Nick Holland wrote:
And in the end, a
'0'-sized bsd.sp after moving in a healthy bsd.mp.
I would not totally exclude an interference of this (new?) code that
lead to the described situation. Honestly, nothing at all done in that
session aside from what I wrote, between the 2 boots. I guess, not
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Ron McDowell wrote:
> patrick keshishian wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:14 PM, Ron McDowell wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> A note of caution. I copied a bunch of stuff from an OSX 10.6 partition
>>> to
>>> a FAT32 USB drive, and when looking at that FAT32 USB drive m
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 23:14:19 -0500, Ron McDowell wrote:
>Ted Roby wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I suspect the OP would like to dual boot his intel mac machine and
>>> still have access from OpenBSD to the files stored on a hfsplus
>>> partition.
>>>
patrick keshishian wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:14 PM, Ron McDowell wrote:
A note of caution. I copied a bunch of stuff from an OSX 10.6 partition to
a FAT32 USB drive, and when looking at that FAT32 USB drive mounted on an
OpenBSD 4.7 system, any filenames that fit into the old DOS
8-c
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:14 PM, Ron McDowell wrote:
> Ted Roby wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I suspect the OP would like to dual boot his intel mac machine and
>>> still have access from OpenBSD to the files stored on a hfsplus
>>> partition.
>
Ted Roby wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
I suspect the OP would like to dual boot his intel mac machine and
still have access from OpenBSD to the files stored on a hfsplus
partition.
-Otto
This is more in line with what I am seeking.
I have a l
Pour visualiser cet e-mail au format HTML, cliquez ci-dessous :
http://www.od-prod.com/e-mailing/sakane/index1.php?id=m...@openbsd.org
SAKANE EXPO
... Vous donnent rendez-vous pour leurs meilleurs Offres !!!
du 25 au 28 mars 2010 au Palais des congrhs de Marrakech
Contact - Info :
http://www.od
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 5:12 PM, bofh wrote:
> Would be hfs porters should also know that snow leopard (10.6) made
> further extensions to hfs+ and there can be data in a file created on
> 10.6 that even 10.5 can't see.
>
>
Yes. This is why my 10.5 system tools broke, and those third party
compa
>>> Isn't ZFS license "copyleft"? I mean, if one includes zfs in the
>>> kernel the whole kernel would have to be CDDL? (Like the GPL)
>>
>> No. No.
>
> Actually, I think that should be "Yes. No." But whatever, the answer
> to the only question that matters is still "No."
>
Oh like the LGPL, ok.
Would be hfs porters should also know that snow leopard (10.6) made
further extensions to hfs+ and there can be data in a file created on
10.6 that even 10.5 can't see.
On 3/22/10, Dale Rahn wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:39:07AM -0600, Ted Roby wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Ot
On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 12:36 PM, T. Valent wrote:
> Folks, yes, I appreciate your attempt to help a lot. And I really am on
> your side if we're talking about "normal" machines.
>
> However, obviously nobody believes me when I say "For us there is no
> reason to update to newer versions of OpenBS
Andres Salazar wrote:
Also.. this Hard disk is marked as 30Gb/sec (384 megabytes / sec) ..
Is it possible to saturate my HD IO and view the traffic /megabyte to
see what is the maximum i can achieve?
You can test the performance with "dd":
a) raw
write: dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/rsd0z bs=1024k
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Dale Rahn wrote:
>
>
> It should be possible to build the port on i386 with the 'ONLY_FOR' tag
> changed, however I dont recall that the hfsplus code was new enough to
> support case-sensitive filesystems. Testing would need to be done to verify
> what filesystems
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:39:07AM -0600, Ted Roby wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
>
> >
> > I suspect the OP would like to dual boot his intel mac machine and
> > still have access from OpenBSD to the files stored on a hfsplus
> > partition.
> >
> >-Otto
>
Uwe Dippel wrote:
Tobias Ulmer wrote:
As explained above, no, you likely moved around/corrupted /boot in a way
that doesn't work for biosboot.
Hmm. Actually I didn't. Through serial console, I had rebooted the
server, just 'to make sure', before booting to bsd.rd, and everything
went thr
...
OpenSSH 5.5:
New features:
...
Milan Prihoda
[IMAGE]
You were recently invited to become a part of the Fast Pitch! online
business network. Note: This invitation is about to expire.
