Re: zombies - solved
bofh wrote: On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Theo de Raadt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A fork does not seem like a good return on investment, so v 1.3.29 will probably go away sooner than later once the Apache Foundation drops maintenance on the 1.3 series. I'm just curious what is in 2.x that you need, that is unavailable in 1.3? mod_proxy_balancer Jonathan -- Jonathan Weiss http://blog.innerewut.de
Re: OpenBSD Berlin?
Vim Visual wrote: Hi, inspired by the Zurich email, I would like to ask here whether there is somebody from / living in Berlin in this list I'm from Berlin: http://blog.innerewut.de I often wear my OpenBSD shirts around City-West. Jonathan -- Jonathan Weiss http://blog.innerewut.de
Re: Annoying problem with dnsmasq
Markus Bergkvist wrote: See release notes on Dnsmasq 2.35 http://freshmeat.net/projects/dnsmasq/?branch_id=1991release_id=239661 OpenBSD-4.0 is due for release very soon and no version of dnsmasq prior to 2.35 will do DHCP on OpenBSD-4.0. I'm working on an update of the port to 2.38 Jonathan
Re: PHP vs Mason vs Ruby vs JSP/Tomcat
*) Ruby + Apache chroot + Ruby on Rails - loosely typed - interpreted Ruby is strongly but dynamically typed. So a = hi a = 1 is ok but a = 1 b = a + 1 is not. I consided this an advantage. Jonathan
Re: PHP vs Mason vs Ruby vs JSP/Tomcat
Adam wrote: On Tue, 23 May 2006 12:05:45 -0500 (CDT) L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: my personal favorite: Rails is MVC, so the URL presented to the user HAS NOT page identifier (i.e. only the controller name)! Uh, there's MVC frameworks in pretty much every language. Ruby is incredibly slow, and lacks internationalization support. Ruby is not incredibly slow, it depends on what you want to do with it. There are many sites with millions of requests (43people, basecamp,eins.de,..) that use Ruby/Ruby on Rails. internationalization is not build in like in Java, but like C, Perl or PHP there is Gettext or other internationalization libraries. I use Ruby on Rails on a German/English site with 100.000 request per day on a P4 2,8 and the machine is mostly idle. With Ruby on Rails you get an incredible increase in productivity. Adam Jonathan
Re: PHP vs Mason vs Ruby vs JSP/Tomcat
Cheers, Yes, it is incredibly slow. Here's some benchmarks showing python is significantly faster in everything but startup time. Even the author of ruby says ruby is slow, and its planned to make it a bytecode compiled language like everyone else in ruby 2. http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=alllang=rubylang2=python Benchmarks are fine but you should always check your specific setting and application. The author does not say that Ruby is slow and I know that Ruby 2 will get faster with YARV (the bytecode compiler). But the question is if it is fast enough. Ruby is clearly slower than Java, but Java is slower than C, so why not use C? Because of abstraction and verboseness. Java operates at a higher abstraction level than C which make programmers more productive at the cost of raw speed. The same argument can be made for Ruby vs. Java or Ruby vs. PHP. You can serve millions of requests with a cgi shell script too. Just because your pages are very simple, and/or can be cached, doesn't mean ruby is fast. For apps that are truely dynamic and cannot be cached, it is horribly slow. Some of my complex pages can't even manage 1 request per second in rails. The same thing gets 3 req/sec on django. Buying 3 times as many servers just because you picked a slow language with a bloated framework seems pretty dumb. We have also very complicated dynamic pages that cannot be cached in one piece. But fragment caching makes it very easy to cache parts of the page. Buying 3 times the servers is an option if you pay less for the hardware than for the developer time. In our case this is true. With Ruby on Rails you get an incredible increase in productivity. You can get the same (not really that incredible) increase in productivity using a faster language with a similar framework, like perl or python, or even java. It would be different if you were trading away execution speed to gain programming speed, but using rails is trading away execution speed for nothing. I doubt that there is a more productive web framework in Perl or Java, especially Java. Django may be another thing but I like to program im Ruby and not in Python. From my experiences I can say that Djano is very productive but not as productive as Rails. I think that the discussion is stuck at this point as you claim one thing and I another and the real arguments are gone. Adam Jonathan
