On Fri, 1 Mar 2013 14:06+0100, Wolfgang Riegler wrote:
> SQLgrey is the only one failing because of the dependency for
> p5-Bit-Vector. I tried it several times. Even downloading manually
> to /usr/ports/distfiles doesn't work. I test the sha256 checksum
> manually, and it is
Hi,
I have the same problem. I use poudriere to package all needed software for my
servers.
SQLgrey is the only one failing because of the dependency for p5-Bit-Vector. I
tried it several times. Even downloading manually to /usr/ports/distfiles
doesn't work. I test the sha256 che
On Jul 14, 2011, at 5:18 AM, monarci wrote:
> I am currently running a company's FreeBSD web server and I am constantly
> receiving the ICMP Bad Checksum warning.
You most likely have a NIC with hardware checksum capabilities; tcpdump sees
outgoing packets before the hardware ge
I am currently running a company's FreeBSD web server and I am constantly
receiving the ICMP Bad Checksum warning. It tells me that the severity is
low, but I've read that it may be best to block such traffic. This advice
comes from
http://www.fortiguard.com/encyclopedia/vul
Marco Steinbach schrieb:
Anton Shterenlikht schrieb:
I'm trying to troubleshoot tftpd(8).
% grep boot /etc/inetd.conf
tftp dgram udp wait root /usr/libexec/tftpd tftpd -dd -l -s /tftpboot
tftp dgram udp wait root /usr/libexec/tftpd tftpd -dd -l -s /tftpboot
bootps dgram udp wait root /
Anton Shterenlikht schrieb:
I'm trying to troubleshoot tftpd(8).
% grep boot /etc/inetd.conf
tftp dgram udp wait root /usr/libexec/tftpd tftpd -dd -l -s /tftpboot
tftp dgram udp wait root /usr/libexec/tftpd tftpd -dd -l -s /tftpboot
bootps dgram udp wait root /usr/libexec/bootpd bootpd
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
>> I've had some trouble netbooting / jumpstaring recently with a similar
>> pattern (using RARP/BOOTP/TFTP/NFS). It turned out to be a dying
>> port on the switch whose errors were masked by TCP in day to day
>> use, but alas were too freq
On Thu, 7 Jul 2011, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
I'm trying to troubleshoot tftpd(8).
% grep boot /etc/inetd.conf
tftp dgram udp wait root /usr/libexec/tftpd tftpd -dd -l -s /tftpboot
tftp dgram udp wait root /usr/libexec/tftpd tftpd -dd -l -s /tftpboot
bootps dgram udp wait root /usr/lib
On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 12:05:37PM +0200, C. P. Ghost wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Anton Shterenlikht
> wrote:
> > I'm trying to troubleshoot tftpd(8).
>
> (...)
>
> > ? ?192.168.232.10.15388 > buzi.tftp: [no cksum] ?25 RRQ "/bsd.rd.IP32"
> > octet (
> > o
> > 23:25:21.024160 IP (
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
> I'm trying to troubleshoot tftpd(8).
(...)
> 192.168.232.10.15388 > buzi.tftp: [no cksum] 25 RRQ "/bsd.rd.IP32" octet (
> o
> 23:25:21.024160 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 56, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP
> (1
> 7), length 30, bad
> - Original Message -
> From: Anton Shterenlikht [mailto:me...@bristol.ac.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 05:44 PM
> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: tftp - bad checksum error? can't transfer file
>
> I'm trying to troubleshoot tftpd(8).
&
eate a file with
the correct name (and perms) first.
- Original Message -
From: Anton Shterenlikht [mailto:me...@bristol.ac.uk]
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 05:44 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: tftp - bad checksum error? can't transfer file
I'm trying to trou
I'm trying to troubleshoot tftpd(8).
