Re: flowtable usable or not
You haven't been bitten by the storage layer or filesystem hackery bits which has caused filesystem corruption. :) That said, FFS+SUJ has made recover-from-kernel-panic so much less painful. Thankyou Jeffr and others! What I tend to do is either run current on a VM or organise some dedicated -current laptops. And run the bits of -current I'm testing on -8 and -9. Adrian ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On 3/6/2012 2:12 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote: You haven't been bitten by the storage layer or filesystem hackery bits which has caused filesystem corruption. :) Ummm, I have, actually. I was one of the early adopters of SU+J and complained loudly when it ate my /var/ for lunch. I also use a lot of separate slices/partitions, so my system partition isn't getting written to very often, isn't using SU+J, and almost always comes up clean after a crash. My layout looks like this: FreeBSD 1 2 are the same: / + /usr /var /tmp (memory disk) /usr/local/ (this is the big partition, things like ports WRKDIRPREFIX and /usr/obj go here) Then I have separate ext2fs filesystems for /home, /data (cvs, svn, other big trees). These are accessible from my Linux partition, which is also where the shared swap partition is. Using ext2fs for things I really care about (like /home) or things that would take a long time to reproduce (like cvs and svn trees) has helped avoid some of the more exciting corruption/data loss events, and everything on the /usr/local's is either backed up, or trivially reproducable. That said, FFS+SUJ has made recover-from-kernel-panic so much less painful. Thankyou Jeffr and others! It's also made a mess out of snapshots ... The only thing I use SU+J for is /var and /usr/local (see above). What I tend to do is either run current on a VM or organise some dedicated -current laptops. And run the bits of -current I'm testing on -8 and -9. Well you get a gold start for actually running it at all, so there you go. :) Doug ___ 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: Request for flowtable testers and actionable feedback RE: flowtable usable or not
On Mar 5, 2012, at 9:11 AM, H wrote: I have the right, even the obligation to point out what I think is wrong So, you see yourself as speaking for others? You certainly do not speak for me! Never authorized you for this, never ever knew you actually exist. For various historical reasons, I don't particularly like the kind of people who self-elect themselves to defend other's rights. OK? :-) So unlike you, Kip at least tries to achieve something. For the good of others. Even if he didn't do it in the most humble, democratic and whatever way. Even if he appears for many as being arrogant or whatever. People are different, some might actually prefer Kip's way, did you imagine that? I happen to share the opinion and the experience of Mark Linimon in situations like this and yes, I do believe you have been rude here. For no reason whatsoever. You either make the choice to help Kip in his experiment, or not. For me, personally, as long as you don't stay on my way, I don't really care what your position is. Daniel PS: In any case, this is an open forum, so you have your opinion heard. By a lot of people.___ 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: Request for flowtable testers and actionable feedback RE: flowtable usable or not
On 3/5/2012 15:00, Daniel Kalchev wrote: I happen to share the opinion and the experience of Mark Linimon in situations like this and yes, I do believe you have been rude here. For no reason whatsoever. I agree. This H person has been hijacking threads over the last week or so, and all of the messages I've seen from them boil down trolling. This is in contrast to the patient, well thought out replies from the rest of the list. I'm at a loss as to what H's endgame is, but it probably has more to do with writing poorly executed metaphors than it does with helping FreeBSD or its users (whom he/she implies they represent). ___ 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: Request for flowtable testers and actionable feedback RE: flowtable usable or not
Daniel Kalchev wrote: On Mar 5, 2012, at 9:11 AM, H wrote: I have the right, even the obligation to point out what I think is wrong So, you see yourself as speaking for others? You certainly do not speak for me! Never authorized you for this, never ever knew you actually exist. For various historical reasons, I don't particularly like the kind of people who self-elect themselves to defend other's rights. OK? :-) don't try to sell your silly deductions as assumptions ... who says I usual means I not they, we or for them but you're funny, must be a ghost typing here :) perhaps I'm just behind your back right now huhhh :) H So unlike you, Kip at least tries to achieve something. For the good of others. Even if he didn't do it in the most humble, democratic and whatever way. Even if he appears for many as being arrogant or whatever. People are different, some might actually prefer Kip's way, did you imagine that? I happen to share the opinion and the experience of Mark Linimon in situations like this and yes, I do believe you have been rude here. For no reason whatsoever. You either make the choice to help Kip in his experiment, or not. For me, personally, as long as you don't stay on my way, I don't really care what your position is. Daniel PS: In any case, this is an open forum, so you have your opinion heard. By a lot of people.___ 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 -- H +55 11 4249. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Request for flowtable testers and actionable feedback RE: flowtable usable or not
Adam Strohl wrote: On 3/5/2012 15:00, Daniel Kalchev wrote: I happen to share the opinion and the experience of Mark Linimon in situations like this and yes, I do believe you have been rude here. For no reason whatsoever. I agree. This H person has been hijacking threads over the last week or so, and all of the messages I've seen from them boil down trolling. This is in contrast to the patient, well thought out replies from the rest of the list. I'm at a loss as to what H's endgame is, but it probably has more to do with writing poorly executed metaphors than it does with helping FreeBSD or its users (whom he/she implies they represent). ___ you also do not have a clew, have you? now we're changing to girl-talk ? If you are curious about something, ask, right away ... clear and straight -- H signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Request for flowtable testers and actionable feedback RE: flowtable usable or not
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 4:37 PM, H h...@hm.net.br wrote: If you are curious about something, ask, right away ... clear and straight I'm curious about when you will stop trolling one of the last few fora on the internet where the SNR is actually high. This topic is discussing how users can help Kip can make flowtables more acceptable/without strange side-effects. If you're not discussing that, please don't discuss other things*. Start a new thread if you want to discuss the state of ports, whether you can't install KDE, ad infinitum. Cheers Tom * I'm well aware that I'm doing that also. I'm sorry. ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On 3/4/2012 2:04 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote: 2012/3/3 Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org: On 03/02/2012 16:05, Adrian Chadd wrote: Try breaking that cycle. ... one of the things I've been asking for years. :) Julian's right though, I think PC-BSD will help, but I still think that committers should run -current. I've asked privately for our committers to go back to -current and then have some dedicated development time where we work together to fix the problems that *we* find in order to make the project more desktop-friendly overall. I was (figuratively) laughed out of the room. There's a magic intersection between need to run current and need to keep stuff unbroken enough to get work done. Personally I have a -current partition (slice) that I keep up to date, and an 8-stable'ish slice that I purposely keep in a known-good state, and only update if -current has been running good for a while (which it has more often than not in the last several years). I have both slices set up to share data such as /home, my cvs and svn trees, etc. This has worked really well for me (and others, I originally got the idea and some of my configuration from David Wolfskill) for over a decade. hth, Doug ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On 03/03/2012 04:32 PM, H wrote: Bas Smeelen wrote: // away. Binary packages are a big time saver and are more efficient. It // should be easy for FreeBSD to make it easy to install the most recent // versions of all binary packages, its beyond belief they cannot pull // off such a simple ans straight forward, and basic part of any OS. / come on, you really think I need lecturing about how to read threads? and I did not misquoted nothing, you are trying to save your ass here :) in the above excerpt _YOU_ are talking about packages and how easy it is ... and this cannot pull off thing ... then you tell us today that ports is the best ever happened to you I am sorry, but I really did not write the sentences you quote. It is what David Jackson wrote and I replied to it. Please see again http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2012-January/237779.html I will paste the the message below: Unable to upgrade packages on FreeBSD *Bas Smeelen* b.smeelen at ose.nl mailto:freebsd-questions%40freebsd.org?Subject=Unable%20to%20upgrade%20packages%20on%20FreeBSDIn-Reply-To=CAGy-%2Bi9pYgB3VjG8KQg98Bfr5Ax2BOLOnuqrzOe_P5juDe%2BVjw%40mail.gmail.com /Mon Jan 30 23:01:17 UTC 2012 / On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 17:04:56 -0500 David Jacksondjackson452 at gmail.com http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions wrote: / On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Bas Smeelenb.smeelen at ose.nl http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions wrote: // //On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:52:07 -0500 //David Jacksondjackson452 at gmail.com http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions wrote: // // I have tried endlessly to no avail to upgrade binary the packages // on Freebsd to the latest version. I have tried: // // *portupgrade -PP -a // *portmaster -PP -a // *pkg_update // // All fail miserably and totally and have left the system in an // unuseable state. // //What's unusable? For instance, servers are perfectly usable without //graphical tools. If you have tried `endlessly` why didn't you //consult /usr/ports/UPDATING and just recompile the ports without //using binary packages? //Or you might want to try PCBSD, it's FreeBSD with some fancy stuff //taken care of which might solve the problem you complain about. // // // // // I wish to use binary packages and I specifically do not want to // compile anything, it tends to take far too long to compile programs // and would rather install some packages and have it all work right // away. Binary packages are a big time saver and are more efficient. It // should be easy for FreeBSD to make it easy to install the most recent // versions of all binary packages, its beyond belief they cannot pull // off such a simple ans straight forward, and basic part of any OS. / I understand your motivations. On my 1,6GHz celeron it takes a lot of time to compile the ~600 ports I use, especially chromium for instance and when I forget to give an option to not bother me with questions it sits there waiting for me to enter y or n. Ports/ packages are not `a basic part` of the FreeBSD OS. I also don't think it is simple and straight forward to satisfy all different user requirements and options in a package system. Ubuntu for my taste has had flukes in many ways many times in the past and still has (often enough the developers desktop users complain). It works good with complete upgrades at times, on the other hand it still leaves me sometimes with an unusable freezing OS on the desktop, and before every upgrade it has becomes mandatory to me to first try it with an USB boot. This is something I cannot have on server systems being used 24x7. / // // Why can't FreeBSD just make the package system just work. Right // after installing FreeBSD I should be able to type a single command // such as update_packages and it should update all packages on the // system, with no errors and without requiring any configurations // to be troubleshooted, it should work out of the box. // // Why not? Why is something so simple so difficult and impossible? // Ubuntu can do it, why not FreeBSD? // //FreeBSD unlike Ubuntu is an entirely volunteer project. Ubuntu has //a dedicated corporation working on it and I guess a larger user //base. // // // The reason that FreeBSD has a smaller user base is because it has a // dysfunctional package system and it is hard to upgrade package to the // most recent version, making FreeBSD more difficult to use/ // // But doing a workable package system is not difficult, it something // that FreeBSD should be easily able to make it easy to have a way to // upgrade packages to most recent versions out of box anbd in an error // free and reliable way. // // // // Why cant FreeBSD Just make the package upgrades work. // //Because uh well it's not up to FreeBSD