Re: PHP vs Mason vs Ruby vs JSP/Tomcat
Cheers, Like I said, I did. Rails is over 3 times slower than django for some stuff, and ruby in general is far slower for EVERY single script I have ever compared with. So Ruby is slower than Python for your application. The author does not say that Ruby is slow Yes he does. Unlike the legions of mindless rails drones, Matz doesn't try to pretend ruby is perfect. Here's a slide from his presentation talking about what sucks about ruby: http://www.rubyist.net/~matz/slides/rc2003/mgp4.html This slide shows that Matz know's that Ruby is slow(er) but the important question is how slow it is. Because of abstraction and verboseness. Java operates at a higher abstraction level than C which make programmers more productive at the cost of raw speed. The same argument can be made for Ruby vs. Java or Ruby vs. PHP. But the same argument cannot be made about ruby vs python, perl or pike. They are all high level, dynamic languages that let you do things quickly. Compare the lines of code in the linked benchmarks, notice how ruby isn't any quicker to write code in, and it is much slower. The same argument can be made indeed be made for Ruby vs. Perl and in some ways Python. Compare Ruby's OO vs. Perl's not to mention MetaProgramming with Ruby. We have also very complicated dynamic pages that cannot be cached in one piece. But fragment caching makes it very easy to cache parts of the page. The part that takes all the time is the part that can't be cached. Caching trivial stuff like the menu doesn't help. If ruby is fast enough for your needs that's fine, but don't lie to people and try to pretend that ruby is fast, or that trading off its speed vs other scripting languages buys you anything. I do not say that Ruby is incredible fast. I say that in most cases it will be fast enough and you should benchmark yourself. Further I see great increases in productivity, even compared with Python or Perl. This is no lie, this is my experience and opinion. Buying 3 times the servers is an option if you pay less for the hardware than for the developer time. In our case this is true. True in my case too, but ruby doesn't save you any time over perl or python, so its just paying 3 times as much for servers, and getting no benefit in return. Not true in my case. I doubt that there is a more productive web framework in Perl or Java, especially Java. Django may be another thing but I like to program im Ruby and not in Python. From my experiences I can say that Djano is very productive but not as productive as Rails. Catalyst in perl, django in python, and trails in java are all comparable. Trails is a little less productive than the rest because java is more verbose and static, but catalyst and django are just as fast to work with as rails, and both perform better. Catalyst is also significantly more flexible. And for alot of the really simple apps that rails is used for, maypole is actually faster to get stuff done in than rails. Again, speaking from my experience Ruby on Rails is more productive than Catalist or Django, but that depends on your application and skills. I think that the discussion is stuck at this point as you claim one thing and I another and the real arguments are gone. I think you have been brainwashed by the hype, and don't want to admit that perhaps other solutions are just as productive as rails, without the crappy speed. I am using Rails over a year now so I do not think that the hype got into me. Maybe tha anti-hype got into you. I can only restate that the discussion is pointless at this stage as none of us will change its opinion and personal attacks are starting to replace rational arguments. Adam Jonathan
Re: PHP vs Mason vs Ruby vs JSP/Tomcat