% grep boot /etc/inetd.conf
tftp dgram udp wait root /usr/libexec/tftpd tftpd -dd -l -s /tftpboot
tftp dgram udp wait root /usr/libexec/tftpd tftpd -dd -l -s /tftpboot
bootps dgram udp wait root /usr/libexec/bootpd bootpd -d4 -t0 /etc/bootptab
%
I'm t
print/cmpsfont'
===> Cleaning for cmpsfont-1.0_7
===> Vulnerability check disabled, database not found
===> License check disabled, port has not defined LICENSE
===> Extracting for cmpsfont-1.0_7
=> SHA256 Checksum OK for cmps-unix.tar.gz.
gzip: /usr/ports/distfiles//cmps-un
gt; Build of print/cmpsfont started at: Mon, 30 May 2011 08:29:15
> ---> +0200 Building '/usr/ports/print/cmpsfont'
> ===> Cleaning for cmpsfont-1.0_7
> ===> Vulnerability check disabled, database not found ===> License
> check disabled, port has not defined LI
ld of print/cmpsfont started at: Mon, 30 May 2011 08:29:15 +0200
> ---> Building '/usr/ports/print/cmpsfont'
> ===> Cleaning for cmpsfont-1.0_7
> ===> Vulnerability check disabled, database not found
> ===> License check disabled, port has not defined LICENS
ng '/usr/ports/print/cmpsfont'
===> Cleaning for cmpsfont-1.0_7
===> Vulnerability check disabled, database not found
===> License check disabled, port has not defined LICENSE
===> Extracting for cmpsfont-1.0_7
=> SHA256 Checksum mismatch for cmps-unix.tar.gz.
===> Refetch for
Alexandre wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 9:59 AM, David Demelier wrote:
> > I was working and suddenly FreeBSD freezes, I needed to hard reboot
> > and when the BIOS post came two beeps appears with this message:
> >
> > CMOS/GPNV checksum bad
> > ...
&
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 9:59 AM, David Demelier wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I was working and suddenly FreeBSD freezes, I needed to hard reboot and
> when the BIOS post came two beeps appears with this message:
>
> CMOS/GPNV checksum bad
>
> Press F1 to enter setup
> Press
Hello,
I was working and suddenly FreeBSD freezes, I needed to hard reboot and
when the BIOS post came two beeps appears with this message:
CMOS/GPNV checksum bad
Press F1 to enter setup
Press F2 to continue with default values..
What does that mean? I guess a hardware failure is coming up
Hi,
I may have experienced some odd behavior from ZFS running 8.0-STABLE-201004
amd64.
I have a zpool 'zhome' on my laptop with checksum=on and copies=2. I was
getting ready to burn a FreeBSD DVD today and was verifying the checkums of the
image I downloaded (stored
on zhome). I g
I NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND
root 1 44 015668K 1936K tx->tx 1 0:00
0.00% zpool
/var/log/messages excerpt:
May 21 00:58:31 silmeria root: ZFS: checksum mismatch, zpool=valkyrie
path=/dev/aacd3 offset=494926778368 size=1024
May 21
Hello, all--
An unexpected powercycle apparently introduced (thanks to my system's
RAID controller) metadata checksum errors on the system. Attempts to
import that pool on any system hangs the command (such that it cannot
even be killed).
I tried pulling out the OpenSolaris (2009.0
On 4 April 2010 11:02, gahn wrote:
> Hi all:
>
> I am trying to compile the smaba34 but somehow it failed MD5 Checksum and
> SHA256 Checksum:
>
>
> # make all
> ===> Vulnerability check disabled, database no
Hi all:
I am trying to compile the smaba34 but somehow it failed MD5 Checksum and
SHA256 Checksum:
# make all
===> Vulnerability check disabled, database not found
===> Found saved configuration for samba34-3
2010/2/26 Ffflee Ffflee :
> when i downloaded the freebsd ISO files is there any reason why
> i should downlaod the checksum files also? why would they be on the download
> ISO page if there isnt a reason for them being there. what is the purpose of
> checksum files? and do I need
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 11:21 PM, Sean Cavanaugh
wrote:
> they are there so you can compare the real checksum hash for the .ISO file
> against what you downloaded as a way to make sure you downloaded every
> single bit of the file or if it has been changed.
