Re: DHCP client error: domain_not_set.invalid
Mark Andrews wrote: --61jdw2sOBCFtR2d/ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 07:14:00PM -0800, Mark Space wrote: Hi all, =20 I just set up the latest 6.0 release, and I'm getting errors with the=20 DHCP client. Trying to pull a network address during start up, I get: =20 Bogus domain search list 15: domain_not_set.invalid =20 This repeats several times before giving up. Google tells me that this= =20 problem was report by two users on the bsd-current list. No one ever=20 replied to their inquiries (at least on the list), so I thought to try=20 once more to see if there's any interest in addressing this issue.=20 =20 More info was in the original post: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2005-October/057034.ht= ml We should really bitch and then ignore this value when it's bogus rather than rejecting the lease. We should also probably allow underscores since they are popular among clueless Microsoft admins. Please try the follow patch. Yes. They are clueless. However giving into their cluelessness just perpetuates the cluelessness. Underscores have never been legal in hostnames. Underscores are deliberately used to provide namespaces which do not collide with the hostname namespace. Accepting underscores just allows the namespaces to collide. Mark Sorry for the late reply. I just read this thread and this issue affects me as well. Hopefully I'm not commenting on something that has been fixed but I can't test STABLE at the moment to verify that... I understand the idea that bad values should be rejected, but in reality, I have the same DSL modem that these others have and there is no way to change the domain search list that it sends. No way that I could find at least. This is SBC-Yahoo in California, so there are a lot of people out there with this modem. I had to modify the source code to accept the lease anyway. Now my network stops working every time I rebuild and forget to re-patch the source. I shouldn't have to patch the source code to be able to accept a lease. A single bad lease option shouldn't prevent a lease from being accepted without choice. dhcpd should either 1. accept bogus names (warnings are fine) 2. offer a configuration option or command line switch to allow the bogus domain if we wish 3. offer a configuration option like isc-dhcpd does so that we can ignore or override the setting Number 3 is the best IMHO, number 2 is easier but similar, and number one has already been done in less than a line of code and could be deployed right now. - Sam Nilsson ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: from 5.4-PRERELEASE - 5.3-RELEASE-p5 error?
Bashar wrote: The Canonical Way to Update Your System (for 5.x): 1) make buildworld 2) make buildkernel KERNCONF=YOUR_KERNEL_HERE 3) make installkernel KERNCONF=YOUR_KERNEL_HERE 4) reboot in single user 5) /etc/rc.d/preseedrandom 6) mergemaster -p 7) make installworld 8) mergemaster 9) reboot Jon Jon, Cant do this for remote system as you know Sorry if this is a bit off topic... Well, you can't reboot into single user on remote (unless you have a remote console setup), but I have done the above steps remotely except for that. The difference for me was that instead of rebooting into single user, I rebooted into normal system, then shut down each running service/daemon except for ssh before the mergemaster and installworld steps. I don't know how reliable this method is for others, but it always works well for me (with 5.3 Release and 5.3 Stable at least). - Sam ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Any hosting companies offering FreeBSD 5.3 yet?
John Nielsen wrote: On Saturday 26 February 2005 06:38 pm, David J. Hughes wrote: On 26/02/2005, at 7:28 PM, John Pettitt wrote: I'm thinking about moving one of my servers to a new home (it's currently at servepath.com on a FreeBSD 5.0 box) - does anybody know of a reputable hosting company that's offering 5.3 boxes? I know www.johncompanies.com will be offering 5.x soon. I've had a 4.x jail with them for quite some time and am very happy with the service and support. I second that. Their service is hands-down the best I've ever had for anything technology-related. JN ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] A bit off topic but... with johncompanies, there is no SLA (you get what you pay for), but i agree that all of the support that i have recieved has been quick, honest, helpful. This support service isn't guaranteed by a contract, but nevertheless, they have been very good to me. - Sam ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Any hosting companies offering FreeBSD 5.3 yet?