Cheers, Adam wrote: On Wed, 24 May 2006 02:08:45 +0200 Jonathan Weiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So Ruby is slower than Python for your application. No, it is slower than Python for everything. Every single basic function of the language is slower, conditionals, loops, instantiating objects, calling methods, indexing arrays, string mangling, etc, etc. Ignoring the benchmarks because they are benchmarks doesn't change this. The author does not say that Ruby is slow Yes he does. Unlike the legions of mindless rails drones, Matz doesn't try to pretend ruby is perfect. Here's a slide from his presentation talking about what sucks about ruby: http://www.rubyist.net/~matz/slides/rc2003/mgp4.html This slide shows that Matz know's that Ruby is slow(er) but the important question is how slow it is. Right, so as I said from the start, ruby is slow. And like I told you, even the author of ruby says ruby is slow. YEAH, RUBY IS SLOW. But the important question is how much slower for a particular situation and if this is important compared with your productivity. The same argument can be made indeed be made for Ruby vs. Perl and in some ways Python. Compare Ruby's OO vs. Perl's not to mention MetaProgramming with Ruby. Just because perl's OO syntax is ugly, doesn't mean it makes using it slower. It's OO syntax is ugly and it slows you down while your code grows and grows. If I have to look 5 minutes at one line of Perl in order to understand it, it is slower in means of productivity. Ever looked into Ruby Meta Programming? I do not say that Ruby is incredible fast. I say that in most cases it will be fast enough and you should benchmark yourself. Further I see great increases in productivity, even compared with Python or Perl. No, you said its not slow. And it is slow. I said that just generally saying that Ruby is slow is an oversimplification. Everything depends on the context. Not true in my case. Because you are comparing writing CGIs in perl from scratch to using a framework like rails in ruby? No I'm comparing Djano, PHP Propel, Grails, Spring/Hibernate co. Again, speaking from my experience Ruby on Rails is more productive than Catalist or Django, but that depends on your application and skills. If you already know ruby, sure you will be faster in rails. If you know more than one of the languages in question, or none of them, then rails is not faster at all. I know Perl, PHP, Python, and Java and again I CODE FASTER IN RUBY. I am using Rails over a year now so I do not think that the hype got into me. Maybe tha anti-hype got into you. Or maybe I want people to know the truth so they realize the downsides and can make an informed decision? A fine informed descision if you just critizise Ruby/Rails and start a flame war. You are clearly making up nonsense to claim rails is the greatest thing in existance. Ever actualy read what I wrote? I am saying there's lots of frameworks that do the same thing just as well. Which is more likely based on buying into hype? If you want to think I have bought into all the common sense hype, go right ahead. I can only restate that the discussion is pointless at this stage as none of us will change its opinion and personal attacks are starting to replace rational arguments. But it will help other people see that rails is not magical, or special, or even particularly good. Just because you've invested too much time to be willing to see reality, doesn't mean other people won't decide to look into things themselves. If someone realizes catalyst, maypole, django, fins, trails and nitro (and more) are out there too, then the discussion helped someone. Pretending rails is the second coming of christ does not help anyone. I'm not saying that Rails is the second coming or that Django co are not worth a dime. I said that just saying that Ruby is slow is a too easy answer and that Ruby/Rails make this up in productivity. Further in most cases your bottleneck is not the language itself but I/O, databases or other remote systems. You just do not want to understand and flame Rails. Adam Jonathan
Re: PHP vs Mason vs Ruby vs JSP/Tomcat