Re: flowtable usable or not
2012/3/3 Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org: On 03/02/2012 16:05, Adrian Chadd wrote: Try breaking that cycle. ... one of the things I've been asking for years. :) Julian's right though, I think PC-BSD will help, but I still think that committers should run -current. I've asked privately for our committers to go back to -current and then have some dedicated development time where we work together to fix the problems that *we* find in order to make the project more desktop-friendly overall. I was (figuratively) laughed out of the room. There's a magic intersection between need to run current and need to keep stuff unbroken enough to get work done. I have 9.0-REL and -HEAD boxes at the moment which I actually use for development. But enough things are going wonky with kde4 for now that getting actual work done is hard. Upgrading ports will become a lot less painful with pkgng, so I hope to try and migrate to that when it's (more) ready. This is the unfortunate side effect of things being mostly run by volunteers who have to work to eat. :-) Adrian ___ 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: Request for flowtable testers and actionable feedback RE: flowtable usable or not
K. Macy wrote: I'm re-sending this portion of another mail as it will inevitably not be read by most readers by virtue of having been part of a long and digressive thread. this is exactly one of this statements which makes users (normal people) stay away a person-person understand this as shut up fuckers, you're disturbing my privileged thinking, how do you dare you little nothings and certainly not going along with your quoted anti-nazi statement below, well, thinking better, the last paragraph may apply ... what you said here before ... any progress, any improvements, any advancements will only happen because *we* made it happen. bravo!!! hurray!!! Mr. *WE* Sir Judge of the poor souls... you have really balls to write such a thing, do you? in modern people conversations, this what you call digressive, we call it brainstorming and it is _highly_ desirable, because talking together leads to new ideas, what you apparently refuse to acknowledge you do shit when you have a close mind some people simply do not get the big picture because they only see themselves, their interests and personal reflection in the pretended egomaniac outcome and that my friend, certainly is no progress at all ... ohh you know what is funny? At the end, you are one of these in your own quote: The real damage is done by those millions who want to 'get by.' because you don't care about what really matters, people, users, you do not even know how to talk to them I might go with Doug's frustration Clearly you are either unable or unwilling to see my point, so I wish you all the best. and what he said gently in another thread, I still did not agreed that time, but now I'm coming closer That's only true if the project leadership agrees with your goals Sooo all you Mr. *WEs* good work! we worship you until the rest of your days and beyond H -- “The real damage is done by those millions who want to 'get by.' The ordinary men who just want to be left in peace. Those who don’t want their little lives disturbed by anything bigger than themselves. Those with no sides and no causes. Those who won’t take measure of their own strength, for fear of antagonizing their own weakness. Those who don’t like to make waves—or enemies. Those for whom freedom, honour, truth, and principles are only literature. Those who live small, love small, die small. It’s the reductionist approach to life: if you keep it small, you’ll keep it under control. If you don’t make any noise, the bogeyman won’t find you. But it’s all an illusion, because they die too, those people who roll up their spirits into tiny little balls so as to be safe. Safe?! From what? Life is always on the edge of death; narrow streets lead to the same place as wide avenues, and a little candle burns itself out just like a flaming torch does. I choose my own way to burn.” Sophie Scholl ___ 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 -- H signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Request for flowtable testers and actionable feedback RE: flowtable usable or not
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 02:28:37AM -0300, H wrote: because you don't care about what really matters, people, users, you do not even know how to talk to them I've been criticized for saying this to a user before, but I'm going to repeat it here regardless of consequences. I'm sorry, you (as a user) do not have the right to flame someone in this manner and then expect them to listen to further input from you, no matter how reasonable your further contributions are. We are not paid employees, who might have to simply continue to work with you because their business requires it. I am not speaking for Kip here but I will state that I myself am happy to work with users up until I feel I am getting treated like this, at which point I feel no further obligation whatsoever to try to help them. Executive summary: you are being very rude here. mcl ___ 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: Request for flowtable testers and actionable feedback RE: flowtable usable or not
Mark Linimon wrote: On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 02:28:37AM -0300, H wrote: because you don't care about what really matters, people, users, you do not even know how to talk to them I've been criticized for saying this to a user before, but I'm going to repeat it here regardless of consequences. I'm sorry, you (as a user) do not have the right to flame someone in this manner and then expect them to listen to further input from you, no matter how reasonable your further contributions are. We are not paid employees, who might have to simply continue to work with you because their business requires it. I am not speaking for Kip here but I will state that I myself am happy to work with users up until I feel I am getting treated like this, at which point I feel no further obligation whatsoever to try to help them. Executive summary: you are being very rude here. mcl well, as they say, as you shout into the woods it comes back ... who can not stand the echo better hold his peace ... not withstanding the annulment of my rights ... I grant you the right to criticize me as you wish do you mean rude or direct? I have the right, even the obligation to point out what I think is wrong if you think it's not, then make your point but telling me what I can or not is kind of lame, don't you think so? -- H signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: flowtable usable or not
on 03/03/2012 08:44 H said the following: let's face some reality. Let's do that. Forever installing FreeBSD Desktop, either KDE or Gnome, was a nightmare process, or better, to make it appear on screen was a nightmare. This has not been my experience (reality). -- Andriy Gapon ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
Andriy Gapon wrote: on 03/03/2012 08:44 H said the following: let's face some reality. Let's do that. Forever installing FreeBSD Desktop, either KDE or Gnome, was a nightmare process, or better, to make it appear on screen was a nightmare. This has not been my experience (reality). of course not! but you do not count as well other developers and insiders do not, this kind of people we have a lot, BTW very capable people, if not the best ... but it depends on the angle of view and the question to be answered ... why we do not have more desktops out, why normal technicians and administrator do prefer Linux or Windows Workstations/server? because we do not attract them, it is to hard for them to find their way through so it is their eyes we have to look with -- H signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: flowtable usable or not
Bas Smeelen wrote: On 03/02/2012 07:42 PM, H wrote: Doug Barton wrote: ... and here is the crux of the problem. The vast majority of our developers don't use FreeBSD as their regular workstation. So it has increasingly become an OS where changes are being lobbed over the wall by developers who don't run systems that those changes affect. That's no way to run a railroad. Doug wow since it is not April 1st it must be revelation's day ...:) is this then the bottomline ? if [ $using_ports=YES ]; get_screwed($big_time); fi Hey people There are still a lot of us which might not be smart enough or lack the resources to help you debug issues but we still use and depend on FreeBSD, and we test, and hopefully give you some debugging hints I have some production servers running on STABLE and even some on CURRENT to stress our developers, but most run RELEASE and use freebsd-update Keep up the good work, it makes me a more confident sysadmin Ports is the best thing happening to me after going through al the apt and other stuff you talk like the wind blows my friend ... remembering your own most recent words in another occasion what certainly do not match your last sentence ... / On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Bas Smeelen b.smeelen at ose.nl http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions wrote: // // On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:52:07 -0500 // David Jackson djackson452 at gmail.com http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions wrote: // // I have tried endlessly to no avail to upgrade binary the packages // on Freebsd to the latest version. I have tried: // /... / // All fail miserably and totally and have left the system in an // unuseable state. // / / // // I wish to use binary packages and I specifically do not want to // compile anything, it tends to take far too long to compile programs // and would rather install some packages and have it all work right // away. Binary packages are a big time saver and are more efficient. It // should be easy for FreeBSD to make it easy to install the most recent // versions of all binary packages, its beyond belief they cannot pull // off such a simple ans straight forward, and basic part of any OS. / -- H signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: flowtable usable or not
