locate(1) ZFS addition
I just came across what I believe to be just a oversight on locate(1). By default as stated in its locate.rc file in /etc it states that the default file systems that will be searched is ufs ext2fs. Would it be wise to have the default be ufs zfs xfs ext2fs ? or some other combination. PS: Should a PR be filed for this ? Best regards -- - (2^(N-1)) ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Perennial suggestion to split freebsd-stable into version-specific lists
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 20:17 -, dougb wrote: Howdy, I make this suggestion every time there is a new major release coming, maybe this time will be the one! :) One could argue that with the 2 active stable branches that we have now the freebsd-stable@ mailing list is already quite confusing. Adding a third (8-STABLE) will make it much more so (arguably confusion to the third power instead of just confusion squared), for a lot of reasons that I think are probably obvious. Thus, my suggestion. Split what is currently freebsd-stable into one list per branch. This year I even have a better suggestion for the names, freebsd-6@, freebsd-7@, and freebs...@. After the flag day mail sent to the existing -stable list can get an auto-reply explaining the new world order. What do you think? Doug I think this is a very good idea. This would also allow targeting specific releases directly from the documentation/release notes. I vote on specifically: FreeBSD-8stable FreeBSD-8release FreeBSD-7stable FreeBSD-7release and then 9 or current just stays the same obviously. and so on Then at EOL drop and archive the list that coordinates. Not to mention the benefits of tracking problems per distribution that this would provide. Just some thoughts. Best regards. -- - (2^(N-1)) ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Perennial suggestion to split freebsd-stable into version-specific lists
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 20:17 -, dougb wrote: Howdy, I make this suggestion every time there is a new major release coming, maybe this time will be the one! :) One could argue that with the 2 active stable branches that we have now the freebsd-stable@ mailing list is already quite confusing. Adding a third (8-STABLE) will make it much more so (arguably confusion to the third power instead of just confusion squared), for a lot of reasons that I think are probably obvious. Thus, my suggestion. Split what is currently freebsd-stable into one list per branch. This year I even have a better suggestion for the names, freebsd-6@, freebsd-7@, and freebs...@. After the flag day mail sent to the existing -stable list can get an auto-reply explaining the new world order. What do you think? Doug On second thought you could also create the FreeBSD-?stable list and still have then CC'd to the FreeBSD-stable list for archive purposes allowing people to just subscribe to one list or all of them as a group. -- - (2^(N-1)) ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Blocked process
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 08:42 -, doconnor wrote: On Thu, 20 Aug 2009, Kostik Belousov wrote: Things like ls on the console might take several seconds to respond when the box didn't seem to be very busy (but wasn't idle, maybe serving a little NFS). It wasn't the shell getting swapped out or anything else obvious. This was on SMP, not using X. The problem went away with 6.4R (had to stay with 6.x for unrelated reasons). 6.1 was released with a bug in NFS server, causing serious slowdown when non-MPSAFE fs was exported. Hmmm.. this is 6.2 (and a half) so I guess that's not my problem. Next! ;) I had a problem like this once when the NFS mount stopped responding and any command that was issued seemed to hang. This all was happening while not paying attention to the NFS mount and that mount being various directories under /var and including /var/mail. A little deeper I eventually came across and what made me feel pretty stupid is that the $SHELL whether it be csh, ksh, bash or sh checks for mail on command completion or invocation and being so that the NFS mount stopped responding the process would hang until the mount came back or the machine was rebooted. I continued for a while using /var/mail over NFS while setting or unset mail variables for the shell. You may also want to check into whether something is trying to acquire a lock on a file over that NFS mount which could accrue some extra time making it seem like a process is hung. -- - (2^(N-1)) ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Fwd: How do I mount an external ntfs formatted harddisk manually and through /etc/fstab?
On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 12:54 -, jensrasmus wrote: I'm forwarding this to -stable list, since i appears to get no response on -fs. -- Forwarded message -- From: Jens Rasmus Liland jensras...@gmail.com Date: Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 4:25 PM Subject: How do I mount an external ntfs formatted harddisk manually and through /etc/fstab? To: freebsd...@freebsd.org Hi, How do I mount an NTFS formatted external harddisk plugged into the computer using a usb cable? And what do i write in the /etc/fstab after being able to successfully mount it manually? I have some blurry understanding after reading a bit in handbook that the harddisk's NTFS partition is at /dev/da0s1 by default. I have installed ntfs-3g from ports. /Rasmus ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org Try mount_ntfs-3g /dev/da0s1 /path/to/mountpoint Manuals and other such documentation serve as a pretty good medium. -- - (2^(N-1)) ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: upgrading ports without recompiling
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 13:16 -, pj wrote: Ishmael F.E. wrote: [...] . so, ¿how can I upgrade the ports? unfortunatley I don't have time to compile my 64bit system Have you looked at the -PP option of portupgrade? I don't know how portmaster handles upgrades using packages only. You could look into devel/ccache devel/distcc if you would like to speed up your compile times. Of course your first compile will always be the slowest one but everyone after that will be faster. This is not always advised as a good solution and has been known to throw some pretty weird compiler bugs and also fail while compiling certain ports but that is tweakable through /etc/make.conf*. Best regards. J. Hellenthal ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Adding multiipul virtual domains?
