[pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem

2011-03-06 Thread Bao Ha
Something happened in BETA5 and it was carried into RC1, up to today
snapshot: 20110306-0859.

The file system in nanobsd version is now mounted fully RW, see the
following mount command:
...
[2.0-RC1][admin@pfHacom.localdomain]/root(1): mount
/dev/ufs/pfsense0 on / (ufs, local)

devfs on /dev (devfs, local)

/dev/md0 on /tmp (ufs, local)

/dev/md1 on /var (ufs, local)

/dev/ufs/cf on /cf (ufs, local)

devfs on /var/dhcpd/dev (devfs, local)
...

I believe they are supposed to be mounted read-only or at least RW with
NOATIME.

We have had at least two systems running pfSense 2.0 BETA5 and RC1 RMAed
back with suspected hardware problems, causing corruption of compact flash
memory. We think the root cause of this problem is due to the filesystems
mounted fully RW in the compact flash.

We plan to distribute the following temporary fix to our custmers who want
to run pfSense 2.0:
...
[2.0-RC1][admin@pfHacom.localdomain]/root(1): cat
/usr/local/etc/rc.d/hacom.sh
#!/bin/sh



# hacom.sh - BCH 3/6/2011

#   Temprorary fix to mount the filesystem Read-Only to avoid destroying
flash memory


PLATFORM=`/bin/cat /etc/platform`



if [ $PLATFORM = nanobsd ]; then

/sbin/mount -u -oro /; /sbin/mount -u -onoatime /cf

fi

...

Appreciate if someone look into this problem.

I have also CCed this message to support@pfsense.com to notify others
currently using pfSense 2.0 RC1 nanobsd version of the danger to flash
memory.

Thanks.
Bao
-- 
Best Regards.
Bao C. Ha
Hacom - Embedded Systems and Appliances
http://www.hacom.net
voice: (714) 564-9932


RE: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem

2011-03-06 Thread Bart Grefte
Someone already made a bugreport  http://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/1279
http://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/1279  ;)

 

 

  _  

Van: Bao Ha [mailto:b...@hacom.net] 
Verzonden: zondag 6 maart 2011 23:06
Aan: customersupp...@pfsense.org
CC: support@pfsense.com
Onderwerp: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem

 

Something happened in BETA5 and it was carried into RC1, up to today
snapshot: 20110306-0859.


The file system in nanobsd version is now mounted fully RW, see the
following mount command:

...

[2.0-RC1][admin@pfHacom.localdomain]/root(1): mount

/dev/ufs/pfsense0 on / (ufs, local)


devfs on /dev (devfs, local)


/dev/md0 on /tmp (ufs, local)


/dev/md1 on /var (ufs, local)


/dev/ufs/cf on /cf (ufs, local)


devfs on /var/dhcpd/dev (devfs, local)

...

 

I believe they are supposed to be mounted read-only or at least RW with
NOATIME.

 

We have had at least two systems running pfSense 2.0 BETA5 and RC1 RMAed
back with suspected hardware problems, causing corruption of compact flash
memory. We think the root cause of this problem is due to the filesystems
mounted fully RW in the compact flash.

 

We plan to distribute the following temporary fix to our custmers who want
to run pfSense 2.0:

...

[2.0-RC1][admin@pfHacom.localdomain]/root(1): cat
/usr/local/etc/rc.d/hacom.sh

#!/bin/sh


 


# hacom.sh - BCH 3/6/2011


#   Temprorary fix to mount the filesystem Read-Only to avoid destroying
flash memory 

 


PLATFORM=`/bin/cat /etc/platform`


 


if [ $PLATFORM = nanobsd ]; then


/sbin/mount -u -oro /; /sbin/mount -u -onoatime /cf


fi


...

 

Appreciate if someone look into this problem.

 

I have also CCed this message to support@pfsense.com to notify others
currently using pfSense 2.0 RC1 nanobsd version of the danger to flash
memory.

 

Thanks.

