gets confused, and most server apps I'm ever likely to want to run have an option to explicitly set the local machine's hostname anyway. Satisfies my curiosity, though... ;-) Cheers, Dan -- Daniel Bye PGP Key: ftp://ftp.slightlystrange.org/pgpkey/dan.asc PGP Key fingerprint: 3B9D 8BBB EB03 BA83 5DB4 3B88 86FC F03A 90A1 BE8F _ ASCII ribbon campaign ( ) - against HTML, vCards and X - proprietary attachments in e-mail / \ pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: uname(3) return being truncated
Daniel Bye [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Morning all, I have just come across something that strikes me as a little peculiar. I don't know if it's a FreeBSD peculiarity, or an Exim oddity. My MTA is exim 4.20. I had left the $primary_hostname unset in my config file, expecting exim to take the return value from uname(3), which is the stated default action. However, looking through headers of test mails I sent myself (posts to the list were failing - without bounces...), I found the hostname was mangled slightly - the last character of the FQDN was truncated. Received: from danielby by catflap.home.slightlystrange.or with local (Exim ^^^ I had a quick look in sys/utsname.h, and lib/libc/gen/uname.c, but don't know enough C to figure what's going on. Is there a limit on the length of the nodename that is returned? Or is exim chopping the last character? Explicitly setting $primary_hostname in the exim config fixes the problem - my posts now get through to the list again. Just wondered if anyone could shed any light? According to /usr/include/sys/utsname.h, there is a 32-byte limit on the string that holds the hostname. It looks like it could be boosted without much trouble, but *anything* that used the utsname structure would need to be recompiled. And you'd have to migrate the change forward. Doesn't sound worth it to me... ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