To begin, take a moment to create your professional profile here:
http://www.fastpitchnetworking.com
Creating a profile takes seconds... and opens the door to
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 01:36:45PM +0200, Andreas Gerdd wrote:
> I've an OpenBSD 4.6-Stable system. I wanted to ask how long will
> OBSD4.6 has patch/update support?
If you already follow -stable, it is the same process to upgrade to
newer release.
The main differences are that you get newer ver
Hello..
Iam trying to use systat for identifying if when my applications/db
runs there is an IO bottleneck. Linux systat shows more info and it
seems there are more examples on the net.. but even though with BSDs
iostat i dont know how to make sense of all these numbers.
I ran it this way:
syst
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Ted Unangst wrote:
>
> Getting data off a filesystem can be useful on any machine, even if
> you don't intend to boot it. Ports are generally marked "only for"
> because they only work there (read: are not written portably), not out
> of a subjective "useful" ca
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:07 PM, Bryan Irvine wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Ted Roby wrote:
>> I've noticed this environment variable in misc/hfsplus
>>
>>
>> # this only makes sense on macintosh (powerpc) systems.
>> ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= powerpc
>>
>>
>> It used to only make sense on powe
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
>
> I suspect the OP would like to dual boot his intel mac machine and
> still have access from OpenBSD to the files stored on a hfsplus
> partition.
>
>-Otto
>
This is more in line with what I am seeking.
I have a large amount of d
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 10:07:24AM -0700, Bryan Irvine wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Ted Roby wrote:
> > I've noticed this environment variable in misc/hfsplus
> >
> >
> > # this only makes sense on macintosh (powerpc) systems.
> > ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= powerpc
> >
> >
> > It used to only m
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:07 AM, Bryan Irvine wrote:
>
> I'm sure someone else will correct me if I'm wrong. I believe the
> only reason this is needed on ppc machines is because the openfirmware
> expects an hfs volume to boot from so the bootloader is stored on a
> small hfs partition. If th
Wow, you moved to Europe and really *did* change, didn't you?
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 7:20 AM, Bret S. Lambert wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 03:58:46PM +0200, Dan Naumov wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Marc Espie wrote:
>> > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 02:29:51PM +0200, Dan Naumov wrot
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 12:45 PM, VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO
> wrote:
>> Isn't ZFS license "copyleft"? I mean, if one includes zfs in the
>> kernel the whole kernel would have to be CDDL? (Like the GPL)
>
> No. No.
Actually, I think that should
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Ted Roby wrote:
> I've noticed this environment variable in misc/hfsplus
>
>
> # this only makes sense on macintosh (powerpc) systems.
> ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= powerpc
>
>
> It used to only make sense on powerpc systems, but Macintosh
> hardware now uses i386 architecture
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 12:45 PM, VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO
wrote:
> Isn't ZFS license "copyleft"? I mean, if one includes zfs in the
> kernel the whole kernel would have to be CDDL? (Like the GPL)
No. No.
I've currently been running a redundant firewall solution in our
Production environment using OpenBSD (version 4.5-stable) with CARP (4),
PF (4), PFsync (4) and SAsyncd (8) which syncs the pf rules and IPSEC
security associations via the cross-over cable method. We're also
running an IPSEC (4)
Hello,
(I'm using current with smtpd.)
I'm sending mail reports to a mail address which is defined in the
alias file like this:
didier: dwir...@company.com
My smtpd.conf is:
listen on lo0
map "aliases" { source db "/etc/mail/aliases.db" }
accept for local deliver to mbox
accept for all relay via m
I've noticed this environment variable in misc/hfsplus
# this only makes sense on macintosh (powerpc) systems.
ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= powerpc
It used to only make sense on powerpc systems, but Macintosh
hardware now uses i386 architecture. Of course, changing this
variable is not enough to cause a suc
Isn't ZFS license "copyleft"? I mean, if one includes zfs in the
kernel the whole kernel would have to be CDDL? (Like the GPL)
> This is weird, it is claimed that CDDL is going against the BSD
> philosophy, yet both FreeBSD and NetBSD didn't have any problems
> including it in their base...
Yes, it sure is weird that they are like wind in the wind, merging
more ad more non-free stuff every year.
It does not make it OK fo
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 09:59:20PM +0800, Uwe Dippel wrote:
[..]