John Pettitt wrote: I'm thinking about moving one of my servers to a new home (it's currently at servepath.com on a FreeBSD 5.0 box) - does anybody know of a reputable hosting company that's offering 5.3 boxes? John I emailed servepath.com about this very question a while back, and they replied that they would install whichever FreeBSD version I wanted including 5.3-Release. I don't know anything about servepath.com (I'm not a customer), but I would say, don't move providers unless you are unhappy with the service ;-). As far as other providers go, I can't comment on the quality or reputation of these services because I haven't made use of any of them (yet). That said, here is what I found when I looked for this a month or so ago: -- http://www.netsonic.net/freebsd-pkgs.php -- http://www.nocster.com/servers.shtml Maybe there are others now that the 5.3 branch has been stabilizing for a while. Hopefully the 5.4 Release will be adopted by many dedicated hosting providers. I know that I plan to look for a 5.4 system in the coming months. Let me know if you find others that I didn't mention. - Sam Nilsson ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [5.3-STABLE] netstat doesn't show tcp sockets
Nguyen Tam Chinh wrote: On Mon, 20 Dec 2004, Matthias Buelow wrote: After upgrading from 5.2.1 (cvsup 18/Dec), It seems to be a bug with netstat. It doesn't show tcp sockets any more. kernel is a customized with ipv6 disable. same here. I thought that maybe it was because I put CPUTYPE=p4 in /etc/make.conf and gcc messed up again, and wanted to test this hypothesis some time but if others are seeing it too... Yeah, please test it. I also have a CPUTYPE=p4 and -O3 in make.conf. In kernel config -O2. I'll try to compile again with default options to ensure. - With best regards, |The Power to Serve Nguyen Tam Chinh| http://www.FreeBSD.org Loc: sp.cs.msu.ru | http://chinhngt.svmgu.com | http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/copyleft.html In case this is helpful, I don't seem to have this problem. I am running on a pentium 2 however, and I didn't use -O or CPUTYPE. -- snip -- -bash-2.05b$ uname -a FreeBSD opti.localdomain 5.3-RELEASE-p2 FreeBSD 5.3-RELEASE-p2 #1: Fri Dec 10 16:52:50 PST 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SERVER i386 -bash-2.05b$ netstat Active Internet connections Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address(state) tcp4 0 0 opti.ssh 10.0.0.2.50009 ESTABLISHED udp4 0 0 localhost.domain *.* Active UNIX domain sockets Address Type Recv-Q Send-QInode Conn Refs Nextref Addr c13f8dac stream 0 00 c13f846000 c13f8460 stream 0 00 c13f8dac00 c13f8ec4 stream 0 0 c14e0630000 -- snip -- I know that this is a different situation, but I thought it might help to pinpoint the problem if you haven't already identified it. - Sam Nilsson ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mergemaster on a distant system
Erik Trulsson wrote: It is not necessary to reboot or go into single user mode in order to run mergemaster, and I doubt the handbook says it is necessary. It is sometimes necessary to reboot with a new kernel to let installworld work properly, but most of the time rebooting is not needed. It is usually a good idea to boot into single-user mode to make sure that there is no programs running in the background that can disrupt/be disrupted by the upgrade process, but it is rarely necessary. That's right. Just to chime in, I did the whole make buildworld ... buildkernel ... installworld ... mergemaster all over ssh yesterday. For me it wasn't much of a risk because the computer was in the same room. The biggest risk is that the new kernel doesn't boot up. I don't know how often that happens, but that is what I would worry about if I didn't have access to the boot prompt. Anyway, my upgade went flawlessly. Just shut down all services except for sshd that are running before you installworld and mergemaster. - Sam Nilsson ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: make buildworld fails for 5-Stable cvsup'd today
Godwin Stewart wrote: On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:23:22 +, Stacey Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault Faulty RAM, maybe? A machine throwing a segfault is fairly characteristic of a CPU overheating and/or of a faulty RAM stick. I'll chime in here (again!) and mention that I was having the same problem yesterday trying to make buildworld (5.3 Release). It turned out that one of my RAM modules was bad and the bios must not have fully mapped out all of the bad parts. After removing the offending memory module (through trial and error), freebsd is as stable as ever and my builds went flawlessly. So Godwin is probably right. It is probably bad RAM. - Sam ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
