C unit tests seen by OpenBSD developpers
Hi misc, I'm currently learning C. In many languages, you hear lots of stuff likes 'unit testing', 'refactoring', 'agile programming' and others... It seems that these techniques are not very present in C programming (whereas check framework is in packages, it seems too complex) Looking quickly at the OpenBSD's CVS, I found no unit test. I won't debate on the merit or cost of this approach, and I'm not really fond of it (add not-so-usefull complexity) but I'm just curious to know why OpenBSD developpers choose to not use this technique for userland tools (for kernel, it's obvious :). Best regards, Bruno.
Re: C unit tests seen by OpenBSD developpers
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006, Bruno Carnazzi wrote: Hi misc, I'm currently learning C. In many languages, you hear lots of stuff likes 'unit testing', 'refactoring', 'agile programming' and others... It seems that these techniques are not very present in C These techniques (minus the hype factor) are feasable in any language. programming (whereas check framework is in packages, it seems too complex) Looking quickly at the OpenBSD's CVS, I found no unit test. I won't debate on the merit or cost of this approach, and I'm not really fond of it (add not-so-usefull complexity) but I'm just curious to know why OpenBSD developpers choose to not use this technique for userland tools (for kernel, it's obvious :). You did not look hard enough. We have a lot of tests in src/regress. Both to test userland stuff as well as system calls. -Otto
Soekris network problems - 48 hour deadline
I'm having throughput problems using a Soekris net4801 as a firewall running OpenBSD 3.9. This is replacing a SonicWALL device that was working fine from the user's perspective. (I want to replace it because, among other things, I abhor SonicWALL's licensing). I won't post a dmesg unless requested because I think this platform is pretty well known. Hosts on the internal network are able to access the Internet but report that access seems slow. Some operations fail consistently. For example, users can send and receive e-mail e-mails but can't send e-mail with attachments larger than about 20K. I ran a browser-based ADSL speed test from an internal host and found download speeds to be quite good but upload tests fail to complete. I found a few similar problems in the archives but the posted solutions haven't worked for me. I can't see that pf is blocking anything I want passed. At the moment I am running a stripped down pf.conf as follows: # DECLARATIONS: Ext_If=sis0 Int_If=sis1 DMZ_If=sis2 Int_Net=192.168.5.0/24 # OPTIONS: set loginterface $Ext_If # NAT / REDIRECTION: nat on $Ext_If from $Int_Net to any - ($Ext_If) rdr on $Ext_If inet proto tcp from any to ($Ext_If) port 3391 \ - 192.168.5.1 port 3391 rdr on $Ext_If inet proto tcp from any to ($Ext_If) port 3392 \ - 192.168.5.2 port 3392 I think I can rule out things like speed and duplex problems between the Soekris and the local switch because the problem only affects outbound traffic. I tried a few scrub options to no avail but may not have been doing the right thing. I would really appreciate any suggestions on how to troubleshoot this. If I can't get this resolved by Monday morning I'm going to take some heat. Thanks, RPK.
Re: Soekris network problems - 48 hour deadline
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006, Richard P. Koett wrote: I'm having throughput problems using a Soekris net4801 as a firewall running OpenBSD 3.9. This is replacing a SonicWALL device that was working fine from the user's perspective. (I want to replace it because, among other things, I abhor SonicWALL's licensing). I won't post a dmesg unless requested because I think this platform is pretty well known. Hosts on the internal network are able to access the Internet but report that access seems slow. Some operations fail consistently. For example, users can send and receive e-mail e-mails but can't send e-mail with attachments larger than about 20K. I ran a browser-based ADSL speed test from an internal host and found download speeds to be quite good but upload tests fail to complete. I found a few similar problems in the archives but the posted solutions haven't worked for me. I can't see that pf is blocking anything I want passed. At the moment I am running a stripped down pf.conf as follows: # DECLARATIONS: Ext_If=sis0 Int_If=sis1 DMZ_If=sis2 Int_Net=192.168.5.0/24 # OPTIONS: set loginterface $Ext_If # NAT / REDIRECTION: nat on $Ext_If from $Int_Net to any - ($Ext_If) rdr on $Ext_If inet proto tcp from any to ($Ext_If) port 3391 \ - 192.168.5.1 port 3391 rdr on $Ext_If inet proto tcp from any to ($Ext_If) port 3392 \ - 192.168.5.2 port 3392 I think I can rule out things like speed and duplex problems between the Soekris and the local switch because the problem only affects outbound traffic. I tried a few scrub options to no avail but may not have been doing the right thing. I would really appreciate any suggestions on how to troubleshoot this. If I can't get this resolved by Monday morning I'm going to take some heat. Thanks, RPK. What kind of link is sis0 on? Do you know what your interface MTU was set to on the SonicWall? -Matt-
Undeadly not responding
What's up with undeadly.org. It's dying at: cat6509-vlan300.edm.tera-byte.com (66.244.192.42) * * *
Re: Undeadly not responding
* Daniel Ouellet wrote: What's up with undeadly.org. It's down for maintenance, that's up.