Cheers, Adam wrote: On Wed, 24 May 2006 02:51:55 +0200 Jonathan Weiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You just do not want to understand and flame Rails. Right, I don't understand. Yes, you do not understand me. Its easier to pretend I am just confused than to face reality and admit that your precious rails IS NOT SPECIAL. All of the rails alternatives, including the ones rails took all its ideas from, are ALL just as good as rails. Some of them even impliment nice stuff like database connection pooling and multiple databases so that they can scale, unlike rails. Rails does scale very well. Look at 43people, basecamp, odeo, CDbaby co. You can very nicely split the web, application and database tier. There are better solutions for connection pooling and two-phase-commit stuff but Rails does scale and many times you do not need this. 43people can serve 2,5mio requests/day with rails http://blog.segment7.net/articles/2006/03/15/robot-co-op-hardware http://blog.segment7.net/articles/2006/03/06/2-5-million If you want to live in ignorance, feel free. But I am not going to sit there and watch you lie to people just to try to convince more people to join your herd of blind sheep so you will feel better about your choice. Why is it so important to you that people not hear about all the other frameworks that are just as good as rails, and for many tasks even better? Rails will still exist for you to use even if some people use other frameworks. This is the point, where you do not understand me: Where did I say that everybody should not pay attention to the other frameworks and that Rails is the only way to go? I just disagreed with the generalization that Ruby is _too slow_ and said that _for_me_ the productivity gain outweigh the decreased execution speed and that execution speed is many times not your problem. Even if compared with Django co. For what its worth, I am quite familiar with ruby, and rails, having even wrote quite a bit of code to customize rails and work around its shortcomings. I am also quite familiar with meta-programming, not only in ruby, but also in perl, PHP, python and pike. I am also quite familiar with the fact that its not particularly useful when using these frameworks, but when writing them. Guess what is the basis of the elegance of Rails, MetaProgramming. Simply put, there is no measurable difference between catalyst, djanjo and rails for time to deliver on database driven web apps. Simply put, for _me_ there is one. Surely not for everybody. But there is a measurable difference in execution speed. Yes, but again, _for_me_ this does not matter much and many times this is not your bottleneck. Again, depends on you app, situation and context. Adam Jonathan
Re: sshfs on OpenBSD
Lars Hansson wrote: On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 19:59:43 -0800 smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are there any plans for an OpenBSD implementation of sshfs? Or has someone successfully installed fuse and sshfs on OpenBSD (preferably 3.8)? IIRC, fuse is pretty tied to the Linux kernel so porting it would be non-trivial at the best. There is a port for FreeBSD and it works ok. I use it on two 6-stable systems without any problems. Maybe this port can be a start. Jonathan -- Jonathan Weiss http://blog.innerewut.de
Re: mergemaster
Christian Weisgerber wrote: No, if only for the fact that I wasn't aware of its existence until you mentioned it just now. The questions is, what *do* people use for updating /etc? I've been using mergemaster for several years now, it's an essential tool for me. But then again, I'm perfectly happy to just dump it into ~/bin on my boxes if there's no general interest. I would really appreciate having mergemaster in the base system. Jonathan -- Jonathan Weiss http://blog.innerewut.de
Re: Mounting / ro
Whey I mailed here is: Is it good practice at all to mount / read-only? You should place /dev and /var on other partitions like mfs based ones. See http://blog.innerewut.de/articles/2005/05/14/openbsd-3-7-on-wrap Regards, ahb Jonathan -- Jonathan Weiss http://blog.innerewut.de
Re: radius on openbsd
man Chan wrote: Hello, I would like t know where can I get the authentication users using LDAP via Radius as it seems unavailable at the openbsd journel. Any pointers ? Thanks. Not sure about the ones in the ports tree, but freeradius works well http://www.freeradius.org/ FreeRADIUS does not work well, at least not out-of-box. Search the archives for a port submission of freeradius not long ago. Jonathan -- Jonathan Weiss http://blog.innerewut.de
Re: openbsd as secure accesspoint documentation/tutorial