H h...@hm.net.br wrote: ... Forever installing FreeBSD Desktop, either KDE or Gnome, was a nightmare process, or better, to make it appear on screen was a nightmare. I have never understood the point of KDE or Gnome, other than (perhaps) as eye candy for the uninitiated. If I wanted a Windows desktop, I would install Windows. If I wanted a Mac desktop, I would use a Mac. I do use a few applications that were written using the Gnome or KDE _toolkits_, but that doesn't require me to run the whole Gnome or KDE environment (aka resource hog). Fvwm2 seems to be a perfectly adequate window manager. ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On 03/03/2012 17:09, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: I have never understood the point of KDE or Gnome, other than (perhaps) as eye candy for the uninitiated. If I wanted a Windows desktop, I would install Windows. If I wanted a Mac desktop, I would use a Mac. And if you want a FreeBSD desktop with great integration between applications and the ability to change settings without reading man pages? You run FreeBSD with KDE or GNOME. -- Bruce Cran ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On 03/03/12 07:44, H wrote: Doug Barton wrote: [...] Sure, our strength is servers, and that is not going to change. I agree and disagree. Based upon the struggle with desktop usage and focus on development, FreeBSD is de facto more server oriented. But in comparison to several other non-BSD opensource server OS projects, the corridor of advantages in FreeBSD became and still become smaller and smaller. This is the experience of using FreeBSD now since 1995 as my favorite OS for servers I maintained for scientific projects and my personal desktop(s). Please don't take me wrong, but the conclusion of the strength of FBSD is due to its weakness - and this is not willingly, it is coincidentialy. But how many real-life bugs have I personally uncovered in -current as a result of actually running it (mostly) daily? I'm not the only one, certainly, but if the numbers were flipped and the vast majority of our developers *did* use FreeBSD routinely, how much better off would we be? Well, for an open source project this sounds to me a bit strange. Developers do not use the OS they developing for as their platform? This might be new to me and an old information for the majority of you developers, but I see strange implications ins that fact. FreeBSD is considered an open source project ran by volunteers (I receive this magic message in all forums I ever complained about some problems ...). Honestly and in terms on logic, I can not line up several points, sorry, I might be too dumb. Obviously not a development by heart but by payment? But this is OT here and I never could emphaszie people to follow my philosophical tracks (which might be inadequate for some sets of people ...). let's face some reality. Forever installing FreeBSD Desktop, either KDE or Gnome, was a nightmare process, or better, to make it appear on screen was a nightmare. Since myself (and some remnant we) use FreeBSD for both servers (development of scientific software, processing scientific stuff, modelling, rendering for PR products related in astrodynamics and planetary sciences) and as the desktop system of choice, I never found a friend in that performance eating thing KDE or GNOME and stayed long time with fvwm and now with windowmaker. Yes, this sounds like an echo from the past, but living like a monk and celebrating askesis in that fashion made me faster in some ways and independent from fast hardware and recent developments in X11, in which FreeBSd now turns out to get a position last in terms of modern display driver architectures. But I'm still impressed by the fancy and coloured desktops of PC-BSD, which I have ran for some people to lurde them into the BSD world ... Even if somebody got all packages into his system (by miracle?), it still did not popped up. Without some special knowledge _no_chance_. who knows, the guys who created and battled on area51 knew why they chose this name :) Still now, kde4, hours of install, missing packages, compiling and still nothing, somewhere over the process, flies over the screen please set kdm4_enable=YES ... I guess that will not be noticed by any user Even if some smart guy figures out that he needs xorg-server, the port or package do not select all it needs for running, its own drivers and so. How a user should know that? There is a windeco which installs hundreds of deps, even sound what do not work on FreeBSD, but xorg do not have deps for its functionality? god ... ohhh I forgot, that has nothing to do with the desktop itself , sorry for mentioning ... Maybe the logic behind the dependency system need a refurbish? I feel lost when trying to look into the vast number of of *.mk files and having to figure out myself how they get involved when building some essential ports. Each tweak seems to go into those files undocumented and the logical hierarchy isn't obvious, since many dependencies are hidden in GNOME/KDE related files. Not to mention the mess that ariose when I tried to follow a strict separartion of building the core FreeBSD UNIX only with /etc/src.conf leaving compiler options for non-/usr/src related software in make.conf. Obviously, they are mixed up in a way I get tired as a non-developer to keep on pace with.CLANG is a nice compiler, I like it, I use it now as the base compiler for everything, but the lack of OpenMP and optimizations for modern CPUs (Core-i7/Sandy Bridge/-E) makes it a bit unapplicable to several software packages I'd like to use. And the confusion using the legacy, outdated gcc 4.2.1 in the base system and replace it easily by gcc 4.6.3 or now 4.7.X is taking valuable working time. I think, and this is my personal opinion and view, it would be much better to sort out the confusion in the build system(s) and then start over. I guess there are a lot of options to do so, even now, but how to find documentation? Crawling scripts and source code to find out the logic and vast numbers of variables isn't a way. Even if
Re: flowtable usable or not
Back to the topic of the initial posting: Where can I find documentation for the idiot about flowtable? I can switch this to ON in the kernel config on FreeBSD 9.0-STABLE as well as in FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT. But I can not find any hint what it is supposed to do, what benefit it could provide or what working environment it is aimed to. There are other kernel options, like IPI_PREEMPTION, which are very poor documented. I feel willing to switch on and off options and watch the system's behaviour, but I'm not willing to find out what those options are for by running a uncountable number of benchmarks or tests. It would be really nice to have a very intuitive way to find some notes on that. The NOTES files are not sufficient. Regards Oliver signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Fwd: Re: flowtable usable or not
on 03/03/2012 13:44 O. Hartmann said the following: Back to the topic of the initial posting: Where can I find documentation for the idiot about flowtable? I can switch this to ON in the kernel config on FreeBSD 9.0-STABLE as well as in FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT. But I can not find any hint what it is supposed to do, what benefit it could provide or what working environment it is aimed to. There are other kernel options, like IPI_PREEMPTION, which are very poor documented. I feel willing to switch on and off options and watch the system's behaviour, but I'm not willing to find out what those options are for by running a uncountable number of benchmarks or tests. It would be really nice to have a very intuitive way to find some notes on that. The NOTES files are not sufficient. Maybe it would make sense to restore the original To/Cc list too? -- Andriy Gapon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: flowtable usable or not
On 03/03/2012 10:18 AM, H wrote: you talk like the wind blows my friend ... remembering your own most recent words in another occasion what certainly do not match your last sentence ... What you 'mis'quote further down was not my writing. http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2012-January/237779.html My reply to djackson was and more, see link above I understand your motivations. On my 1,6GHz celeron it takes a lot of time to compile the ~600 ports I use, especially chromium for instance and when I forget to give an option to not bother me with questions it sits there waiting for me to enter y or n. Ports/ packages are not `a basic part` of the FreeBSD OS. I also don't think it is simple and straight forward to satisfy all different user requirements and options in a package system. Ubuntu for my taste has had flukes in many ways many times in the past and still has (often enough the developers desktop users complain). It works good with complete upgrades at times, on the other hand it still leaves me sometimes with an unusable freezing OS on the desktop, and before every upgrade it has becomes mandatory to me to first try it with an USB boot. This is something I cannot have on server systems being used 24x7. / On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Bas Smeelenb.smeelen at ose.nlhttp://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions wrote: // // On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:52:07 -0500 // David Jacksondjackson452 at gmail.comhttp://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions wrote: // //I have tried endlessly to no avail to upgrade binary the packages //on Freebsd to the latest version. I have tried: // /... / //All fail miserably and totally and have left the system in an //unuseable state. // / / // // I wish to use binary packages and I specifically do not want to // compile anything, it tends to take far too long to compile programs // and would rather install some packages and have it all work right // away. Binary packages are a big time saver and are more efficient. It // should be easy for FreeBSD to make it easy to install the most recent // versions of all binary packages, its beyond belief they cannot pull // off such a simple ans straight forward, and basic part of any OS. / Disclaimer: http://www.ose.nl/email ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On 03/03/2012 10:18 AM, H wrote: Bas Smeelen wrote: On 03/02/2012 07:42 PM, H wrote: Doug Barton wrote: ... and here is the crux of the problem. The vast majority of our developers don't use FreeBSD as their regular workstation. So it has increasingly become an OS where changes are being lobbed over the wall by developers who don't run systems that those changes affect. That's no way to run a railroad. Doug wow since it is not April 1st it must be revelation's day ...:) is this then the bottomline ? if [ $using_ports=YES ]; get_screwed($big_time); fi Hey people There are still a lot of us which might not be smart enough or lack the resources to help you debug issues but we still use and depend on FreeBSD, and we test, and hopefully give you some debugging hints I have some production servers running on STABLE and even some on CURRENT to stress our developers, but most run RELEASE and use freebsd-update Keep up the good work, it makes me a more confident sysadmin Ports is the best thing happening to me after going through al the apt and other stuff you talk like the wind blows my friend ... remembering your own most recent words in another occasion what certainly do not match your last sentence ... The last sentences: In short: FreeBSD makes you think about what you are doing beforehand which makes a great way to upgrade/ update application, database e.g. on servers whithout running into service downtime. Other OS's don't or do it less. I like that a lot, it saves a lot of incoming phone calls. http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2012-January/237779.html / On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Bas Smeelenb.smeelen at ose.nlhttp://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions wrote: // // On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:52:07 -0500 // David Jacksondjackson452 at gmail.comhttp://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions wrote: // //I have tried endlessly to no avail to upgrade binary the packages //on Freebsd to the latest version. I have tried: // /... / //All fail miserably and totally and have left the system in an //unuseable state. // / / // // I wish to use binary packages and I specifically do not want to // compile anything, it tends to take far too long to compile programs // and would rather install some packages and have it all work right // away. Binary packages are a big time saver and are more efficient. It // should be easy for FreeBSD to make it easy to install the most recent // versions of all binary packages, its beyond belief they cannot pull // off such a simple ans straight forward, and basic part of any OS. / Disclaimer: http://www.ose.nl/email ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
Bas Smeelen wrote: // away. Binary packages are a big time saver and are more efficient. It // should be easy for FreeBSD to make it easy to install the most recent // versions of all binary packages, its beyond belief they cannot pull // off such a simple ans straight forward, and basic part of any OS. / come on, you really think I need lecturing about how to read threads? and I did not misquoted nothing, you are trying to save your ass here :) in the above excerpt _YOU_ are talking about packages and how easy it is ... and this cannot pull off thing ... then you tell us today that ports is the best ever happened to you Ports is the best thing happening to me after going through al the apt and other stuff but look my friend, either way, you're confirming this thread, as long as conflicts are in place, something needs improvement //* the following comment is not related to any living person, only a quote with personal note :) please lord forgive them, they don't know what they are doing (or talking about) *// -- H signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: flowtable usable or not
On 3/3/2012 22:32, H wrote: then you tell us today that ports is the best ever happened to you It definitely is for me, and is a major reason why I love FreeBSD. Yum/RPM/etc are not without their own issues, and definitely is not fool proof nor 100% reliable in my experience.