There are many reasons for
they are there so you can compare the real checksum hash for the .ISO file
against what you downloaded as a way to make sure you downloaded every
single bit of the file or if it has been changed.
--
From: "Ffflee Ffflee"
Sent: Friday
when i downloaded the freebsd ISO files is there any reason why
i should downlaod the checksum files also? why would they be on the download
ISO page if there isnt a reason for them being there. what is the purpose of
checksum files? and do I need to download them? I got the freebsd cd ISO. do i
In the last episode (Dec 29), Victor Sudakov said:
> Nikos Vassiliadis wrote:
> > >Are you sure you understand me? I was talking about mirroring the whole
> > >repository with cvsup/cvsupd protocol, that's where the "Checksum
> > >mismatch -- will transfer e
Nikos Vassiliadis wrote:
> >Are you sure you understand me? I was talking about mirroring the
> >whole repository with cvsup/cvsupd protocol, that's where the
> >"Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file" error occurs.
>
> Sorry, I missed the part
t;
> > > Recently I noticed that there are lots of messages "Checksum mismatch --
> > > will transfer entire file" about all kinds of downloaded files.
> > >
> > > What could be the reason? Is my CVS repository corrupt or what? Is there
> > > a w
In the last episode (Dec 25), Victor Sudakov said:
> > I cvsup the FreeBSD CVS repository daily from cvsup.ru.freebsd.org.
> > Both the client and the server run CVSup Software version: SNAP_16_1h,
> > Protocol version: 17.0.
> >
> > Recently I noticed that there
On 12/28/2009 11:11 AM, Victor Sudakov wrote:
Are you sure you understand me? I was talking about mirroring the
whole repository with cvsup/cvsupd protocol, that's where the
"Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file" error occurs.
Sorry, I missed the part of conversation
Erik Trulsson wrote:
> >
> > > > I would be happy to use svn as I do for my own projects.
> > >
> > > To run a cvs repository, you just need /usr/bin/cvs started from
> > > inetd. It is even in the base system.
> > >
> > > To run a subversion repository, you need much more infrastructure and
>
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 11:46:37AM +0600, Victor Sudakov wrote:
> Victor Sudakov wrote:
>
> [dd]
>
> > > I would be happy to use svn as I do for my own projects.
> >
> > To run a cvs repository, you just need /usr/bin/cvs started from
> > inetd. It is even in the base system.
> >
> > To run a
Victor Sudakov wrote:
> ... [svn] needs python26, perl and tcl - all the three of them ...
It seems you may have discovered the significance of the name:
it subverts the sysadmin's sanity. Maybe it can find practical
use as a meta-port for scripting languages, if someone cares to
add ruby to the
understand me? I was talking about mirroring the
whole repository with cvsup/cvsupd protocol, that's where the
"Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file" error occurs.
Actually I mirror the whole repository by cvsup from
cvsup?.ru.freebsd.org and then make it available over c
On 12/28/2009 7:46 AM, Victor Sudakov wrote:
To cut a long story short, I would rather continue using cvs, perhaps
until there is subversion-light in the base system.
I use successfully cvs for the same reasons. Most of the time I use the
French mirror and I have also used the two USA ones. I h
Victor Sudakov wrote:
[dd]
> > I would be happy to use svn as I do for my own projects.
>
> To run a cvs repository, you just need /usr/bin/cvs started from
> inetd. It is even in the base system.
>
> To run a subversion repository, you need much more infrastructure and
> more overhead (lots o
David Kelly wrote:
>
>
> > Colleagues,
> >
> > Am I the only one to have this problem?
>
>
> No.
>
> Telling you more than I know: FreeBSD.org is moving (or has moved)
> from CVS to SVN. Is my guess that what we are seeing is an artifact
> of that move where data is hacked into cvs compatibl
On Dec 25, 2009, at 12:43 AM, Victor Sudakov wrote:
> Colleagues,
>
> Am I the only one to have this problem?
No.