Do you know about tutorials or documentation on how to setup such a secure openbsd accesspoint? I use OpenVPN on my OpenBSD accesspoint. OpenVPN is easy to set up and runs on Windows, OS X, *BSDs and, Linux. I documented it here http://blog.innerewut.de/articles/2005/07/04/openvpn-2-0-on-openbsd Many thx Didier Jonathan -- Jonathan Weiss http://blog.innerewut.de
Re: Win XP VPN
As OpenVPN was mentioned before, I've wrote a HOWTO here: http://blog.innerewut.de/articles/2005/07/04/openvpn-2-0-on-openbsd It is very easy to configure and supports Unix, Win, and OS X. Jonathan -- Jonathan Weiss http://blog.innerewut.de
Re: NAT doesn't appear to work for some websites
Hello, just an idea, are you connected to the internet via pppoe (DSL). There is a well-known problem with mtu/mss (1500/1460 vs. 1492/1452) You can use scrub in your pf.conf to solve it. something like scrub out on ppp0 all max-mss 1452 Or do a set mtu max 1492 In ppp.conf Greets, Jonathan -- Jonathan Weiss http://blog.innerewut.de
Re: Ath0 on WRAP and OpenBSD 3.7
#cat /etc/hostname.ath inet 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0 NONE media autoselect \ mediaopt hostap nwid wrap chan 11 #ifconfig ath0 ath0: flags=8863UP,BROADCAST,NOTRAILERS,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 address: 00:0b:6b:35:b0:1b ieee80211: nwid wrap chan 11 bssid 00:0b:6b:35:b0:1b media: IEEE802.11 autoselect hostap (autoselect mode 11a hostap) status: active inet 192.168.1.1 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255 inet6 fe80::20b:6bff:fe35:b01b%ath0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 Why are you using wicontrol? man wicontrol: The wicontrol command controls the operation of WaveLAN/IEEE wireless networking devices via the wi(4) and awi(4) drivers. you are using an ath device not awi or wi. Also, use ifconfig to control athX in configuring it for host-based AP mode. Look at the end of man ath and you will find very good instructions on how to do so. I used wicontrol as I tried to get the card working and played around. I just posted it, because it's behaviour changed from 3.7 to current. I used the instructions from `man ath` for my configuration in the first place. My /etc/hostname.ath is from `man ath` with just the nwid changed. I also switched antennas, but no luck. Greets, Jonathan -- Jonathan Weiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blog.innerewut.de
Re: Ath0 on WRAP and OpenBSD 3.7
Jonathan Weiss wrote: Cheers, I have a Problem with a WRAP board (dmesg attached) and a MiniPCI WLAN card. The card is a Wistron CM9. My /etc/hostname.ath0 looks like this: #cat /etc/hostname.ath inet 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0 NONE media autoselect \ mediaopt hostap nwid wrap chan 11 #ifconfig ath0 ath0: flags=8863UP,BROADCAST,NOTRAILERS,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 address: 00:0b:6b:35:b0:1b ieee80211: nwid wrap chan 11 bssid 00:0b:6b:35:b0:1b media: IEEE802.11 autoselect hostap (autoselect mode 11a hostap) status: active inet 192.168.1.1 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255 inet6 fe80::20b:6bff:fe35:b01b%ath0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 But I cannot join the network and also cannot see it with a WLAN-scanner (Kismac on a PowerBook with OS X). Lately there have been some reports about problems with WRAP/ath/OpenBSD. Does ath in hostap mode works in 3.7 or do I have to upgrade to current? I am still getting *my* feet wet with wireless in OpenBSD, but the ath device in my ThinkPad required that I update to -current (per Theo's suggestion). After that, I haven't had any problems with joining networks or creating them. I just tested setting up a network with the ThinkPad and it worked fine. I last updated Sunday, so I imagine it still works. I upgraded to Current: OpenBSD 3.7-current (GENERIC) #214: Thu Jun 30 11:43:53 MDT 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/arch/i386/compile/GENERIC cpu0: Geode(TM) Integrated Processor by National Semi (Geode by NSC 586-class) 267 MHz cpu0: FPU,TSC,MSR,CX8,CMOV,MMX cpu0: TSC disabled real mem = 133804032 (130668K) avail mem = 115535872 (112828K) But still, no wireless network and I now get this: # wicontrol ath0 wicontrol: SIOCGWAVELAN (0xfd0b): Invalid argument With 3.7 I got no error. -- Jonathan Weiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blog.innerewut.de Steve Fettig Greets, Jonathan --- OpenBSD 3.7-current (GENERIC) #214: Thu Jun 30 11:43:53 MDT 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/arch/i386/compile/GENERIC cpu0: Geode(TM) Integrated Processor by National Semi (Geode by NSC 586-class) 267 MHz cpu0: FPU,TSC,MSR,CX8,CMOV,MMX cpu0: TSC disabled real mem = 133804032 (130668K) avail mem = 115535872 (112828K) using 1658 buffers containing 6791168 bytes (6632K) of memory mainbus0 (root) bios0 at mainbus0: AT/286+(fa) BIOS, date 05/02/05, BIOS32 rev. 0 @ 0xfc5f2 pcibios0 at bios0: rev 2.1 @ 0xf/0x1 pcibios0: pcibios_get_intr_routing - function not supported pcibios0: PCI IRQ Routing information unavailable. pcibios0: PCI bus #0 is the last bus bios0: ROM list: 0xe/0x8000 cpu0 at mainbus0 pci0 at mainbus0 bus 0: configuration mode 1 (bios) pchb0 at pci0 dev 0 function 0 Cyrix GXm PCI rev 0x00 ath0 at pci0 dev 13 function 0 Atheros AR5212 rev 0x01: irq 12 ath0: AR5212 5.9 phy 4.3 rf5112 3.6, FCC1A, address 00:0b:6b:35:b0:1b sis0 at pci0 dev 14 function 0 NS DP83815 10/100 rev 0x00: DP83816A, irq 10, address 00:0d:b9:01:92:d0 nsphyter0 at sis0 phy 0: DP83815 10/100 PHY, rev. 1 sis1 at pci0 dev 15 function 0 NS DP83815 10/100 rev 0x00: DP83816A, irq 9, address 00:0d:b9:01:92:d1 nsphyter1 at sis1 phy 0: DP83815 10/100 PHY, rev. 1 sis2 at pci0 dev 16 function 0 NS DP83815 10/100 rev 0x00: DP83816A, irq 11, address 00:0d:b9:01:92:d2 nsphyter2 at sis2 phy 0: DP83815 10/100 PHY, rev. 1 gscpcib0 at pci0 dev 18 function 0 NS SC1100 ISA rev 0x00 gpio0 at gscpcib0: 64 pins NS SC1100 SMI/ACPI rev 0x00 at pci0 dev 18 function 1 not configured pciide0 at pci0 dev 18 function 2 NS SCx200 IDE rev 0x01: DMA, channel 0 wired to compatibility, channel 1 wired to compatibility wd0 at pciide0 channel 0 drive 0: SAMSUNG CF/ATA wd0: 1-sector PIO, LBA, 497MB, 1018080 sectors wd0(pciide0:0:0): using PIO mode 4 NS SCx200 AUDIO rev 0x00 at pci0 dev 18 function 3 not configured geodesc0 at pci0 dev 18 function 5 NS SC1100 X-Bus rev 0x00: iid 6 revision 3 wdstatus 0 ohci0 at pci0 dev 19 function 0 Compaq USB OpenHost rev 0x08: irq 9, version 1.0, legacy support usb0 at ohci0: USB revision 1.0 uhub0 at usb0 uhub0: Compaq OHCI root hub, class 9/0, rev 1.00/1.00, addr 1 uhub0: 3 ports with 3 removable, self powered isa0 at gscpcib0 isadma0 at isa0 pcppi0 at isa0 port 0x61 midi0 at pcppi0: PC speaker spkr0 at pcppi0 sysbeep0 at pcppi0 gscsio0 at isa0 port 0x2e/2: SC1100 SIO rev 1: ACB1 ACB2 iic0 at gscsio0 iic1 at gscsio0 lmtemp0 at iic1 addr 0x48: LM77 npx0 at isa0 port 0xf0/16: using exception 16 pccom0 at isa0 port 0x3f8/8 irq 4: ns16550a, 16 byte fifo pccom0: console biomask e3ef netmask ffef ttymask ffef pctr: no performance counters in CPU nvram: invalid checksum dkcsum: wd0 matched BIOS disk 80 root on wd0a rootdev=0x0 rrootdev=0x300 rawdev=0x302 clock: unknown CMOS layout
Re: Ath0 on WRAP and OpenBSD 3.7
Also is it /etc/hostname.ath or /etc/hostname.ath0? Do you see the difference? It is of course /etc/hostname.ath0. But, before you muck around more with hostname.if, try the example from man ath: # ifconfig ath0 -bssid -chan media autoselect nwid -nwkey -powersave then: # ifconfig ath0 inet 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0 NONE media autoselect mediaopt hostap nwid my_net chan 11 you have to add ifconfig ath0 (for obvious reasons) to the example in the man page. I have done this a number of times with the exact same card you have and it has worked every single time. I even changed the nwid from my_net to pigsfly and it worked fine. You also need to send your ifconfig -a along - you are not doing something correctly or the card is broke or I'm out of my mind... I found my problem, the default mode is 11a and the cards of my clients only support 11b/g. Including a `mode 11b` in the ifconfig/hostname.ath0 statement solved my problem. Steve Fettig Thanks for your help, Jonathan -- Jonathan Weiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blog.innerewut.de
Re: Problems with 3.7 on Wrap and detecting ram