Re: flowtable usable or not
2012/3/2 Julian Elischer jul...@freebsd.org: On 3/2/12 10:21 AM, Doug Barton wrote: On 03/02/2012 03:44, K. Macy wrote: not sure who wrote: Correct. However, I'm not sure the analogy is flawed. I am, to some degree, guilty of the same sin. I now run Ubuntu and have never had a single problem keeping my package system up date, in stark contrast to my experiences of slow and nightmarishly error-ridden port updates. but I use the PBIs from pcbsd.. you REALLY don't have this problem with them. (Thanks Kip for the heads up on the thread) It's well known that software has bugs; unfortunately PCBSD (I mention this because of PBIs noted above) isn't immune from bugs either -- they're just manifested in a different way. I think everyone here on the CC list has FreeBSD's best intentions in mind, but let's work together to improve the OS instead of causing discord with one another. Personally, I think that adding knobs with sane defaults (and we can debate about that and there will be disagreement on what is important and what is not) will go a long way because then people can pick and choose what they want to keep and what they want to toss as far as OS support is concerned. This is one of the strong selling points of Linux, OSX, Solaris, Windows, etc. Less effort is required to get greater profit without having to mess around with things because they fit the generic case as opposed to a number of niche cases or provide OS features that a user may or may not use. Thanks, -Garrett ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On Sat, 2012-03-03 at 03:44 -0300, H wrote: Doug Barton wrote: Just looking at the committers, of which we have over 300, only a couple dozen at most have ever identified as actually using FreeBSD as a desktop at my count. Taking the larger development community into account I think the numbers are a little better, but not much. Sure, our strength is servers, and that is not going to change. eventually that could be a good starting point, good question is, why not? But how many real-life bugs have I personally uncovered in -current as a result of actually running it (mostly) daily? I'm not the only one, certainly, but if the numbers were flipped and the vast majority of our developers *did* use FreeBSD routinely, how much better off would we be? again, why? let's face some reality. Forever installing FreeBSD Desktop, either KDE or Gnome, was a nightmare process, or better, to make it appear on screen was a nightmare. Even if somebody got all packages into his system (by miracle?), it still did not popped up. Without some special knowledge _no_chance_. who knows, the guys who created and battled on area51 knew why they chose this name :) Still now, kde4, hours of install, missing packages, compiling and still nothing, somewhere over the process, flies over the screen please set kdm4_enable=YES ... I guess that will not be noticed by any user Even if some smart guy figures out that he needs xorg-server, the port or package do not select all it needs for running, its own drivers and so. How a user should know that? There is a windeco which installs hundreds of deps, even sound what do not work on FreeBSD, but xorg do not have deps for its functionality? god ... ohhh I forgot, that has nothing to do with the desktop itself , sorry for mentioning ... Anybody can tell how somebody can find all this out? Don't say by reading because we need to look at the real facts and that is nobody want to read, they want a desktop nothing else, something silly and easy to read email and write docs and surf on the net, listen to a CD, they need to put a cd into the drive, running install process, reboot, using, nothing else and such a thing ... we do not have so where this potential users should come from? Only from heaven ... And before anyone bothers to point it out, yes, I happen to be using Windows at this exact moment. I have some layer 9 work to get done and I need tools that are only available to me in Windows (more's the pity). The sad thing is, judging by the activity on the -ports@ list, the traffic in #bsdports, and just talking to/interacting with FreeBSD users, a lot of *them* are not only interested in FreeBSD as a desktop OS, they are actually doing it. IMO the weakest point is that we do not have the packages ready. Even if lots of you do not like it to hear, fact is that we must look around and see how others do it. Windows, whatever it is, it is easy to install for everybody. Same for Fedora, in order to stay with a Unix system, package handling, update with YUM on Fedora hardly fails. ALL packages are compiled, you never need to compile anything. Even if you need 800MB of packages, yum picks them all, installs them all, and all is fine up top date. Such a process is where we need to get orientation from. If it was my decision, it should be go to ports=no_no, packages=YES I mean, as long as the packages are not complete and ready, no new port version should be released or announced So who dares,understand and can or like adventures, compiles from ports Such a decision would help FreeBSD in all means and would help the users as well, in any case it will create more users Why somebody should chose FreeBSD as his daily desktop, oh man, only some die-hard-guys like you and me, but you know, that is not hours of work, that is days, weeks and constant setbacks for whatever reasons ... that is not for anybody. And you are right, no traffic on the specific lists, why? because the three on the list, two can help themselves (you and me) and the other is the moderator ... :) not even the port maintainer/packager is on that list ... :) ps. the last statement might be exaggerated and might not be valid in all cases, so please do not shoot When the announcement of the 8.3-BETA1 release was made on these lists I had just finished building a new machine to become my everyday desktop machine for code development. I figured I should download and install using the new beta to help test the release. I was disappointed to find that the packages weren't on the beta dvd ISO, so the test wasn't as complete as I was hoping in terms of being similar to what a new user would experience. I ran through the sysinstall process without any glitches and rebooted to a working text-mode system. Then I did, from my notes: pkg_add -r for the following: sudo rsync
Re: flowtable usable or not
O. Hartmann wrote: Maybe the logic behind the dependency system need a refurbish? I feel lost when trying to look into the vast number of of *.mk files and having to figure out myself how they get involved when building some essential ports. Each tweak seems to go into those files undocumented and the logical hierarchy isn't obvious, since many dependencies are hidden in GNOME/KDE related files. it is kind of hard discussing logic here, certainly we are coming to the end of the natural thermodynamics chain, expansion=chaos=order which also is a logic, letting the things in hand of natural orders is no good, too slow in first place, too many victims in second so eventually we use algebra and separate stuff, so what do we have? Base System Ports Packages so now comes a logic question before anything else target is what? more users how? the base system is pretty good, stable and secure, but this is not enough, to get more users we need other stuff on the table Even if lots of you do not like it to hear, fact is that we must look around and see how others do it. Windows, whatever it is, it is easy to install for everybody. Well, this is right. But do not forget that even those fancy and easy to use installation framework hide a lot of the underlying system's hierarchy and logic. Look at all the Linux systems, trying to get on par with Windows. How long did they raped Linux to get it that way looking? of course, but we do not fear work at the end they looked for the target's needs and understood that that is the only point what matters for success If it was my decision, it should be go to ports=no_no, packages=YES In such a case, there would be no reason anymore to use FreeBSD! I want to use the system as fast as possible on desktop, so binary packages should be all right. But on servers, I'd like to squeeze out the last nanosecond I can grab by using dedicated compiler options. So I wnt to have the choise! My freedom, my responsibility and also the freedom to slow slow with the young horses ... that is not what I said or meant first my saying is for/from user perspective, repeating, cd into the drive, install, boot, ready to go, without fiddling around - that is one and perhaps the only straight possibility to reach and get more users you are not a common user, of course ports will stay alive for whom likes, needs or want it decide for my own how much brain I want to invest into understanding my OS - or even not. At this very point, I can, up to a certain point, decide how much time I want to spend on understanding. Others can not, by natural selection, they need to be stuck with binaries. or they exactly I mean, as long as the packages are not complete and ready, no new port version should be released or announced Why not? How should the free open source community then ever help to debug? I guess what you think about is to have a more strict RELEASE/STABLE/CURRENT/ based policy also for the ports system? I would agree. again recalling, user perspective and no, complete is the keyword before announcing an available upgrade, all necessary packages should be ready so that the common user do not get caught in some compiling process So who dares,understand and can or like adventures, compiles from ports It is not simple as that. The logic starts at the compiler's point. GCC 4.2.1 isn't an option in many cases, CLANG unsuitable (openMP). well, right or wrong, that is then issue for whom likes to compile, we do not speak about it because that is what we have, but that is not good for the users, still less for getting more users On the other hand, who should provide all the binary coverage? As you could see, the user domain of FreeBSD is shrinking. And even my the maintainer/packager today we are with some kind of mess because there are no rules today nobody cares because the actual FreeBSD horde is completely or almost composed of developers or insiders or programmers or lovers, so why making packages? No one requires them developers have other interests as users have Such a decision would help FreeBSD in all means and would help the users as well, in any case it will create more users Yes, well said, but a bit false. World has changed since the last 50 years, politically. Monolithic capitalism with a herd of dumb, mean animals only want to touch and use. Monolithic socialism creates mean don't be so harsh on people because it is the constructor who builds your house but he wants to read email and surf the net ... for that he certainly do not need to learn to compile or read Makefiles, but of course, he tells his wife how stupid this nerd is which do not know the name of the wood he uses :) so let skip this part Why somebody should chose FreeBSD as his daily desktop, oh man, only some die-hard-guys like you and me, but you know, that is not hours of work, that is days, weeks and constant setbacks for whatever reasons
Re: flowtable usable or not
On Sat, 2012-03-03 at 09:09 -0800, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: H h...@hm.net.br wrote: ... Forever installing FreeBSD Desktop, either KDE or Gnome, was a nightmare process, or better, to make it appear on screen was a nightmare. I have never understood the point of KDE or Gnome, other than (perhaps) as eye candy for the uninitiated. If I wanted a Windows desktop, I would install Windows. If I wanted a Mac desktop, I would use a Mac. I've been getting paid to develop software since 1975 -- I'm hardly what you would call the uninitiated. I couldn't imagine working without a fully functional desktop environment. Look at a calendar, it's 2012. Maybe you long for a return to punch cards and fanfold greenbar paper, but I'm not going back there. It's exactly because I don't want a Windows or Mac desktop that I use gnome. (I used to be a Mac user, starting in the 80s, but Apple lost their way during their struggle to survive 10 years ago. Soon you won't be able to boot a Mac without an account at the iTunes store, and my last Mac will go into the e-cycle pile at that point.) -- Ian ___ 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