Re: Soekris network problems - 48 hour deadline
On 10/14/06, Richard P. Koett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm having throughput problems using a Soekris net4801 as a firewall running OpenBSD 3.9. This is replacing a SonicWALL device that was working fine from the user's perspective. (I want to replace it because, among other things, I abhor SonicWALL's licensing). I won't post a dmesg unless requested because I think this platform is pretty well known. Hosts on the internal network are able to access the Internet but report that access seems slow. Some operations fail consistently. For example, users can send and receive e-mail e-mails but can't send e-mail with attachments larger than about 20K. I ran a browser-based ADSL speed test from an internal host and found download speeds to be quite good but upload tests fail to complete. I found a few similar problems in the archives but the posted solutions haven't worked for me. I can't see that pf is blocking anything I want passed. At the moment I am running a stripped down pf.conf as follows: # DECLARATIONS: Ext_If=sis0 Int_If=sis1 DMZ_If=sis2 Int_Net=192.168.5.0/24 # OPTIONS: set loginterface $Ext_If # NAT / REDIRECTION: nat on $Ext_If from $Int_Net to any - ($Ext_If) rdr on $Ext_If inet proto tcp from any to ($Ext_If) port 3391 \ - 192.168.5.1 port 3391 rdr on $Ext_If inet proto tcp from any to ($Ext_If) port 3392 \ - 192.168.5.2 port 3392 I think I can rule out things like speed and duplex problems between the Soekris and the local switch because the problem only affects outbound traffic. I tried a few scrub options to no avail but may not have been doing the right thing. I would really appreciate any suggestions on how to troubleshoot this. If I can't get this resolved by Monday morning I'm going to take some heat. Do netstat -in, netstat -s or netstat -ss give any clues?
Re: armish fdisk/disklabel free sectors
On 2006/10/13 19:37, Theo de Raadt wrote: Speaking of zaurus -- any way to get a com0 on this thing? You have to buy the special Zaurus adapter for this. It is a little bit hard to find. If you do so, you can even use it as a serial console. Sharp ce-170ts (try amazon), there is another one (serialio zslimcable) which fits the socket but is not suitable for use with sl-c3xxx.
Re: Soekris network problems - 48 hour deadline
On 2006/10/14 00:56, Richard P. Koett wrote: known. Hosts on the internal network are able to access the Internet but report that access seems slow. Some operations fail consistently. For example, users can send and receive e-mail e-mails but can't send e-mail with attachments larger than about 20K. I ran a browser-based ADSL speed test from an internal host and found download speeds to be quite good but upload tests fail to complete. I tried a few scrub options to no avail which ones, did you try the max-mss I suggested? if 1440 is no good try a bit lower. it sounds very likely that you have MTU problems and max-mss will workaround that (at least for TCP).