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:21 -, mg-fbsd3 wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 17:04, eculpec...@encontacto.net wrote: Quoting ALLnetgroup allnetgr...@yahoo.com: The server has 1 domain name already setup along with: sendmail Webmin Apache Web Server MySQL Apache Tomcat Squid Proxy SOCKS5 PERL Mod PERL PHP OpenSSH phpBB RoundCube WebMail When I add a new virtual host I would like the host to have it's own directory, website and the services above. There is nothing that I know of that will automatically add a new virtual domain to a machine in all of these systems. I have my own home brew perl scripts which do such things but they are not usable outside my own environment. Many other people I have talked to have done the same thing or just configured each of these individually. If you are not technically savvy enough to write your own configuration management system or to modify the configuration files individually, you might consider instead of having your own machine to use a web hosting company which automatically installs and configures this stuff for you via a control panel. Incidentally this is not the first time I have seen a need for some larger meta confutation system for unix/linux in general. It's absolutely true that adding a domain to a system is often a multi-step process and it need not be. Like adding a user in the old days when you first edited the passwd file, the group file, made the home directory and copied over some dot files there, now it's all automated in the adduser command. A user might have several domains, mail, one or more web sites, etc. All of this gets configured into lots of different files. Then think what happens when you get rid of a user. There really aught to be some easier way which is why I ended up writing my own scripts. Michael Grant Might I suggest http://promote.pairlite.com/direct.pl?pl893 ;) End of Thread -- Sincerely,-- Jason H. ;; Networked Systems Engineering. The Command Line Kid.;; Multi-user Systems Advocate. mailto:gmail.com!cmdlnkid ;; 1(616)403- / BSD Group. - (2^(N-1)) ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Let's back out LOADER_ZFS_SUPPORT from STABLE
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 19:56 -, danallen46 wrote: On 13 Jun 2009, at 5:42 PM, Paul B. Mahol wrote: On 6/13/09, Dan Allen danalle...@airwired.net wrote: I have now proven that the recent post June 8th version of /usr/src/sys/boot/i386/loader/Makefile causes catastrophic data loss. I hardly doubt that such change cause loss of data on entire drive. There is always old loader to pick up. How do I get to the old loader when the machine boots and immediately stops? There is no ability at this point in the boot process to try and get to the old loader that I know of. Is there a hidden magic key combination that allows this? You are correct that the bulk of the file system is not touched, but the key file partitioning headers get cleared and when you boot off of a DVD -- the only way to get to the system that I know of -- and inspect the file partitioning via whatever means you try, it shows that the root partition is gone. What was your main file system is gone. I learned after many installs that I could NOT do a newfs(8) and the setup program would re-mark things and and files ended up re-appearing. My machine was well backed up so no great loss of data in the end, but it has cost me lots of time to get this figured out. For me the real questions are these: * Why is my system the only one that this happens on? * What makes my machine setup different? * What is the bug in the bootable ZFS loader that munges the partition map? Dan Is it possible that you have most likely been playing around with ZFS before this and left some of the configurations of ZFS embedded in your drive and the loader is picking that up. -- Sincerely,-- Jason H. ;; Networked Systems Engineering. The Command Line Kid.;; Multi-user Systems Advocate. mailto:gmail.com!cmdlnkid ;; 1(616)403- / BSD Group. - (2^(N-1)) ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: problem moving gmirror between two machines.