Alexander Yurchenko wrote: On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 02:00:45AM +0200, Jonathan Weiss wrote: Hi folks, I own a Wrap box, very similar to the Soekris NET4801 except that it is lacking USB, IDE and PXE among other minor things. I own this model: http://shop.tronico.net/pd1100964260.htm?categoryId=0 I installed 3.7 from my offical CD on a 512MB CF card per card reader and herefore use GENERIC. So far so good. The Problem is, that OpenBSD only detecs 64MB ran instead of 128 MB. it's a bug in wrap's bios and fixed in version 1.07. That was it. I'm now running with Bios 1.08 and 128MB RAM. Thanks, Jonathan -- Jonathan Weiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blog.innerewut.de
Problems with 3.7 on Wrap and detecting ram
Hi folks, I own a Wrap box, very similar to the Soekris NET4801 except that it is lacking USB, IDE and PXE among other minor things. I own this model: http://shop.tronico.net/pd1100964260.htm?categoryId=0 I installed 3.7 from my offical CD on a 512MB CF card per card reader and herefore use GENERIC. So far so good. The Problem is, that OpenBSD only detecs 64MB ran instead of 128 MB. From dmesg: real mem = 66695168 (65132K) avail mem = 53452800 (52200K) From sysctl: hw.physmem=66695168 hw.usermem=66486272 Do I have to compile something into the kernel in order to get access to all installed ram? My detailed installation steps can be found here: http://blog.innerewut.de/articles/2005/05/14/openbsd-3-7-on-wrap Thanks, Jonathan dmesg: OpenBSD 3.7 (GENERIC) #50: Sun Mar 20 00:01:57 MST 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/arch/i386/compile/GENERIC RTC BIOS diagnostic error 80clock_battery cpu0: Geode(TM) Integrated Processor by National Semi (Geode by NSC 586-class) 267 MHz cpu0: FPU,TSC,MSR,CX8,CMOV,MMX cpu0: TSC disabled real mem = 66695168 (65132K) avail mem = 53452800 (52200K) using 839 buffers containing 3436544 bytes (3356K) of memory RTC BIOS diagnostic error 80clock_battery mainbus0 (root) bios0 at mainbus0: AT/286+(ac) BIOS, date 07/13/04, BIOS32 rev. 0 @ 0xfc554 pcibios0 at bios0: rev 2.1 @ 0xf/0x1 pcibios0: pcibios_get_intr_routing - function not supported pcibios0: PCI IRQ Routing information unavailable. pcibios0: PCI bus #0 is the last bus cpu0 at mainbus0 pci0 at mainbus0 bus 0: configuration mode 1 (bios) pchb0 at pci0 dev 0 function 0 Cyrix GXm PCI rev 0x00 sis0 at pci0 dev 14 function 0 NS DP83815 10/100 rev 0x00: DP83816A, irq 10, address 00:0d:b9:01:92:d0 nsphyter0 at sis0 phy 0: DP83815 10/100 PHY, rev. 1 sis1 at pci0 dev 15 function 0 NS DP83815 10/100 rev 0x00: DP83816A, irq 9, address 00:0d:b9:01:92:d1 nsphyter1 at sis1 phy 0: DP83815 10/100 PHY, rev. 1 sis2 at pci0 dev 16 function 0 NS DP83815 10/100 rev 0x00: DP83816A, irq 11, address 00:0d:b9:01:92:d2 nsphyter2 at sis2 phy 0: DP83815 10/100 PHY, rev. 1 gscpcib0 at pci0 dev 18 function 0 NS SC1100 ISA rev 0x00 gpio0 at gscpcib0: 64 pins NS SC1100 SMI/ACPI rev 0x00 at pci0 dev 18 function 1 not configured pciide0 at pci0 dev 18 function 2 NS SCx200 IDE rev 0x01: DMA, channel 0 wired to compatibility, channel 1 wired to compatibility wd0 at pciide0 channel 0 drive 0: SAMSUNG CF/ATA wd0: 1-sector PIO, LBA, 497MB, 1018080 sectors wd0(pciide0:0:0): using PIO mode 4 NS SCx200 AUDIO rev 0x00 at pci0 dev 18 function 3 not configured geodesc0 at pci0 dev 18 function 5 NS SC1100 X-Bus rev 0x00: iid 6 revision 3 wdstatus 0 isa0 at gscpcib0 isadma0 at isa0 pcppi0 at isa0 port 0x61 midi0 at pcppi0: PC speaker sysbeep0 at pcppi0 gscsio0 at isa0 port 0x2e/2: SC1100 SIO rev 1: ACB1 ACB2 iic0 at gscsio0 iic1 at gscsio0 lmtemp0 at iic1 addr 0x48: LM77 npx0 at isa0 port 0xf0/16: using exception 16 pccom0 at isa0 port 0x3f8/8 irq 4: ns16550a, 16 byte fifo pccom0: console pccom1 at isa0 port 0x2f8/8 irq 3: ns16550a, 16 byte fifo biomask f1e7 netmask ffe7 ttymask ffe7 pctr: no performance counters in CPU nvram: invalid checksum dkcsum: wd0 matched BIOS disk 80 root on wd0a rootdev=0x0 rrootdev=0x300 rawdev=0x302 clock: unknown CMOS layout WARNING: clock time much less than file system time WARNING: using file system time WARNING: CHECK AND RESET THE DATE! -- Jonathan Weiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blog.innerewut.de
Re: some questions about OpenBSDs future plans
Some birds told me Theo got a hint about a compiler at the FosDem... And yes gcc will be replaced one day... but not now, nor in 3.8... Maybe in 3.9/4.0.. Some birds tell me you speak out of your arse. Even if the plan9 compiler looks nice. You made my day! Still grinning :-) Jonathan -- Jonathan Weiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blog.innerewut.de