Telling you more than I know: FreeBSD.org is moving (or has moved) from CVS to
SVN. Is my guess that what we are seeing is an artifact of that move where data
is hacked into cv
there are lots of messages
> "Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file" about all kinds of
> downloaded files.
>
> What could be the reason? Is my CVS repository corrupt or what? Is
> there a way to check the integrity of the entiry repository?
>
> I have rea
Jamie Griffin wrote:
been trying to portupgrade firefox3 for about a day but keep getting a
checksum mismatch error and the build stops. What do I need to do to get
it to upgrade?
Try deleting the firefox sources you downloaded previously and start again.
It seems your download somehow got
Hi
been trying to portupgrade firefox3 for about a day but keep getting a
checksum mismatch error and the build stops. What do I need to do to get
it to upgrade?
Jamie
pgps5KOt9v59v.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Colleagues,
I cvsup the FreeBSD CVS repository daily from cvsup.ru.freebsd.org.
Both the client and the server run CVSup Software version: SNAP_16_1h,
Protocol version: 17.0.
Recently I noticed that there are lots of messages
"Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file" about al
On 11/15/09, Chris wrote:
> b. f. wrote:
>> Chris wrote:
...
>> Even if you edited your
>> filesystem or archives to change the timestamps of package files, the
>>
> I think that could be accomplished though the port makefiles.
I think that the exact reproduction of whole archives will be
probl
b. f. wrote:
Chris wrote:
I'm also thinking of building a simple checksum database to track what actually
changes
and what my options were when I compiled it. It would allow me to better make
regression decisions. I could also be free to delete packages and know if I
recompile
it
Chris wrote:
>I'm also thinking of building a simple checksum database to track what
>actually changes
>and what my options were when I compiled it. It would allow me to better make
>regression decisions. I could also be free to delete packages and know if I
>recompile
&
d as my desktop. I am sure that most of my
crashing is
due to multiple jails and using nullfs and unionfs but that isn't
relevent to my current post.
I'm also thinking of building a simple checksum database to track what
actually changes
and what my options were when I compiled
El día Saturday, November 14, 2009 a las 07:51:17AM -0800, Chris escribió:
> I have a somewhat flaky system. I would like to compile ports to
> packages multiple times and do a file comparison. ...
Hi Chris,
What is behind the idea to compile and pack a given port twice if there
are no errors
I have a somewhat flaky system. I would like to compile ports to
packages multiple times and do a file comparison. Since packages are
tar files they wouldn't match for sure just because of the different
time attributes. There may be other differences. Anyone know how to
generate packages wi
clearing; after scrubbing, the total checksum goes back up to 4. The
error is not cleared, though.
Strange. I do recall that there was one OpenSolaris development release
which did produce spurious checksum errors which looked weird like
that. Hopefully you are not using that particular release.
I
Thank you very much for your reply! :-)
Trevor Pretty schrieb:
Steven
I had a similar problem back in 2006 when I was first playing with ZFS.
Jeff Bronwick sent me this. It may (or not) help. I'm not sure if the
number is still the inode. If it is a please let zfs-discuss know.
> I've a n
Hello,
I couldn't find a dedicated FreeBSD/ZFS mailing list, so I hope this is
the right place to ask.
I'd like some advice if I should rely on one of my ZFS pools:
[u...@host ~]$ sudo zpool clear zpool01
...
[u...@host ~]$ sudo zpool scrub zpool01
...
[u...@host ~]$ sudo zpool status -v
per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
Mel Flynn wrote:
However, thinking about this inquiry and JPEG in the same sentence
has given me an idea that might help the OP: JPEG is a "lossy"
compression, with the degree of loss related to the chosen image
quality, so two "similar" images might become identic
Mel Flynn wrote:
> On Monday 07 September 2009 05:09:53 Michael David Crawford wrote:
> > > M> I'm looking for a pseudo-checksum tool for use with
> > > M> cataloging images.
> > One way you could approach it might be to use a blur filter ...