Bao

-- 
Best Regards.
Bao C. Ha
Hacom - Embedded Systems and Appliances
http://www.hacom.net 
voice: (714) 564-9932



Re: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem

2011-03-06 Thread Bao Ha
Hi Bart,

Thanks for the note.

According to the forum, it should not be a problem. :-(

Unfortunately, mounting RW without NOATIME will pounce on the compact flash
everytime a READ is made. It will kill the CF sooner or later.

When we first got the reports of corrupted CFs, we just overnighted new
ones. Then, those died shortly, within a week or two. We replaced a complete
system: systemboard, memory and CF.

I am loosing my hair and sleeps, thinking one of our most reliable systems
being shipped since 2006 is having compatibility issues with pfSense 2.0.

I am hoping that this is the real cause. And I can stop a flood of support
issues.

Bao

On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Bart Grefte b...@ravenslair.nl wrote:

  Someone already made a bugreport http://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/1279
  ;)




  --

 *Van:* Bao Ha [mailto:b...@hacom.net]
 *Verzonden:* zondag 6 maart 2011 23:06
 *Aan:* customersupp...@pfsense.org
 *CC:* support@pfsense.com
 *Onderwerp:* [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem



 Something happened in BETA5 and it was carried into RC1, up to today
 snapshot: 20110306-0859.

 The file system in nanobsd version is now mounted fully RW, see the
 following mount command:

 ...

 [2.0-RC1][admin@pfHacom.localdomain]/root(1): mount

 /dev/ufs/pfsense0 on / (ufs, local)


 devfs on /dev (devfs, local)


 /dev/md0 on /tmp (ufs, local)


 /dev/md1 on /var (ufs, local)


 /dev/ufs/cf on /cf (ufs, local)


 devfs on /var/dhcpd/dev (devfs, local)

 ...



 I believe they are supposed to be mounted read-only or at least RW with
 NOATIME.



 We have had at least two systems running pfSense 2.0 BETA5 and RC1 RMAed
 back with suspected hardware problems, causing corruption of compact flash
 memory. We think the root cause of this problem is due to the filesystems
 mounted fully RW in the compact flash.



 We plan to distribute the following temporary fix to our custmers who want
 to run pfSense 2.0:

 ...

 [2.0-RC1][admin@pfHacom.localdomain]/root(1): cat
 /usr/local/etc/rc.d/hacom.sh

 #!/bin/sh





 # hacom.sh - BCH 3/6/2011


 #   Temprorary fix to mount the filesystem Read-Only to avoid destroying
 flash memory




 PLATFORM=`/bin/cat /etc/platform`





 if [ $PLATFORM = nanobsd ]; then


 /sbin/mount -u -oro /; /sbin/mount -u -onoatime /cf


 fi


 ...



 Appreciate if someone look into this problem.



 I have also CCed this message to support@pfsense.com to notify others
 currently using pfSense 2.0 RC1 nanobsd version of the danger to flash
 memory.



 Thanks.

 Bao

 --
 Best Regards.
 Bao C. Ha
 Hacom - Embedded Systems and Appliances
 http://www.hacom.net
 voice: (714) 564-9932




-- 
Best Regards.
Bao C. Ha
Hacom - Embedded Systems and Appliances
http://www.hacom.net
voice: (714) 564-9932


RE: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem

2011-03-06 Thread Bart Grefte
Hi Bao,

 

You're welcome :)

 

I've read that, but not sure if that is actually true in all cases.

 

Wow, that is fast! I doubt pfSense writes so much in that time the CF-cards
start dieing, although I might be wrong.

Could be the (lack of?) quality of the CF-cards combined with that problem
that is causing them to fail so fast. (This is just me thinking out loud.)

 

Out of curiosity, why ship systems with an OS that is still beta? Well, RC1
now, but still

 

Not sure if this will help, but maybe adding /etc/rc.conf_mount_ro to a
script that runs during boot-up will do some good. It's the command to mount
read-only.

I still have to add that one and /etc/rc.conf_mount_rw to the script that
makes an IPv6 tunnel on my pfSense v1.2.3 system, since the script needs to
write something during the boot of pfSense when the script is started but
can't do that because of RO filesystem

 

Hope this problem will be solved soon!