Request for flowtable testers and actionable feedback RE: flowtable usable or not
I'm re-sending this portion of another mail as it will inevitably not be read by most readers by virtue of having been part of a long and digressive thread. subject line: flowtable usable or not It is possible to re-structure the routing code to have a smaller cache footprint / shorter lookup time / and eliminate all locking in the packet transmit path (ip_output, ip_forward). However, it would take more time and effort than I have to do so as a recreational activity. The set of people able to fund such an effort is non-intersecting with the set of people who would benefit the most heavily from it. Hence, for the time being, for those who want to be able to approach anywhere near 1Mpps, much less 10 or 15 times that, whilst continuing to use the regular stack (i.e. not running netmap) we are left only with flowtable for bypassing the locking and compute overhead of per-packet route lookups. It is beyond debate that under some, if not many, circumstances flowtable was unusable and perhaps continues to be. Hence, any further reports of it was broken so I turned it off, and now my life is better should be left unsent. If you, the reader, are willing to contribute to the testing of changes, provide backtraces from cores etc. please follow up. Thank you for your support. Cheers, Kip -- “The real damage is done by those millions who want to 'get by.' The ordinary men who just want to be left in peace. Those who don’t want their little lives disturbed by anything bigger than themselves. Those with no sides and no causes. Those who won’t take measure of their own strength, for fear of antagonizing their own weakness. Those who don’t like to make waves—or enemies. Those for whom freedom, honour, truth, and principles are only literature. Those who live small, love small, die small. It’s the reductionist approach to life: if you keep it small, you’ll keep it under control. If you don’t make any noise, the bogeyman won’t find you. But it’s all an illusion, because they die too, those people who roll up their spirits into tiny little balls so as to be safe. Safe?! From what? Life is always on the edge of death; narrow streets lead to the same place as wide avenues, and a little candle burns itself out just like a flaming torch does. I choose my own way to burn.” Sophie Scholl ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
Less effort is required to get greater profit without having to mess around with things because they fit the generic case as opposed to a number of niche cases or provide OS features that a user may or may not use. My initial venting of my frustrations at Doug appears to have turned an open-ended discussion of FreeBSD's merits as a desktop vs. a server OS. I don't have the inclination to read every response closely, but I think that it is generating more heat than light. I have three points that I would like to make before I attempt to transition this thread back to its initial purpose: a) We as a members of the community are collectively responsible for the state of FreeBSD. Simply disabling features or removing functionality that doesn't work or doesn't work optimally and / or filing bug reports but not being able or willing to respond to feedback requests is in essence a form of neglect. Although we all have day to day obligations for which the use of FreeBSD is extremely impractical if not impossible ... any progress, any improvements, any advancements will only happen because *we* made it happen. b) There are many features and many changes that are introduced in to FreeBSD which extend the potential user base which are of no obvious benefit to many users. Just because one doesn't need a feature and doesn't hear users crying out for it, doesn't mean that it isn't important. c) My grievance was in no way with Doug Barton or ports per se, but with his response as a representative instance of a behaviour which bothers me, and, taken over time, is detrimental to the whole. Back to the initial subject line: flowtable usable or not It is possible to re-structure the routing code to have a smaller cache footprint / shorter lookup time / and eliminate all locking in the packet transmit path (ip_output, ip_forward). However, it would take more time and effort than I have to do so as a recreational activity. The set of people able to fund such an effort is non-intersecting with the set of people who would benefit the most heavily from it. Hence, for the time being, for those who want to be able to approach anywhere near 1Mpps, much less 10 or 15 times that, whilst continuing to use the regular stack (i.e. not running netmap) we are left only with flowtable for bypassing the locking and compute overhead of per-packet route lookups. It is beyond debate that under some, if not many, circumstances flowtable was unusable and perhaps continues to be. Hence, any further reports of it was broken so I turned it off, and now my life is better should be left unsent. If you, the reader, are willing to contribute to the testing of changes, provide backtraces from cores etc. please follow up. Thank you for your support. Cheers, Kip -- “The real damage is done by those millions who want to 'get by.' The ordinary men who just want to be left in peace. Those who don’t want their little lives disturbed by anything bigger than themselves. Those with no sides and no causes. Those who won’t take measure of their own strength, for fear of antagonizing their own weakness. Those who don’t like to make waves—or enemies. Those for whom freedom, honour, truth, and principles are only literature. Those who live small, love small, die small. It’s the reductionist approach to life: if you keep it small, you’ll keep it under control. If you don’t make any noise, the bogeyman won’t find you. But it’s all an illusion, because they die too, those people who roll up their spirits into tiny little balls so as to be safe. Safe?! From what? Life is always on the edge of death; narrow streets lead to the same place as wide avenues, and a little candle burns itself out just like a flaming torch does. I choose my own way to burn.” Sophie Scholl ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
... and here is the crux of the problem. The vast majority of our developers don't use FreeBSD as their regular workstation !! Something is wrong with this picture! If not, why not?! ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On Sat, Mar 03, 2012 at 03:44:42AM -0300, H wrote: nobody want to read, they want a desktop nothing else, something silly and easy to read email and write docs and surf on the net, listen to a CD, they need to put a cd into the drive, running install process, reboot, using, nothing else and such a thing ... we do not have I really recommend this class of users investigate PC-BSD. It works right out of the box (all the type of work you are frustrated with has already been done, and is part of their release process). To my view, comparing FreeBSD to Ubuntu is apples-to-oranges. A much better point of comparison is PC-BSD to Ubuntu. I can't speak to whether or not PC-BSD will meet all your needs, but it is much more oriented to users than stock FreeBSD. mcl ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On 03/03/2012 08:53, K. Macy wrote: a) We as a members of the community are collectively responsible for the state of FreeBSD. Simply disabling features or removing functionality that doesn't work or doesn't work optimally and / or filing bug reports but not being able or willing to respond to feedback requests is in essence a form of neglect. Although we all have day to day obligations for which the use of FreeBSD is extremely impractical if not impossible ... any progress, any improvements, any advancements will only happen because *we* made it happen. Since we're reiterating key points, I'll do mine one more time. While I sympathize with what you wrote above, if you continue to believe that users have a responsibility to help you debug new features you're going to be disappointed and frustrated. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On 03/02/2012 16:05, Adrian Chadd wrote: Try breaking that cycle. ... one of the things I've been asking for years. :) Julian's right though, I think PC-BSD will help, but I still think that committers should run -current. I've asked privately for our committers to go back to -current and then have some dedicated development time where we work together to fix the problems that *we* find in order to make the project more desktop-friendly overall. I was (figuratively) laughed out of the room. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote: On 03/03/2012 08:53, K. Macy wrote: a) We as a members of the community are collectively responsible for the state of FreeBSD. Simply disabling features or removing functionality that doesn't work or doesn't work optimally and / or filing bug reports but not being able or willing to respond to feedback requests is in essence a form of neglect. Although we all have day to day obligations for which the use of FreeBSD is extremely impractical if not impossible ... any progress, any improvements, any advancements will only happen because *we* made it happen. Since we're reiterating key points, I'll do mine one more time. While I sympathize with what you wrote above, if you continue to believe that *users* have a responsibility to help you debug new features you're going to be disappointed and frustrated. Users don't, community members do. So I guess I rest my case for you Doug. You're an end user at the end of the day who thinks he is a member of the community. As you've made apparent on other threads. In your mind Other People(TM) are responsible for FreeBSD's welfare for consuming your dogfood because you know the people who eat it. FreeBSD would still be at the UP stage or worse the 5.x stage if everyone thought the way you do. Individuals who fail to understand the distinction between simple user and community member and are confused by which role they play can only further contribute to the acrimony. -Kip ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On 03/03/2012 13:03, K. Macy wrote: On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote: On 03/03/2012 08:53, K. Macy wrote: a) We as a members of the community are collectively responsible for the state of FreeBSD. Simply disabling features or removing functionality that doesn't work or doesn't work optimally and / or filing bug reports but not being able or willing to respond to feedback requests is in essence a form of neglect. Although we all have day to day obligations for which the use of FreeBSD is extremely impractical if not impossible ... any progress, any improvements, any advancements will only happen because *we* made it happen. Since we're reiterating key points, I'll do mine one more time. While I sympathize with what you wrote above, if you continue to believe that *users* have a responsibility to help you debug new features you're going to be disappointed and frustrated. Users don't, community members do. You're drawing a distinction that I don't. So I guess I rest my case for you Doug. You're an end user at the end of the day who thinks he is a member of the community. As you've made apparent on other threads. In your mind Other People(TM) are responsible for FreeBSD's welfare for consuming your dogfood because you know the people who eat it. Um, wow. Clearly you are either unable or unwilling to see my point, so I wish you all the best. -- This .signature sanitized for your protection ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote: On 03/03/2012 13:03, K. Macy wrote: On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote: On 03/03/2012 08:53, K. Macy wrote: a) We as a members of the community are collectively responsible for the state of FreeBSD. Simply disabling features or removing functionality that doesn't work or doesn't work optimally and / or filing bug reports but not being able or willing to respond to feedback requests is in essence a form of neglect. Although we all have day to day obligations for which the use of FreeBSD is extremely impractical if not impossible ... any progress, any improvements, any advancements will only happen because *we* made it happen. Since we're reiterating key points, I'll do mine one more time. While I sympathize with what you wrote above, if you continue to believe that *users* have a responsibility to help you debug new features you're going to be disappointed and frustrated. Users don't, community members do. You're drawing a distinction that I don't. I'm drawing a distinction that you don't make or can't make? Like I said I expect a group of people whose existence as a distinct entity you are unaware of to be helpful. The initial conflict stemmed from confusion on my part that you belong to that group. However, as you've repeatedly made clear you don't, so I was wrong to have been critical of you. I apologize for the confusion. Cheers ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