Re: Soekris network problems - 48 hour deadline
Matthew Closson wrote: On Sat, 14 Oct 2006, Richard P. Koett wrote: I'm having throughput problems using a Soekris net4801 as a firewall running OpenBSD 3.9. This is replacing a SonicWALL device that was working fine from the user's perspective. (I want to replace it because, among other things, I abhor SonicWALL's licensing). I won't post a dmesg unless requested because I think this platform is pretty well known. Hosts on the internal network are able to access the Internet but report that access seems slow. Some operations fail consistently. For example, users can send and receive e-mail e-mails but can't send e-mail with attachments larger than about 20K. I ran a browser-based ADSL speed test from an internal host and found download speeds to be quite good but upload tests fail to complete. I found a few similar problems in the archives but the posted solutions haven't worked for me. I can't see that pf is blocking anything I want passed. At the moment I am running a stripped down pf.conf as follows: # DECLARATIONS: Ext_If=sis0 Int_If=sis1 DMZ_If=sis2 Int_Net=192.168.5.0/24 # OPTIONS: set loginterface $Ext_If # NAT / REDIRECTION: nat on $Ext_If from $Int_Net to any - ($Ext_If) rdr on $Ext_If inet proto tcp from any to ($Ext_If) port 3391 \ - 192.168.5.1 port 3391 rdr on $Ext_If inet proto tcp from any to ($Ext_If) port 3392 \ - 192.168.5.2 port 3392 I think I can rule out things like speed and duplex problems between the Soekris and the local switch because the problem only affects outbound traffic. I tried a few scrub options to no avail but may not have been doing the right thing. I would really appreciate any suggestions on how to troubleshoot this. If I can't get this resolved by Monday morning I'm going to take some heat. Thanks, RPK. What kind of link is sis0 on? Do you know what your interface MTU was set to on the SonicWall? -Matt- sis0 is connected to a D-Link ADSL modem - not sure of the exact model. ifconfig shows the following details: # ifconfig lo0: flags=8049UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST mtu 33224 groups: lo inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff00 inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128 inet6 fe80::1%lo0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x7 sis0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 lladdr 00:00:24:c6:df:34 groups: egress media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex) status: active inet6 fe80::200:24ff:fec6:df34%sis0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 inet xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx netmask 0xfe00 broadcast xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx sis1: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 lladdr 00:00:24:c6:df:35 media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex) status: active inet 192.168.5.254 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.5.255 inet6 fe80::200:24ff:fec6:df35%sis1 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2 sis2: flags=8802BROADCAST,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 lladdr 00:00:24:c6:df:36 media: Ethernet autoselect (none) status: no carrier pflog0: flags=141UP,RUNNING,PROMISC mtu 33224 pfsync0: flags=0 mtu 1460 enc0: flags=0 mtu 1536 I don't know what MTU the SonicWALL was using but I'm sure it would have been whatever the default setting is on a SonicWALL SOHO3.
Re: Soekris network problems - 48 hour deadline
Adriaan wrote: On 10/14/06, Richard P. Koett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm having throughput problems using a Soekris net4801 as a firewall running OpenBSD 3.9. This is replacing a SonicWALL device that was working fine from the user's perspective. (I want to replace it because, among other things, I abhor SonicWALL's licensing). I won't post a dmesg unless requested because I think this platform is pretty well known. Hosts on the internal network are able to access the Internet but report that access seems slow. Some operations fail consistently. For example, users can send and receive e-mail e-mails but can't send e-mail with attachments larger than about 20K. I ran a browser-based ADSL speed test from an internal host and found download speeds to be quite good but upload tests fail to complete. I found a few similar problems in the archives but the posted solutions haven't worked for me. I can't see that pf is blocking anything I want passed. At the moment I am running a stripped down pf.conf as follows: # DECLARATIONS: Ext_If=sis0 Int_If=sis1 DMZ_If=sis2 Int_Net=192.168.5.0/24 # OPTIONS: set loginterface $Ext_If # NAT / REDIRECTION: nat on $Ext_If from $Int_Net to any - ($Ext_If) rdr on $Ext_If inet proto tcp from any to ($Ext_If) port 3391 \ - 192.168.5.1 port 3391 rdr on $Ext_If inet proto tcp from any to ($Ext_If) port 3392 \ - 192.168.5.2 port 3392 I think I can rule out things like speed and duplex problems between the Soekris and the local switch because the problem only affects outbound traffic. I tried a few scrub options to no avail but may not have been doing the right thing. I would really appreciate any suggestions on how to troubleshoot this. If I can't get this resolved by Monday morning I'm going to take some heat. Do netstat -in, netstat -s or netstat -ss give any clues? netstat -in lists no errors or collisions. Below is the output from netstat -ss and netstat -s. I'm not sure what to make of it: # netstat -ss ip: 241379 total packets received 