> > Sma
On Monday 07 September 2009 05:09:53 Michael David Crawford wrote:
> > M> I'm looking for a pseudo-checksum tool for use with cataloging images.
>
> I've seen such tools advertised, but they were proprietary products and
> only worked on windows.
>
> One way you c
>> Modulok writes:
>> > I'm not even sure such a tool exists, but it's worth asking:
>> >
>> > I'm looking for a pseudo-checksum tool for use with catalogging
>> > images. For example, a strict checksum algorithm, like the sha
>> &
in message <44skf0c6zq@lowell-desk.lan>,
wrote Lowell Gilbert thusly...
>
> Modulok writes:
(I am replyin to Lowell's reply for I do not have OP.)
> > I'm not even sure such a tool exists, but it's worth asking:
> >
> > I'm looking f
M> I'm looking for a pseudo-checksum tool for use with cataloging images.
I've seen such tools advertised, but they were proprietary products and
only worked on windows.
One way you could approach it might be to use a blur filter to blur each
of your images, and then to compar
Modulok writes:
> I'm not even sure such a tool exists, but it's worth asking:
>
> I'm looking for a pseudo-checksum tool for use with catalogging
> images. For example, a strict checksum algorithm, like the sha family,
> will produce a dramatically differen
>> On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 10:33:03 -0600,
>> Modulok said:
M> I'm looking for a pseudo-checksum tool for use with cataloging images.
M> For example, a strict checksum algorithm, like the sha family, will
M> produce a dramatically different checksum for two files which diff
On Sat 05 Sep 2009 at 09:33:03 PDT Modulok wrote:
List,
I'm not even sure such a tool exists, but it's worth asking:
I'm looking for a pseudo-checksum tool for use with catalogging
images. For example, a strict checksum algorithm, like the sha family,
will produce a dramati
List,
I'm not even sure such a tool exists, but it's worth asking:
I'm looking for a pseudo-checksum tool for use with catalogging
images. For example, a strict checksum algorithm, like the sha family,
will produce a dramatically different checksum for two files which
differ by on
On 23 August 2009, at 10:56, andrew clarke wrote:
On Sun 2009-08-23 10:24:53 UTC+0200, Vincent Zee (zen...@xs4all.nl)
wrote:
===> Vulnerability check disabled, database not found
===> Extracting for netatalk-2.0.4,1
=> MD5 Checksum mismatch for netatalk-2.0.4.tar.bz2.
=> SHA
On Sun 2009-08-23 10:24:53 UTC+0200, Vincent Zee (zen...@xs4all.nl) wrote:
> ===> Vulnerability check disabled, database not found
> ===> Extracting for netatalk-2.0.4,1
> => MD5 Checksum mismatch for netatalk-2.0.4.tar.bz2.
> => SHA256 Checksum mismatch for netatalk-2.0
aches
netatalk it gives this error message:
-
===> Vulnerability check disabled, database not found
===> Extracting for netatalk-2.0.4,1
=> MD5 Checksum mismatch for netatalk-2.0.4.tar.bz2.
=> SHA256 Checksum mismatch for netatalk-2.0.4.tar.bz2.
[snip]
===> G
Paul van der Zwan wrote:
[snip]
>>
> Well at least I am not the only one seeing these errors. I think we can
> rule out a local problem and will have to wait for someone to fix this.
>
>> Note: I use cvsup to maintain a local copy of the cvs repository.