Ian Lepore free...@damnhippie.dyndns.org wrote: On Sat, 2012-03-03 at 09:09 -0800, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: H h...@hm.net.br wrote: ... Forever installing FreeBSD Desktop, either KDE or Gnome, was a nightmare process, or better, to make it appear on screen was a nightmare. I have never understood the point of KDE or Gnome, other than (perhaps) as eye candy for the uninitiated. If I wanted a Windows desktop, I would install Windows. If I wanted a Mac desktop, I would use a Mac. I've been getting paid to develop software since 1975 -- Same here (approximately). Maybe you long for a return to punch cards and fanfold greenbar paper, but I'm not going back there. I think we've both been around long enough to know that even an ADM-3 or a 3270 is a step up from punch cards and fanfold greenbar paper. The second step up is screen(1), and AFAIK no one is advocating a return even to that level of functionality, much less to anything more primitive. The next improvement is huge, and costly: high-resolution display hardware, and the software (X11, xterm, basic window manager) to handle it. That provides the capability to use multiple windows -- to see several ptys at the same time instead of being able to see only one and having to remember what's on the rest. I think most of us would agree that, costly as this upgrade is, it is justified for most desktop systems. Once we have the high-resolution display capability, it becomes possible to add graphics-based productivity apps like a PDF viewer, web browser, word processor, calendar, drawing programs, etc. I _know_ it is possible to run all that with nothing more than X11 and the same basic window manager, because I do it on a daily basis. The question remains: what more does KDE or Gnome bloatware provide, other than eye candy? It's exactly because I don't want a Windows or Mac desktop that I use gnome. Last I saw, Gnome was a way to make an otherwise perfectly good X-windows desktop look like MacOS X. Again, what's the point? What does Gnome give you, that twm or fvwm2 would not? ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On 03/01/2012 16:03, K. Macy wrote: I understand the switch. Uptime is important in any production network. However, it seems like it may have been too easy to turn it off because no one has made any effort to help me debug the issues. By analogy your guidance for ports usability problems would be to install Ubuntu. Apparently you've missed all the times that I've given that exact advice. :) But your analogy is severely flawed. Flowtable was an experimental feature that theoretically might have increased performance for some work flows, but turned out to be fatally flawed. The ports system is an essential part of the FreeBSD operating *system*, depended on by virtually 100% of FreeBSD users. Users don't have any obligation to help us debug new/experimental features. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
Apparently you've missed all the times that I've given that exact advice. :) But your analogy is severely flawed. Flowtable was an experimental feature that theoretically might have increased performance for some work flows, but turned out to be fatally flawed. The ports system is an essential part of the FreeBSD operating *system*, depended on by virtually 100% of FreeBSD users. Certainly fatally flawed without any user support. Just as many new features have been. Users don't have any obligation to help us debug new/experimental features. Correct. However, I'm not sure the analogy is flawed. I am, to some degree, guilty of the same sin. I now run Ubuntu and have never had a single problem keeping my package system up date, in stark contrast to my experiences of slow and nightmarishly error-ridden port updates. I know there are users who have operated without such problems. It is entirely possible that they're simply smarter than I am. I similarly feel no compunction to use a FreeBSD feature (the ports system) that I can't rely on. Cheers ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
my experiences of slow and nightmarishly error-ridden port updates I have no intention to bash FreeBSD or ports but ports is certainly not without problems. It's annoying but not a reason to use Ubuntu! Get a grip, man! ;-) I know there are users who have operated without such problems I think if you use the i386 architecture and the common ports you are less likely to find something before somebody else finds it and it gets fixed. If you use any other platform you are likely to find problems with ports and this gets amplified if you use nonstandard (read stuff not everybody uses) ports. I have found several ports broken for many releases in a row. Other ports aren't supported on certain target architectures but the build doesn't tell you that until after it has run for a couple of hours downloading huge source tarballs and compiling them only to give you a nastygram Sorry this port is not available on AMD64 of something like that. I understand not every port maintainer can test on every arch but come on, for stuff that you know doesn't work can't you check at the beginning and stop rather than put out a message when the build breaks? ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
Em Sex, Março 2, 2012 11:35, Nomen Nescio escreveu: my experiences of slow and nightmarishly error-ridden port updates I have no intention to bash FreeBSD or ports but ports is certainly not without problems. It's annoying but not a reason to use Ubuntu! Get a grip, man! ;-) I know there are users who have operated without such problems I think if you use the i386 architecture and the common ports you are less likely to find something before somebody else finds it and it gets fixed. If you use any other platform you are likely to find problems with ports and this gets amplified if you use nonstandard (read stuff not everybody uses) ports. with some good luck may be ... ports need some kind of disaster management for example, certain ports depending on perl, install or upgrade fine when using portupgrade or portinstall and are satisfied with let's say perl-8.9 then you use pkg_add, or -P[P] switch and the same port looks for perl.12.4 and bumps it into the system careless, not even checking if there is another perl already no way using batch on ports today unless you like to get screwed and never turn your eyes away from screen I do not need to say more, you all know that and I can understand the frustration of whom is gotten caught by this mess I have found several ports broken for many releases in a row. Other ports aren't supported on certain target architectures but the build doesn't tell you that until after it has run for a couple of hours downloading huge source tarballs and compiling them only to give you a nastygram Sorry this port is not available on AMD64 of something like that. I understand not every port maintainer can test on every arch but come on, then the port should not be there for this architecture ... or it is and works or it is not or do we have new standards now as 0|0.5|1 or is it still 0|1 ? come on, for stuff that you know doesn't work can't you check at the beginning and stop rather than put out a message when the build breaks? some fine ports are compiling fine, go through the whole process and screw all up at the install process, they already run pkg_delete, do not find the dependency, do some stuff and bail out, at the end portupgrade confirm success but they do not got installed but de-installed, as present some dependencies are messed up ... :) so as it is, better grab the original sources and compile your stuff on your own and stay far away from ports -- João Martins (JoaoBR) Infomatik Development Team http://wipserver.matik.com.br +55 11 4249. ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On 03/02/2012 03:44, K. Macy wrote: Apparently you've missed all the times that I've given that exact advice. :) But your analogy is severely flawed. Flowtable was an experimental feature that theoretically might have increased performance for some work flows, but turned out to be fatally flawed. The ports system is an essential part of the FreeBSD operating *system*, depended on by virtually 100% of FreeBSD users. Certainly fatally flawed without any user support. Just as many new features have been. Right, but what's your point? I have this cool new thing, and you have to risk your network stability in order to help me debug it on a production network? That's not how the world works man. Users don't have any obligation to help us debug new/experimental features. Correct. However, I'm not sure the analogy is flawed. I am, to some degree, guilty of the same sin. I now run Ubuntu and have never had a single problem keeping my package system up date, in stark contrast to my experiences of slow and nightmarishly error-ridden port updates. So first of all, apples and oranges (Ubuntu packages vs. our ports), but yeah, I get it. I use both, and have had the same user experience you have, on both systems. I work with the ports infrastructure quite a bit, and I know it's flaws intimately. That's one reason that I wrote portmaster. I know there are users who have operated without such problems. It is entirely possible that they're simply smarter than I am. Not necessarily. I have said many times that the ports system has some really bad fundamental design principles that make users' lives harder, and unfortunately there is a lot of inertia that prevents change. Some of this is improving, a lot of it is not. But, at the same time, a lot of work is going into improving usability, and I think the situation is better now than it was even just a few years ago. I similarly feel no compunction to use a FreeBSD feature (the ports system) that I can't rely on. ... and here is the crux of the problem. The vast majority of our developers don't use FreeBSD as their regular workstation. So it has increasingly become an OS where changes are being lobbed over the wall by developers who don't run systems that those changes affect. That's no way to run a railroad. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