3302 packets for this host 1 packet for unknown/unsupported protocol 236784 packets forwarded 3 packets not forwardable 3048 packets sent from this host icmp: 495 calls to icmp_error Output packet histogram: echo reply: 180 destination unreachable: 495 Input packet histogram: destination unreachable: 1 echo: 180 180 message responses generated igmp: ipencap: tcp: 1234 packets sent 1017 data packets (161279 bytes) 27 data packets (17252 bytes) retransmitted 153 ack-only packets (775 delayed) 37 control packets 1737 packets received 762 acks (for 151461 bytes) 222 duplicate acks 808 packets (28599 bytes) received in-sequence 9 completely duplicate packets (252 bytes) 10 out-of-order packets (80 bytes) 4 window update packets 1737 packets hardware-checksummed 6 connection requests 26 connection accepts 32 connections established (including accepts) 57 connections closed (including 0 drops) 717 segments updated rtt (of 729 attempts) 26 retransmit timeouts 3 correct ACK header predictions 457 correct data packet header predictions 308 PCB cache misses cwr by fastrecovery: 26 cwr by timeout: 26 26 SYN cache entries added 26 completed 26 SACK recovery episodes 34 segment rexmits in SACK recovery episodes 8552 byte rexmits in SACK recovery episodes 202 SACK options received 1 SACK option sent udp: 1385 datagrams received 5 with no checksum 1380 input packets hardware-checksummed 99 dropped due to no socket 1260 broadcast/multicast datagrams dropped due to no socket 26 delivered 27 datagrams output 100 missed PCB cache esp: ah: etherip: ipcomp: carp: pfsync: ip6: 12 packets sent from this host Mbuf statistics: icmp6: Output packet histogram: multicast listener report: 10 neighbor solicitation: 2 Histogram of error messages to be generated: pim6: rip6: -- # netstat -s (Note: Some parts omitted for brevity where all entries were zeros) ip: 241674 total packets received 0 bad header checksums 0 with size smaller than minimum 0 with data size data length 0 with header length data size 0 with data length header length 0 with bad options 0 with incorrect version number 0 fragments received 0
Re: Soekris network problems - 48 hour deadline
Stuart Henderson wrote: On 2006/10/14 00:56, Richard P. Koett wrote: known. Hosts on the internal network are able to access the Internet but report that access seems slow. Some operations fail consistently. For example, users can send and receive e-mail e-mails but can't send e-mail with attachments larger than about 20K. I ran a browser-based ADSL speed test from an internal host and found download speeds to be quite good but upload tests fail to complete. I tried a few scrub options to no avail which ones, did you try the max-mss I suggested? if 1440 is no good try a bit lower. it sounds very likely that you have MTU problems and max-mss will workaround that (at least for TCP). I tried the following variations: scrub out on sis0 max-mss 1440 scrub out max-mss 1440 scrub max-mss 1440 scrub max-mss 1400 Should I keep going lower, or try some other variation?
Thanks once more
Guys, I just browsed over 40.html#new and I'm once more deeply astounded what you guys achieve for each new release. Given the hostile vendor environment you have to deal with one can just be impressed how you guys just did it again - somehow ... even my fully-closed-and-no-docs 88E8053 is now supported. Respect. -- Stephan A. Rickauer --- Institut f|r Neuroinformatik Tel: +41 44 635 30 50 Universitdt / ETH Z|rich Sek: +41 44 635 30 52 Winterthurerstrasse 190 Fax: +41 44 635 30 53 CH-8057 Z|richWeb: www.ini.ethz.ch RSA public key: https://www.ini.ethz.ch/~stephan/pubkey.asc --- [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]
Re: UPS just delivered the 4.0 release CD-set
Hey Ingo, Please refrain from Vandeputte-bashing... =;-) =;-) Wow, hold your horses. Wim is Belgian, I am Dutch. The Dutch diss the Belgians. This is a fundamental (f)law of the Universe. But nevertheless. My three favorite Belgians are: 1) Urbanus 2) Wim 3) God Be well and keep on smiling... Nico :-)
eagle DSL driver which card to try to ngrep :)
Helo, Anyone using eagle driver for Telus High speed ADSL. If so which card would you recommend. Are they still flakey for plunking a server out there? It has been a while. TIA [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Soekris network problems - 48 hour deadline
Good morning I tried the following variations: scrub out on sis0 max-mss 1440 scrub out max-mss 1440 scrub max-mss 1440 scrub max-mss 1400 You should be able to figure out the problem, actually. Good ole tcpdump should show you something. I'd specifically look for icmp that you might be blocking. -Matt Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: c.93.3 not found when installing packages
Christian Weisgerber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I expect a new snapshot to be available by Monday. (Building a full package snapshot now takes ~68 hours on the Xeon 2.66 GHz dedicated to the job. If somebody wants to donate a new high-end machine for the task, talk to Theo what his rack can accommodate.) Hmm.. can you use a few such machines and employ distcc? I couldn't help notice that a port for it was recently submitted to [EMAIL PROTECTED] distcc significantly reduces compile time. At work we used to run it on our individual boxes and our compiles would take a fraction of the normal time. -- Christian naddy Weisgerber [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Soekris network problems - 48 hour deadline - SOLVED!!