>> It is not clear if you too is doing that
On 23 jun 2009, at 15:53, Erik Trulsson wrote:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 02:43:36PM +0200, Paul van der Zwan wrote:
On 23 jun 2009, at 05:55, Frank Shute wrote:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 07:17:40PM +0200, Paul van der Zwan wrote:
The last few days I see a dozens of Checksum mismatches when
Paul van der Zwan wrote:
>
> On 23 jun 2009, at 05:55, Frank Shute wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 07:17:40PM +0200, Paul van der Zwan wrote:
>>>
>>> The last few days I see a dozens of Checksum mismatches when csup-ing
>>> src-all from cvsup.free
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 02:43:36PM +0200, Paul van der Zwan wrote:
>
> On 23 jun 2009, at 05:55, Frank Shute wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 07:17:40PM +0200, Paul van der Zwan wrote:
> >>
> >> The last few days I see a dozens of Checksum mismatche
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 02:43:36PM +0200, Paul van der Zwan wrote:
>
>
> On 23 jun 2009, at 05:55, Frank Shute wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 07:17:40PM +0200, Paul van der Zwan wrote:
>>>
>>> The last few days I see a dozens of Checksum misma
On 23 jun 2009, at 05:55, Frank Shute wrote:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 07:17:40PM +0200, Paul van der Zwan wrote:
The last few days I see a dozens of Checksum mismatches when csup-ing
src-all from cvsup.freebsd.org.
No errors appear on ports-all.
Is there a problem with the cvs repository
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 07:17:40PM +0200, Paul van der Zwan wrote:
>
> The last few days I see a dozens of Checksum mismatches when csup-ing
> src-all from cvsup.freebsd.org.
> No errors appear on ports-all.
> Is there a problem with the cvs repository ?
Most people will use a
The last few days I see a dozens of Checksum mismatches when csup-ing
src-all from cvsup.freebsd.org.
No errors appear on ports-all.
Is there a problem with the cvs repository ?
The fact that all errors are on src-all and none on ports-all make me
suspect it is not a local problem on
my
On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 10:51:57 -0500
"Aryeh M. Friedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> bsd wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > There is a way to calculate the checksum in ports using make with
> > an argument…
> cd /usr/ports/...
> make sums
That should be:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
bsd wrote:
> Hello,
>
> There is a way to calculate the checksum in ports using make with
> an argument…
>
> I can't remember the name of the argument…
>
cd /usr/ports/...
make sums
For more detail see ports(8)
- --
Hello,
There is a way to calculate the checksum in ports using make with an
argument…
I can't remember the name of the argument…
Gregober ---> PGP ID --> 0x1BA3C2FD
bsd @at@ todoo.biz
On removing the old version of amanda-client port, I got this error message:
pkg_delete: '/usr/local/lib/libamandad.a' fails original MD5 checksum -
not deleted.
Oh my, I thought, I have a corrupt library. This is probably what caused
all those weird problems I was having with Aman
On 5/24/07, Erik Trulsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Checksum offloading is usually enabled by default for hardware that supports
it (assuming that the driver for that hardware also supports it of course.)
To see if a particular interface uses checksum offloading you can look at
the out
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 01:10:55PM -0600, Andrew Falanga wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm curious as to how FreeBSD handles checksum offloading for TCP
> packets. Is this on by default? It seems that it's only relevant for
> specific drivers rather than something that's just a
On May 24, 2007, at 12:10 PM, Andrew Falanga wrote:
I'm curious as to how FreeBSD handles checksum offloading for TCP
packets. Is this on by default?
If a particular NIC supports checksum offloading, it is typically
enabled by default.
It seems that it's only relevant for specif
Hi,
I'm curious as to how FreeBSD handles checksum offloading for TCP
packets. Is this on by default? It seems that it's only relevant for
specific drivers rather than something that's just assumed. How can I
determine if this is supported for the hardware I'm running?
O/H Zbigniew Szalbot έγραψε:
Dear all,
I tried updating fetchmail today from 6.3.6 to 6.3.8. I used portupgrade
to do it. However, I got an error message about checksum mismatch.
I suspect it may have something to do with me stopping the upgrade process
because while downloading the files, the
Hello again,
>>line and tried again. Since then I have been getting checksum mismatch
warnings and I am not able to upgrade.
>>What should I do now? Your advice is very much appreciated!
> delete the downloaded bad file from /usr/ports/distfiles and then
> download
> a go
Zbigniew Szalbot wrote:
Dear all,
I tried updating fetchmail today from 6.3.6 to 6.3.8. I used portupgrade
to do it. However, I got an error message about checksum mismatch.