... and here is the crux of the problem. The vast majority of our developers don't use FreeBSD as their regular workstation. So it has increasingly become an OS where changes are being lobbed over the wall by developers who don't run systems that those changes affect. That's no way to run a railroad. You understand my point but then fail to or choose not to see how it applies to you when it creates problems for you personally. In essence my point was that It was broken so I turned it off, end of story. does not constitute constructive feedback and does not contribute to the development of FreeBSD. It isn't your responsibility to help me debug my code just as it isn't my responsibility to contribute to the maintenance of ports by dealing with a port management that for me has been virtually unusable in coping with dependencies. I'm not eating the ports dog food because it is broken for me and you're not fully eating the sys dog food because it is broken for you are perfectly reasonable courses of action taken in isolation. However, our respective actions cumulatively don't contribute to the welfare of FreeBSD and my response was simply voicing frustration with such conduct. If you do not see the parallels between the two then there really isn't anything further to discuss about how we engage with the community. -Kip Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection -- “The real damage is done by those millions who want to 'get by.' The ordinary men who just want to be left in peace. Those who don’t want their little lives disturbed by anything bigger than themselves. Those with no sides and no causes. Those who won’t take measure of their own strength, for fear of antagonizing their own weakness. Those who don’t like to make waves—or enemies. Those for whom freedom, honour, truth, and principles are only literature. Those who live small, love small, die small. It’s the reductionist approach to life: if you keep it small, you’ll keep it under control. If you don’t make any noise, the bogeyman won’t find you. But it’s all an illusion, because they die too, those people who roll up their spirits into tiny little balls so as to be safe. Safe?! From what? Life is always on the edge of death; narrow streets lead to the same place as wide avenues, and a little candle burns itself out just like a flaming torch does. I choose my own way to burn.” Sophie Scholl ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On 03/02/2012 10:46, K. Macy wrote: You understand my point but then fail to or choose not to see how it applies to you when it creates problems for you personally. No, I already pointed out the distinction between new, experimental features; and essential components of the FreeBSD operating system. It's Ok for you to disagree with that distinction, or with its importance. But what you're suggesting is that if users don't help developers debug cool new feature X then we won't have cool new feature X. By implication you're saying that if we don't continue to develop cool new features then at some point down the road we wither and die. What I have tried ever-so-delicately to avoid saying is that lack of user help with debugging cool new feature X is generally a sign of lack of user demand for cool new feature X. Not all cool new ideas are good ones. :) OTOH, if we don't fix the fundamental problems with ports, and other key areas of the operating system, we're just not going to have users, period. Given that most of the developers (like you) have stopped using FreeBSD on a day-to-day basis, who can blame them? Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
No, I already pointed out the distinction between new, experimental features; and essential components of the FreeBSD operating system. It's Ok for you to disagree with that distinction, or with its importance. But what you're suggesting is that if users don't help developers debug cool new feature X then we won't have cool new feature X. By implication you're saying that if we don't continue to develop cool new features then at some point down the road we wither and die. What I have tried ever-so-delicately to avoid saying is that lack of user help with debugging cool new feature X is generally a sign of lack of user demand for cool new feature X. Not all cool new ideas are good ones. :) Considering there are firewall vendors and CDNs making consistent use of it because it dramatically increases the sustainable data rates it is a bit cavalier to say that there is a lack of demand. It doesn't show up directly as a lack of demand when FreeBSD drastically underperforms linux in a high bandwidth environment. The solution is for the user to simply switch to linux how is a user to know (parodying Star Trek technobabble) Darn it, if only FreeBSD provided an exponential phase inverter on the warp core in the network stack. All he or she will see is it is slow. Or another very concrete example is iX keeps losing sales because ZFS doesn't perform adequately. ZFS doesn't perform adequately largely because the VM system can't map and can't recycle pages fast enough because of locking limitations. It has nothing to do with the storage stack itself. However, most developers themselves are not familiar with the issues much less users. So if I were to make further locking changes I would initially inevitably break some things. Your response would be that it isn't something users want. You're absolutely right, because current users with higher performance demands DON'T USE FreeBSD. Now you may wish to cut hairs by saying well ... locking we need flowtable we don't. However, the gist of that would be that things that you don't understand, that don't solve anyone's immediate problems user's don't want. For many prospective server class users the current performance profile is a bigger deterrent than the fact that Cairo took tons of hand-wringing to build and so I spent hours just getting a broken chat client to install and once I did OTR support didn't work. Taken collectively the cool new feature Xs are every bit as important to FreeBSD as ports. OTOH, if we don't fix the fundamental problems with ports, and other key areas of the operating system, we're just not going to have users, period. Given that most of the developers (like you) have stopped using FreeBSD on a day-to-day basis, who can blame them? Not necessarily. Most big shops don't really use ports as is. Particularly appliance vendors don't care about how package management is handled. But yes, in principle we could end up with no desktop users. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection -- “The real damage is done by those millions who want to 'get by.' The ordinary men who just want to be left in peace. Those who don’t want their little lives disturbed by anything bigger than themselves. Those with no sides and no causes. Those who won’t take measure of their own strength, for fear of antagonizing their own weakness. Those who don’t like to make waves—or enemies. Those for whom freedom, honour, truth, and principles are only literature. Those who live small, love small, die small. It’s the reductionist approach to life: if you keep it small, you’ll keep it under control. If you don’t make any noise, the bogeyman won’t find you. But it’s all an illusion, because they die too, those people who roll up their spirits into tiny little balls so as to be safe. Safe?! From what? Life is always on the edge of death; narrow streets lead to the same place as wide avenues, and a little candle burns itself out just like a flaming torch does. I choose my own way to burn.” Sophie Scholl ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
Doug Barton wrote: ... and here is the crux of the problem. The vast majority of our developers don't use FreeBSD as their regular workstation. So it has increasingly become an OS where changes are being lobbed over the wall by developers who don't run systems that those changes affect. That's no way to run a railroad. Doug wow since it is not April 1st it must be revelation's day ...:) is this then the bottomline ? if [ $using_ports=YES ]; get_screwed($big_time); fi -- H signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: flowtable usable or not
on 02/03/2012 20:21 Doug Barton said the following: ... and here is the crux of the problem. The vast majority of our developers don't use FreeBSD as their regular workstation. Do you care to back this up with facts? Or are you going beyond constructive in your [self-]criticism of FreeBSD [OS, developers, procedures, community, etc]? -- Andriy Gapon ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On 3/2/2012 1:27 PM, Andriy Gapon wrote: on 02/03/2012 20:21 Doug Barton said the following: ... and here is the crux of the problem. The vast majority of our developers don't use FreeBSD as their regular workstation. Do you care to back this up with facts? You mean other than the very few hands that go up whenever we discuss who is actually using FreeBSD as their desktop? If that doesn't work for you, look around at the next developer's summit and take note of the overwhelming preponderance of fruit logos. Just looking at the committers, of which we have over 300, only a couple dozen at most have ever identified as actually using FreeBSD as a desktop at my count. Taking the larger development community into account I think the numbers are a little better, but not much. Sure, our strength is servers, and that is not going to change. But how many real-life bugs have I personally uncovered in -current as a result of actually running it (mostly) daily? I'm not the only one, certainly, but if the numbers were flipped and the vast majority of our developers *did* use FreeBSD routinely, how much better off would we be? And before anyone bothers to point it out, yes, I happen to be using Windows at this exact moment. I have some layer 9 work to get done and I need tools that are only available to me in Windows (more's the pity). The sad thing is, judging by the activity on the -ports@ list, the traffic in #bsdports, and just talking to/interacting with FreeBSD users, a lot of *them* are not only interested in FreeBSD as a desktop OS, they are actually doing it. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
on 03/03/2012 00:24 Doug Barton said the following: On 3/2/2012 1:27 PM, Andriy Gapon wrote: on 02/03/2012 20:21 Doug Barton said the following: ... and here is the crux of the problem. The vast majority of our developers don't use FreeBSD as their regular workstation. Do you care to back this up with facts? You mean other than the very few hands that go up whenever we discuss who is actually using FreeBSD as their desktop? If that doesn't work for you, look around at the next developer's summit and take note of the overwhelming preponderance of fruit logos. Just looking at the committers, of which we have over 300, only a couple dozen at most have ever identified as actually using FreeBSD as a desktop at my count. Taking the larger development community into account I think the numbers are a little better, but not much. OK, I agree that anyone can have his own impressions and now I realize that you stated your own impression based on your observations. It's just that it sounded like you stated a fact. -- Andriy Gapon ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