A huge thank you to all who offered advice on my network problem. It appears that the problem has been fixed by changing hostname.sis0 from dhcp NONE NONE NONE to dhcp media 10baseT. Previous output from ifconfig showed: sis0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex) It now shows: sis0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 media: Ethernet 10baseT I guess it was a stupid autonegotiation problem after all. I didn't know that could affect traffic in only 1 direction. Live and learn :) At this point I have reloaded my full pf rule set. Unless doing so introduces a new problem I believe things are fine. The advice I received from the list has been educational and much appreciated as always. RPK.
Re: Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 11:11:52 -0400 From: Kurt Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Thursday 12 October 2006 10:13 am, Tobias Ulmer wrote: We are modifying the source code, which is ok with the porting software paragraph in the document above, but contradicts with a private mail from Mike Connor where he writes about patching of app source violates their trademark. Oh well... Yes they are trying to exert a ridiculous level of control with their trademark but only when using the official branding. If they have given a project permission to use the official branding then any patch to firefox must first be approved by them. That's what all the fus is about. I'm not happy about it but it doesn't affect our ability to distribute it under the community edition rules. Actually, what the Mozilla people objected to in the whole Debian debacle seems to be that the package was called ;firefox+. Debian already used the community edition version just like OpenBSD does. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=354622
Re: best hardware plattform for openbsd
On 10/13/06, Toni Mueller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for pointing me to bioctl - I was unaware about that - but I don't offhand see how I could eg. collect SMART status on the drives hanging off such a card. IIRC, you cannot collect the SMART status on individual drives. Personally, I don't really mind as I'm not a big fan of SMART. Having seen drives that showed no issues in SMART, right up to the point of dying, is bound to change one's perspective. Since the machines may very well be not in reach, I don't fancy beeping or blinking drive enclosures. I need log entries instead. The logical disk status on ami(4) devices can also be polled through sensorsd(8). Perhaps I should also have mentioned that bit. If you want individual drive statistics, I suppose you would want to parse bioctl(8) output. I also recommend you take a quick look at sensorsd.conf(5). The above works for me, but of course your requirements may be different. Cheers, Rogier -- If you don't know where you're going, any road will get you there.