 

With regards,

 

Bart

 

 

  _  

Van: Bao Ha [mailto:b...@hacom.net] 
Verzonden: zondag 6 maart 2011 23:26
Aan: support@pfsense.com
Onderwerp: Re: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem

 

Hi Bart,

 

Thanks for the note.

 

According to the forum, it should not be a problem. :-(

 

Unfortunately, mounting RW without NOATIME will pounce on the compact flash
everytime a READ is made. It will kill the CF sooner or later.

 

When we first got the reports of corrupted CFs, we just overnighted new
ones. Then, those died shortly, within a week or two. We replaced a complete
system: systemboard, memory and CF.

 

I am loosing my hair and sleeps, thinking one of our most reliable systems
being shipped since 2006 is having compatibility issues with pfSense 2.0.

 

I am hoping that this is the real cause. And I can stop a flood of support
issues.

 

Bao

On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Bart Grefte b...@ravenslair.nl wrote:

Someone already made a bugreport  http://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/1279
http://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/1279  ;)

 

 

  _  

Van: Bao Ha [mailto:b...@hacom.net] 
Verzonden: zondag 6 maart 2011 23:06
Aan: customersupp...@pfsense.org
CC: support@pfsense.com
Onderwerp: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem

 

Something happened in BETA5 and it was carried into RC1, up to today
snapshot: 20110306-0859.


The file system in nanobsd version is now mounted fully RW, see the
following mount command:

...

[2.0-RC1][admin@pfHacom.localdomain]/root(1): mount

/dev/ufs/pfsense0 on / (ufs, local)


devfs on /dev (devfs, local)


/dev/md0 on /tmp (ufs, local)


/dev/md1 on /var (ufs, local)


/dev/ufs/cf on /cf (ufs, local)


devfs on /var/dhcpd/dev (devfs, local)

...

 

I believe they are supposed to be mounted read-only or at least RW with
NOATIME.

 

We have had at least two systems running pfSense 2.0 BETA5 and RC1 RMAed
back with suspected hardware problems, causing corruption of compact flash
memory. We think the root cause of this problem is due to the filesystems
mounted fully RW in the compact flash.

 

We plan to distribute the following temporary fix to our custmers who want
to run pfSense 2.0:

...

[2.0-RC1][admin@pfHacom.localdomain]/root(1): cat
/usr/local/etc/rc.d/hacom.sh

#!/bin/sh


 


# hacom.sh - BCH 3/6/2011


#   Temprorary fix to mount the filesystem Read-Only to avoid destroying
flash memory 

 


PLATFORM=`/bin/cat /etc/platform`


 


if [ $PLATFORM = nanobsd ]; then


/sbin/mount -u -oro /; /sbin/mount -u -onoatime /cf


fi


...

 

Appreciate if someone look into this problem.

 

I have also CCed this message to support@pfsense.com to notify others
currently using pfSense 2.0 RC1 nanobsd version of the danger to flash
memory.

 

Thanks.

Bao

-- 
Best Regards.
Bao C. Ha
Hacom - Embedded Systems and Appliances
http://www.hacom.net 
voice: (714) 564-9932




-- 
Best Regards.
Bao C. Ha
Hacom - Embedded Systems and Appliances
http://www.hacom.net 
voice: (714) 564-9932



Re: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 RC1 Nanobsd Problem

2011-03-06 Thread Nenhum_de_Nos

On Sun, March 6, 2011 19:26, Bao Ha wrote:
 Hi Bart,

 Thanks for the note.

 According to the forum, it should not be a problem. :-(

 Unfortunately, mounting RW without NOATIME will pounce on the compact
 flash
 everytime a READ is made. It will kill the CF sooner or later.

 When we first got the reports of corrupted CFs, we just overnighted new
 ones. Then, those died shortly, within a week or two. We replaced a
 complete
 system: systemboard, memory and CF.

 I am loosing my hair and sleeps, thinking one of our most reliable systems
 being shipped since 2006 is having compatibility issues with pfSense 2.0.