I've had the same problem with wireless. For some users, wireless works flawlessly. For other users, it's completely unusable. Trying to get any kind of useful feedback from people has been impossible at best. I've even had FreeBSD developers, sitting in the developers IRC channel, say wifi is so broken on FreeBSD they have to boot into windows to get anything done. Yet I still haven't seen any PRs about this. This is why I've been pushing people to keep filing PRs. I can't even begin to investigate what I don't know is broken and if the _developers_ don't use FreeBSD because supported wifi stuff is broken, then .. well, no hope, etc. The honest truth is this: for any system to work, there needs to be: * sufficient users reporting issues; * sufficient developers (and/or companies) wanting it to work and keeping the bug fixes coming; * a healthy cycle between the above two. If _either_ there are no developers or there is no feedback to the developer(s), the cycle breaks, and things rot in very annoying ways. Then you have the next problem, which is: * if it doesn't work, noone will use it * if noone uses it, noone will work on it. Try breaking that cycle. 2c, Adrian ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
Doug Barton wrote: Just looking at the committers, of which we have over 300, only a couple dozen at most have ever identified as actually using FreeBSD as a desktop at my count. Taking the larger development community into account I think the numbers are a little better, but not much. Sure, our strength is servers, and that is not going to change. eventually that could be a good starting point, good question is, why not? But how many real-life bugs have I personally uncovered in -current as a result of actually running it (mostly) daily? I'm not the only one, certainly, but if the numbers were flipped and the vast majority of our developers *did* use FreeBSD routinely, how much better off would we be? again, why? let's face some reality. Forever installing FreeBSD Desktop, either KDE or Gnome, was a nightmare process, or better, to make it appear on screen was a nightmare. Even if somebody got all packages into his system (by miracle?), it still did not popped up. Without some special knowledge _no_chance_. who knows, the guys who created and battled on area51 knew why they chose this name :) Still now, kde4, hours of install, missing packages, compiling and still nothing, somewhere over the process, flies over the screen please set kdm4_enable=YES ... I guess that will not be noticed by any user Even if some smart guy figures out that he needs xorg-server, the port or package do not select all it needs for running, its own drivers and so. How a user should know that? There is a windeco which installs hundreds of deps, even sound what do not work on FreeBSD, but xorg do not have deps for its functionality? god ... ohhh I forgot, that has nothing to do with the desktop itself , sorry for mentioning ... Anybody can tell how somebody can find all this out? Don't say by reading because we need to look at the real facts and that is nobody want to read, they want a desktop nothing else, something silly and easy to read email and write docs and surf on the net, listen to a CD, they need to put a cd into the drive, running install process, reboot, using, nothing else and such a thing ... we do not have so where this potential users should come from? Only from heaven ... And before anyone bothers to point it out, yes, I happen to be using Windows at this exact moment. I have some layer 9 work to get done and I need tools that are only available to me in Windows (more's the pity). The sad thing is, judging by the activity on the -ports@ list, the traffic in #bsdports, and just talking to/interacting with FreeBSD users, a lot of *them* are not only interested in FreeBSD as a desktop OS, they are actually doing it. IMO the weakest point is that we do not have the packages ready. Even if lots of you do not like it to hear, fact is that we must look around and see how others do it. Windows, whatever it is, it is easy to install for everybody. Same for Fedora, in order to stay with a Unix system, package handling, update with YUM on Fedora hardly fails. ALL packages are compiled, you never need to compile anything. Even if you need 800MB of packages, yum picks them all, installs them all, and all is fine up top date. Such a process is where we need to get orientation from. If it was my decision, it should be go to ports=no_no, packages=YES I mean, as long as the packages are not complete and ready, no new port version should be released or announced So who dares,understand and can or like adventures, compiles from ports Such a decision would help FreeBSD in all means and would help the users as well, in any case it will create more users Why somebody should chose FreeBSD as his daily desktop, oh man, only some die-hard-guys like you and me, but you know, that is not hours of work, that is days, weeks and constant setbacks for whatever reasons ... that is not for anybody. And you are right, no traffic on the specific lists, why? because the three on the list, two can help themselves (you and me) and the other is the moderator ... :) not even the port maintainer/packager is on that list ... :) ps. the last statement might be exaggerated and might not be valid in all cases, so please do not shoot -- H signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: flowtable usable or not
On 3/2/12 10:21 AM, Doug Barton wrote: On 03/02/2012 03:44, K. Macy wrote: not sure who wrote: Correct. However, I'm not sure the analogy is flawed. I am, to some degree, guilty of the same sin. I now run Ubuntu and have never had a single problem keeping my package system up date, in stark contrast to my experiences of slow and nightmarishly error-ridden port updates. but I use the PBIs from pcbsd.. you REALLY don't have this problem with them. Doug ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
On 2/29/2012 6:01 PM, Steve Wills wrote: On 02/29/12 13:17, K. Macy wrote: . I tried it, on both FreeBSD routers, web systems, and database servers; all on 8.2+. It still causes massive instability. Disabling the sysctl, and/or removing it from the kernel solved the problems. Routing I can believe, but I'm wondering how close attention you paid to the workload. There are CDN networks with high uptimes and shipping firewall products that use flowtable, so your mention of web systems forces makes me ask for specifics. The failure I experienced was with web servers running 8.0 behind a F5 load balancer in an HA setup. Whenever the failover happened, the web servers would continue sending to the wrong MAC address, despite the arp table updating. Disabling flowtable via the sysctl solved the problem. Maybe Doug's failure was similar, maybe not, but I thought I'd throw my $0.02 in. Yes, that was part of it. On the web and db systems we had what I can only describe as general wackiness with systems suddenly becoming unreachable, etc. This was with a moderately complex network setup with a combination of different VLANs, multiple interfaces, etc. The FreeBSD routers would just plain panic on a semi-regular interval. Removing flowtable made all this go away, and we've been quite stable since then. hth, Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
Yes, that was part of it. On the web and db systems we had what I can only describe as general wackiness with systems suddenly becoming unreachable, etc. This was with a moderately complex network setup with a combination of different VLANs, multiple interfaces, etc. The FreeBSD routers would just plain panic on a semi-regular interval. Removing flowtable made all this go away, and we've been quite stable since then. I understand the switch. Uptime is important in any production network. However, it seems like it may have been too easy to turn it off because no one has made any effort to help me debug the issues. By analogy your guidance for ports usability problems would be to install Ubuntu. Cheers ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
. I tried it, on both FreeBSD routers, web systems, and database servers; all on 8.2+. It still causes massive instability. Disabling the sysctl, and/or removing it from the kernel solved the problems. Routing I can believe, but I'm wondering how close attention you paid to the workload. There are CDN networks with high uptimes and shipping firewall products that use flowtable, so your mention of web systems forces makes me ask for specifics. Thanks ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 02/29/12 13:17, K. Macy wrote: . I tried it, on both FreeBSD routers, web systems, and database servers; all on 8.2+. It still causes massive instability. Disabling the sysctl, and/or removing it from the kernel solved the problems. Routing I can believe, but I'm wondering how close attention you paid to the workload. There are CDN networks with high uptimes and shipping firewall products that use flowtable, so your mention of web systems forces makes me ask for specifics. The failure I experienced was with web servers running 8.0 behind a F5 load balancer in an HA setup. Whenever the failover happened, the web servers would continue sending to the wrong MAC address, despite the arp table updating. Disabling flowtable via the sysctl solved the problem. Maybe Doug's failure was similar, maybe not, but I thought I'd throw my $0.02 in. Steve -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPTtiJAAoJEPXPYrMgexuhp8EIAKGGtZzcxgQ4zVO5SKy1jAOH DXLRLYfdm8NJB9hYEvtUa9/nltAE35zQMp7FU4AlZ2L2ol/J7W9aODiN0gw9AFEr dxBYyQliDKvVwLgah9a5PaXNM3kpx9ZvZGM3lBQGQbZaEV+ERwjBXkfIqjEB4Ei5 bBd7841jQm22s1xJOuJTdMGrpnY1DMUPdPCFOAtyQmTAhWpoELgtQBvP9kGYNKv2 3NAPnjFuooe9fdze9VSO8TWFJSb82DVbRsz6JiR0998oHXPApCh4I5y1rNcg2qA/ 1x2EdFlivXpgjC4nKUgFjhohmdGv20FrLfex4eOq6dSMF0Baje86PJcc8EZ1DK0= =NUft -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
Inviato da iPad Il giorno 01/mar/2012, alle ore 03:01, Steve Wills swi...@freebsd.org ha scritto: The failure I experienced was with web servers running 8.0 behind a F5 load balancer in an HA setup. Whenever the failover happened, the web servers would continue sending to the wrong MAC address, despite the arp table updating. Disabling flowtable via the sysctl solved the problem. Maybe Doug's failure was similar, maybe not, but I thought I'd throw my $0.02 in. Thanks. I just committed a change recently for 8 - HEAD to address that. I would like to know if it solves the problem. Steve -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPTtiJAAoJEPXPYrMgexuhp8EIAKGGtZzcxgQ4zVO5SKy1jAOH DXLRLYfdm8NJB9hYEvtUa9/nltAE35zQMp7FU4AlZ2L2ol/J7W9aODiN0gw9AFEr dxBYyQliDKvVwLgah9a5PaXNM3kpx9ZvZGM3lBQGQbZaEV+ERwjBXkfIqjEB4Ei5 bBd7841jQm22s1xJOuJTdMGrpnY1DMUPdPCFOAtyQmTAhWpoELgtQBvP9kGYNKv2 3NAPnjFuooe9fdze9VSO8TWFJSb82DVbRsz6JiR0998oHXPApCh4I5y1rNcg2qA/ 1x2EdFlivXpgjC4nKUgFjhohmdGv20FrLfex4eOq6dSMF0Baje86PJcc8EZ1DK0= =NUft -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ 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: flowtable usable or not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 02/28/2012 15:08, Florian Smeets wrote: I talked to Kip Macy, who implemented flowtable, about this. He thinks that the problem was caused by inappropriate default setting of net.inet.ip.output_flowtable_size. This should have been fixed by r205488 which was MFC'd to 8 and should be part of 8.2 and of course 9.0. However nobody who experienced the problem wanted to try any of these releases with flowtable enabled, so we still don't know if it's fixed or not. Should anyone try this it could certainly be the case that net.inet.ip.output_flowtable_size needs to be tuned even more. I tried it, on both FreeBSD routers, web systems, and database servers; all on 8.2+. It still causes massive instability. Disabling the sysctl, and/or removing it from the kernel solved the problems. Doug - -- It's always a long day; 86400 doesn't fit into a short. Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJPTdKIAAoJEFzGhvEaGryEHksH/1Hg6TIXLuXf9fUrwsr2Wru3 0qY4MyB6Z0jgXZYqK3QtVd+zzo3LjCbhlN2qUJE/j5eLdROwev+vqdmmKgHRmU5+ lbqIw8t3W9ICobzTxlKmOjJlgBMgrPcX1Dbz0h1+kj26EIJEzThv/l4dxwElm1OT W6bNvYIsrs/fR7MoYnJAp+frTMiuAx3QACx8YeKDLevKtUK8VmQxRJzZ7f6dFSNm qtucCnfDyawIomnoRFbWLvA88RoK8gEZ3sYytXb97qB2D0oLkCu3aX6LkaDzFVR5 LrZwtY8gFzSueGEIaxdxZjgEcHMeyXeq3b6MXvxSBGd0QQ0F15ZpDxhBI4jjEI0= =He/W -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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