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 21:29 -, hartzell wrote: George Hartzell writes: I have an HP DL360 with a pair of 1TB seagate disks that's been running -STABLE with a ZFS root partition set up using the tools available here: http://yds.coolrat.org/zfsboot.shtml It's been working great. As part of trying to understand what's going on, I csup'ed to -RELENG earlier today and rebuilt/installed the kernel and world whilst running on the DL360, so everything should be current. I tried to move the disks into an HP DL320 G4 and it fails to boot because it can't find /dev/mirror/boot (which it wants to mount onto /strap and then parts get nullfs'ed onto /boot and /rescue). It gives me the opportunity to start a shell, and from that shell I can do a zfs mount -a and get all of the zfs filesystems mounted, but there's nothing in /dev/mirror. No gmirror status and list are silent. I can move the disks back into the older machine and they work fine. I've run fdisk -s ad4 and bsdlabel -A /dev/ad4s1a and diffed the output from the two machines and they're identical. I've booted with kern.geom.mirror.debug=2 and the DL320G4 tastes /dev/ad4s1a (along with everything else) but doesn't do anything with it. Any ideas? [for the archives] Solved. gmirror had been set up with -h specifying the device, and although the newer server used the same device names for its disks (ad[46]) it assigned them to different hot swap bays. Once I switched the disks everything came up fine. g. Wouldn't it be more feasible in this situation to just glabel the disks and mount them from /dev/fstype/label instead. Might make your life easier in the future for swapping disks. Example: /dev/ufs/tmp on /tmp (ufs, asynchronous, local, gjournal) /dev/ufs/usr on /usr (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/ufs/var on /var (ufs, local, soft-updates) -- Sincerely,-- Jason H. ;; Networked Systems Engineering. The Command Line Kid.;; Multi-user Systems Advocate. mailto:gmail.com!cmdlnkid ;; 1(616)403- / BSD Group. - (2^(N-1)) ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
acd0: FAILURE - INQUIRY ILLEGAL REQUEST asc=0x24 ascq=0x00
_ ._ _ , _ ._
(_ ' ( ` )_ .__)
( ( () `) ) _)
(__ (_ (_ . _) _) ,__)
`~~`\ ' . /`~~`
,::: ; ; :::,
':::'
__/_ __ \__
| |
| Copyright (c) 1992-2007 The FreeBSD Project. |
| Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 |
| The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. |
| FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation. |
| FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE #0: Sat Oct 20 04:58:39 UTC 2007 |
| - CUT - |
| acd0: CDRW LITE-ON LTR-52327S/QS5A at ata1-master UDMA33|
| acd0: FAILURE - INQUIRY ILLEGAL REQUEST asc=0x24 ascq=0x00|
| acd0: FAILURE - INQUIRY ILLEGAL REQUEST asc=0x24 ascq=0x00|
| cd0 at ata1 bus 0 target 0 lun 0 |
| cd0: LITE-ON LTR-52327S QS5A Removable CD-ROM SCSI-0 device |
| cd0: 33.000MB/s transfers |
| cd0: Attempt to query device size failed: NOT READY, Medium not present |
|___|
Introduced-From:RELENG_6 (TODAY)
Unproduced-With:RELENG_6_2
Questioned: FAILURE - INQUIRY ILLEGAL REQUEST asc=0x24 ascq=0x00
I was curious if this is just some debug printf's that were thrown in
thrown in the src of {acd?,ata?,pci?} or whatever ?. If not I have been
looking in the wrong place for where this is coming from and would
appreciate any feedback on this non-issue. The cd burner works just fine
like in RELENG_6_2 as well as 4 5 but seeing this come up the way it has
just raises the question in my mind that possible hardware failure might
be eminent in the future. This seems to produce it self with a cd in
the drive on boot or without one. Any other info on this non-issue is
available on request.
[Future thanks forwarded to any generated threads.]
Sincerely,
The Command Line Kid.
--
- (2^(N-1))
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: can I do 6.1-RELEASE to 6.2 via cvsup
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 05:42 +0800, robert.a.chalmers wrote: I should just be able to change the TAG in standard-supfile from 6_1 to 6_2, do a cvsup, and the builds etc to end up with 6.2-RELEASE right? yes? no? ta rob Change that tag and then follow anything thats said in the README UPDATING Makefile. Specificly follow this after you upgrade your sources. ( head -n55 /usr/src/Makefile |tail -n13 ) -- - (2^(N-1)) ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: rm(1) bug, possibly serious
On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 17:55 +0100, jan.grant wrote: On Tue, 25 Sep 2007, Oliver Fromme wrote: Note that the command rm -rf ../ was entered twice. The first time I got an error message (and exit code 1), the second time it apparently succeeded. Check the man page for rm: -f Attempt to remove the files without prompting for confirma- tion, regardless of the file's permissions. If the file does not exist, do not display a diagnostic message or modify the exit status to reflect an error. That's what's happening the second time through. The first time, your current directory is getting removed (so ../ won't refer to a real directory the second time around). The bug is really in rm(1)'s initial diagnostic message. Just wanted to point out that this actually goes all the way back as far as 4.6.2-RELEASE-p27. I dont have any earlier machines than that to test on but best guess is that it most likely goes back further than that. -- - (2^(N-1)) ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