 I am hoping that this is the real cause. And I can stop a flood of support
 issues.

I see this in a 4g nano image, but is no problem as I use microdrive. so,
in case when this be corrected, how can I make it this way ?

is the nano image the best for a microdrive soekris ? I want the full pc
install just using serial instead of vga.

thanks,

matheus

-- 
We will call you cygnus,
The God of balance you shall be

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org



[pfSense Support] auto-update blacklist

2011-03-06 Thread Luke Jaeger
How do I make squidguard automatically download  rebuild the  
blacklist once a week?

cron job? what would the syntax look like?

thanks -


Luke Jaeger | Technology Coordinator
Pioneer Valley Performing Arts Charter Public School
www.pvpa.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org



[pfSense Support] 2.0-RC1 access point problem

2011-03-06 Thread Nenhum_de_Nos
hi,

I have a just installed 2.0-rc1 on soekris 5501-70 and have an ral card:

ral0: Ralink Technology RT2561 mem 0xa0008000-0xa000 irq 10 at
device 14.0 on pci0
ral0: MAC/BBP RT2561C, RF RT2527
ral0: [ITHREAD]

I configured it as AP, and all is fine. but once a day (two days of
uptime) my wifi connection falls. yesterday I got to it and unchecked the
WME options and all went to work. now I guess the restart got it back.

pfsense is:

uname -a
FreeBSD red.apartnet 8.1-RELEASE-p2 FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE-p2 #0: Fri Mar  4
14:40:38 EST 2011
sullrich@FreeBSD_8.0_pfSense_2.0-snaps.pfsense.org:/usr/obj.pfSense/usr/pfSensesrc/src/sys/pfSense_wrap.8.i386
 i386

log says:

ral0: need multicast update callback
ral0: need multicast update callback

if any leads, please say. I have an option to use atheros based pci card,
just have to get it :)

thanks,

matheus

-- 
We will call you cygnus,
The God of balance you shall be

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org



Re: [pfSense Support] 2.0-RC1 access point problem

2011-03-06 Thread Nenhum_de_Nos

On Sun, March 6, 2011 21:28, Nenhum_de_Nos wrote:
 hi,

 I have a just installed 2.0-rc1 on soekris 5501-70 and have an ral card:

 ral0: Ralink Technology RT2561 mem 0xa0008000-0xa000 irq 10 at
 device 14.0 on pci0
 ral0: MAC/BBP RT2561C, RF RT2527
 ral0: [ITHREAD]

 I configured it as AP, and all is fine. but once a day (two days of
 uptime) my wifi connection falls. yesterday I got to it and unchecked the
 WME options and all went to work. now I guess the restart got it back.

 pfsense is:

 uname -a
 FreeBSD red.apartnet 8.1-RELEASE-p2 FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE-p2 #0: Fri Mar  4
 14:40:38 EST 2011
 sullrich@FreeBSD_8.0_pfSense_2.0-snaps.pfsense.org:/usr/obj.pfSense/usr/pfSensesrc/src/sys/pfSense_wrap.8.i386
  i386

 log says:

 ral0: need multicast update callback
 ral0: need multicast update callback

 if any leads, please say. I have an option to use atheros based pci card,
 just have to get it :)

 thanks,

 matheus

just forgot to say, when it dies, I can still see the ap transmiting,
just can't join the network.

thanks,

matheus

-- 
We will call you cygnus,
The God of balance you shall be

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org



Re: [pfSense Support] auto-update blacklist

2011-03-06 Thread Lyle Giese
Luke Jaeger wrote:
 How do I make squidguard automatically download  rebuild the
 blacklist once a week?
 cron job? what would the syntax look like?

 thanks -


 Luke Jaeger | Technology Coordinator
 Pioneer Valley Performing Arts Charter Public School
 www.pvpa.org


http://www.shallalist.de/helpers.html

You need an outside script to do that. It's not something that is built
into squidGuard.

And why once a week? It's not that hard nor is it cpu intensive. I do it
once a day for my customer that uses Squid/SquidGuard.

Lyle Giese
LCR Computer Services, Inc.



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org