I suspect it may have something to do with me stopping the upgrade process
because while downloading the files, the
On Wed 11 Apr 2007 18:04, Zbigniew Szalbot wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I tried updating fetchmail today from 6.3.6 to 6.3.8. I used portupgrade
> to do it. However, I got an error message about checksum mismatch.
>
> I suspect it may have something to do with me stopping the upgrade
At 11:50 AM 4/11/2007, Zbigniew Szalbot wrote:
Dear all,
I tried updating fetchmail today from 6.3.6 to 6.3.8. I used portupgrade
to do it. However, I got an error message about checksum mismatch.
I suspect it may have something to do with me stopping the upgrade process
because while
Dear all,
I tried updating fetchmail today from 6.3.6 to 6.3.8. I used portupgrade
to do it. However, I got an error message about checksum mismatch.
I suspect it may have something to do with me stopping the upgrade process
because while downloading the files, the connection froze and there was
ight off the start, though, is that my Ethernet card
> is not working. On boot I get this:
>
> ---
> em0: port
> 0x3000-0x301f mem 0xee00-0xee01 irq 16 at device 0.0 on pci2
> em0: The EEPROM Checksum Is Not Valid
> em0: Unable to initialize the hardware
> device_
: port 0x3000-0x301f
mem 0xee00-0xee01 irq 16 at device 0.0 on pci2
em0: The EEPROM Checksum Is Not Valid
em0: Unable to initialize the hardware
device_attach: em0 attach returned 5
---
I Googled for this and saw very few reports of this error; a
post from Dan Langille in 2004 suggested
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 05:34:19PM +0100, Pietro Cerutti wrote:
> On 1/11/07, Pyun YongHyeon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In if_re.c, rev 1.46.2.18 wpaul@ fixed a long standing checksum
> >offload issue by padding. Does re(4) work when you disable only Tx
> >chec
On 1/11/07, Pyun YongHyeon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In if_re.c, rev 1.46.2.18 wpaul@ fixed a long standing checksum
offload issue by padding. Does re(4) work when you disable only Tx
checksum offload?(i.e. ifconfig re0 -txcsum)
yes, because -txcsum also disables Rx checksum on
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 11:51:51AM +0100, Pietro Cerutti wrote:
> Hi lists,
> ifconfig re0 -txcsum -rxcsum solved the problem
>
In if_re.c, rev 1.46.2.18 wpaul@ fixed a long standing checksum
offload issue by padding. Does re(4) work when you disable only Tx
checksum off
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 11:51:51AM +0100, Pietro Cerutti wrote:
> Hi lists,
> ifconfig re0 -txcsum -rxcsum solved the problem
>
> Anyway, is this a bug in the driver or in the interface itself?
That is how checksum offloading works.
tcpdump can't see a correct checksum,
On 1/11/07, Bernd Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 11:51:51AM +0100, Pietro Cerutti wrote:
> Hi lists,
> ifconfig re0 -txcsum -rxcsum solved the problem
>
> Anyway, is this a bug in the driver or in the interface itself?
That is how checksu
0xff2ff000-0xff2f irq 17 at device 0.0 on pci2
($FreeBSD: src/sys/dev/re/if_re.c,v 1.46.2.20 2006/09/21 11:08:28 yongari Exp $)
I get checksum errors on every packet I send, example:
Checksum: 0x0bc5 [incorrect, should be 0x78fe (maybe caused by
checksum offloading?)]
I think this could be the
Hi lists,
ifconfig re0 -txcsum -rxcsum solved the problem
Anyway, is this a bug in the driver or in the interface itself?
Thanx, regards
-- Forwarded message --
From: Pietro Cerutti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Jan 11, 2007 11:29 AM
Subject: re(4) incorrect check
ix this. anybody knows how to
> > fix this?
> >
> > TIA
> >
>
> i was able to fix it :D please ignore the thread :)
>
> solution:
>
> the checksum mismatch is causing a problem, the update from cvsup doesn't
> match the checksum from the mirrors, tried
1 - 100 of 164 matches
Mail list logo