Re: Soekris network problems - 48 hour deadline
On 2006/10/14 02:42, Richard P. Koett wrote: I won't post a dmesg unless requested because I think this platform is pretty well known. it probably won't make a difference here, but in general, the dmesg doesn't just tell about the platform, it tells about the OS you're using on it too. I think I can rule out things like speed and duplex problems between the Soekris and the local switch because the problem only affects outbound traffic. Not entirely, it could only be affecting things in one direction. Better to verify. On 2006/10/14 03:10, Richard P. Koett wrote: I tried a few scrub options to no avail which ones, did you try the max-mss I suggested? if 1440 is no good try a bit lower. it sounds very likely that you have MTU problems and max-mss will workaround that (at least for TCP). I tried the following variations: scrub out on sis0 max-mss 1440 scrub out max-mss 1440 scrub max-mss 1440 scrub max-mss 1400 Should I keep going lower, or try some other variation? I'd have thought that would have taken care of it, perhaps it's some other problem I haven't thought of... Any blocked packets when you see problems? (tcpdump -neipflog0)
Re: Soekris network problems - 48 hour deadline
On Saturday 14 October 2006 4:10 am, you wrote: Hi Richard I dealt with an ISP on behalf of a client that required a MSS of 1100 during one particular phase of troubleshooting. Funny thing (not) they forgot to notify everyone when said problem was corrected and the client ran with that MSS for 5 months.Thankfully the actual packets they used are consistently small. Anyway, have you done the ruleset adjustment to to pass out quick on your $ext_if to rule out a rule issue. I have used this many times and has been helpful and takes just a couple of minutes. Do a one to one NAT from your testing machine through the OBSD box and put pass in quick keep state on the $int_if and pass out quick keep state on the $ext_if at the top of your ruleset and see what happens. If things work correctly you add back you ruleset one at a time. Should I keep going lower, or try some other variation? Certainly try lower, you may find the magic bullet Sonicwall defaults to 1500 If your comfortable with sending your complete ruleset to the list or to me privately please do so. It is more often than not considerably more helpful. Thanks Richard -- Sincerely Bob DeBolt
Static code analysis tools?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I've been looking for static code analysis tools for a while, and the only real free tools I've found are rats and flawfinder. The other stuff is... not very useful. Either incomplete, reliant on non-free parts, reliant on Java (not GNU classpath, but pain-in-the-ass-to-get-working Java), or otherwise just not worth my time. The kinds of things I'm looking for are code coverage and memory safety (buffer overflows, double free()s, memory leaks), not sure on anything else. There are a lot of would be nice things that aren't likely to happen, like finding long loops and code paths (isn't this akin to the halting problem) so as to pretend static profiling can be done. The only thing I can think of at this point is somewhere in process someone working on OpenBSD has got to have found a good set of tools. Manual audits take time; static analysis tools get potential issues to the front of your attention so you can check those areas first before continuing with a deep analysis. Anything out there that's really good that I should know about? - -- We will enslave their women, eat their children and rape their cattle! -- Bosc, Evil alien overlord from the fifth dimension Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQIVAwUBRTEXQgs1xW0HCTEFAQK3IA/8Dj9EMWLX0d8/+hXEpruVb+iOJaTSpC34 8/6psFkko/wzrpL1J+Jtsl9VOaKfhnwSCVgYiYBAStyd9pMUNv7yEgjowqen/ZZ2 esTiWUJMfgwbLncVoARqhOiycQRntD9ktBPv2r3yh0xdqluB2X7Uz3zcwBtGeFV5 b2lPkmsj6swZ/3DJ7L258Q+dvu+AQ4iXkqRsB54TqGgJT1DkT56f1bX3sh3GNduf FcijBYNAfwMchhGmOw820EctNMZ6KEVnk4vhvw9wWIvnJiw79vPEYgOAbm0RFW8m 6BuY5IzvJfi87Gq0e9uFeGCSAi9bvrpzAO/si0lyW7U5dXWQf/Tyy7hEkNSmjcgj cHn4n6Ms+ByNOx7rNMjrfqvH5ZqNozEmGVGBAL1eiXmT87R8dkKPGflFoQ9JL4AK CWZgffIKSJXvturDhm2Lh/OChEpJZL63jFo6gDbsb65rGKUuS0I68RmztttGmXFn C16nBlwv0Sf4aiolrAA/yH8ga8mljtz7k4iOznwXRu0bjen+Qg3H7wgpH6B0B1DL 91St6ECOk0E6Bmqxyog91p9H5T+x1H45/yOM++25XkwKYx4m6Anm9PEj2cvEvz6G M4b4R6ZhlpBiAa38ilZYwVyLKRuhMAl+xDmhOyzI3buL+6MXMwZwJHi7+4fNmru6 lGvvUuS2sK8= =CHxa -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: C unit tests seen by OpenBSD developpers
Bruno said: I'm currently learning C. In many languages, you hear lots of stuff likes 'unit testing', 'refactoring', 'agile programming' and others... It seems that these techniques are not very present in C programming (whereas check framework is in packages, it seems too complex) Looking quickly at the OpenBSD's CVS, I found no unit test. I won't debate on the merit or cost of this approach, and I'm not really fond of it (add not-so-usefull complexity) but I'm just curious to know why OpenBSD developpers choose to not use this technique for userland tools (for kernel, it's obvious :). First, I'm not (perhaps yet) an OpenBSD developer, so I can't speak for them. I write a lot of C (and assembler), but my speciality is embedded work (e.g. instrumentation, controllers, the design of which uses embedded micros). In that field, the methodologies you cite are indeed used, albeit not necessarily fully and individually, and perhaps not as widely as they should be. With embedded devices, bugs are less forgiving. I've now spent nearly three decades acquiring techniques and methodologies that allow me to provide bug-free software (actually, usually firmware) by design, rather than by debugging (something I actively try to avoid) [1]. The methodologies you cite each contain valuable lessons and techniques, but I rarely come across full-blooded devotees of any one or more or them. Regression testing has its uses, and in some cases is absolutely necessary, but in others impractical. There are many other appropriate techniques; it's a large area which pretty much amounts to the entire craft of software engineering. There are many good books (perhaps starting with The Mythical Man-Month). Mostly, IMO, it's an attitude: developing an approach (to both design and coding) which results in clear, maintainable, and above all robust code. Back at OpenBSD, the developers are proactive on these things, and are actively encouraging the use of certain idioms and alternatives to classic library functions to avoid common bugs (e.g. buffer overflows). I've yet to read much source, but I'm confident you'd find it enlightening. [1] A typical response to this claim is get real! or must be really trivial software, then. I can understand that; the software industry at large is fixated on the myth that complex software must be buggy. I don't buy that; it's a question of managing complexity. Reducing the complex to a collection of inter-communicating trivial things is one of the most important skills there is. Steve http://www.fivetrees.com
OpenBSD and the Blind
Hello, Let me start things out here by saying I'm not a Unix programmer. I've no overwhelming need, commercial or otherwise, to use the operating system at all. I'm a hobbiest, which I suppose is a bit of a rarer breed for BSD than for something like Linux. However,, to add interest to the title of hobbiest, I also happen to be a blind computer user. Linux provides programs and kernel patches to enable me to use the system completely, even so far as to listen to the innumerable bootup messages--always interesting. However, I've recently discovered OpenBSD by the only way I currently can, emulation. I'm running it on a VAX provided to me by the work of Bob Supnick and the SIMH team. The reason the I386 version of BSD is generally more difficult for me to use involves the fact that the normal installation program doesn't provide a screen reader, which is something Linux got right, at least some distributions of it. What I am interested in here are ways that an OpenBSD system might be made accessible. Does anyone here have any thoughts on this issue? I'm more than willing to discuss possible approaches. Yours, Zack.
Re: best hardware plattform for openbsd
On Saturday 14 October 2006 08:28, Rogier Krieger wrote: On 10/13/06, Toni Mueller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for pointing me to bioctl - I was unaware about that - but I don't offhand see how I could eg. collect SMART status on the drives hanging off such a card. IIRC, you cannot collect the SMART status on individual drives. Personally, I don't really mind as I'm not a big fan of SMART. Having seen drives that showed no issues in SMART, right up to the point of dying, is bound to change one's perspective. [snip] SMART isn't pefect. I've had a disk go which SMART reported as being fine the day before, so that happens. But I've also seen SMART accurately fortell of problems a couple of time now. While it isn't perfect, it is useful. --STeve Andre'
Re: Soekris network problems - 48 hour deadline - SOLVED!!
Richard P. Koett wrote: I guess it was a stupid autonegotiation problem after all. I didn't know that could affect traffic in only 1 direction. Live and learn :) FWIW, if you're not autonegotiating, you should make certain both sides (NIC and switch) are hard coded/not set to negotiate.
Re: OpenBSD and the Blind
Zachary Kline wrote: What I am interested in here are ways that an OpenBSD system might be made accessible. Does anyone here have any thoughts on this issue? I'm more than willing to discuss possible approaches. Don't get overexited when reading the header, but do read the whole thread, it contains a lot of useful information. http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=articlesid=20061011142519mode=expanded # Han