>
> Thanks for the reply. I'll go there next to try what has been
> proposed. Before I try, in case the
> # /usr/*m*dec/installboot -v boot /*usr/mdec*/biosboot sd0
> does NOT work, what else could I do? (I am asking, because it is a
Alexander Carver wrote:
Miod Vallat wrote:
Hi all,
I've been working on getting gpsd working on one of my old Sun IPXes
but I've run into a problem with ldattach needing the /dev/cuaa
device. The serial port /dev/ttya is working with gpsd directly but
ldattach requires /dev/cuaa. However,
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010, Dan Naumov wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Marc Espie wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 02:29:51PM +0200, Dan Naumov wrote:
>>>
>>> The question of why 2 different BSDs have no issues including specific
>>> code into their base, while another does is a valid one. Whe
http://openbsd.org/mail.html
"Do your homework before you post"
As we say here in Brasil: "Who say what he wants, will listen what he
doesn't wants" (or so).
Sure you doesn't even try google first, if so you'd be redirected to:
http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/openbsd-misc/2009/1/15/4733444 (zf
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 03:58:46PM +0200, Dan Naumov wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Marc Espie wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 02:29:51PM +0200, Dan Naumov wrote:
> >>
> >> The question of why 2 different BSDs have no issues including specific
> >> code into their base, while another
Andreas Gerdd wrote:
when 4.8 comes out (a year after 4.6 came out) support for 4.6 will stop.
Quite short time.
Not really.
Our advise is to upgrade to a newer version and plan for that now.
It's not magic, in fact it is pretty easy in almost all cases.
It is not magic, but it is more th
Hi,
I'd like to use a non-zero (0 seconds is default) timeout for src.track on a
load balancer powered by relayd.
However, I'd like to set it *not* as a global pf setting, but per rule. AFAICS,
I have to configure this in relayd.conf, but where? If it's possible at all,
that is.
Thank you,
D
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:45 +0100, "Marc Espie" wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 08:11:53AM -0400, Woodchuck wrote:
> > Ports/packages are sort of hit-or-miss.
> >
> > This is a very Spartan situation, and comes from a shortage of
> > resources.
>
> Partly.
>
> Being able to drop old shit fairly
I was able to get this dmesg...
X doesn't work and ACPI seems busted too.
OpenBSD 4.7 (GENERIC) #558: Wed Mar 17 20:46:15 MDT 2010
dera...@i386.openbsd.org:/usr/src/sys/arch/i386/compile/GENERIC
cpu0: AMD Athlon(tm) Neo Processor MV-40 ("AuthenticAMD" 686-class, 512KB L2
cache) 1.60 GHz
cpu0
Dan Naumov wrote:
> ... I can only suggest therapy, it works
> for millions of people.
That explains the state of Information Technology.
I'll take the code, snide remarks and all. Thanks.
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Marc Espie wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 02:29:51PM +0200, Dan Naumov wrote:
>>
>> The question of why 2 different BSDs have no issues including specific
>> code into their base, while another does is a valid one. When asked
>> "hard questions", labeling the per
Tobias Ulmer wrote:
As explained above, no, you likely moved around/corrupted /boot in a way
that doesn't work for biosboot.
Hmm. Actually I didn't. Through serial console, I had rebooted the
server, just 'to make sure', before booting to bsd.rd, and everything
went through. I rebooted ag
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 08:11:53AM -0400, Woodchuck wrote:
> Ports/packages are sort of hit-or-miss.
>
> This is a very Spartan situation, and comes from a shortage of
> resources.
Partly.
Being able to drop old shit fairly quickly is also very important in terms
of quality, since we don't have
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 02:29:51PM +0200, Dan Naumov wrote:
>
> The question of why 2 different BSDs have no issues including specific
> code into their base, while another does is a valid one. When asked
> "hard questions", labeling the person asking them a troll is sadly a
> common occurrence on
From: "Andreas Gerdd"
when 4.8 comes out (a year after 4.6 came out) support for 4.6 will stop.
Quite short time.
Perhaps, but it /is/ free. There are undoubtedly some people who will
backport fixes to earlier versions if you paid them.
Our advise is to upgrade to a newer version and pla
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 02:29:51PM +0200, Dan Naumov wrote:
| The question of why 2 different BSDs have no issues including specific
| code into their base, while another does is a valid one. When asked
| "hard questions", labeling the person asking them a troll is sadly a
| common occurrence on th
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 12:29:51 -, Dan Naumov
wrote:
The question of why 2 different BSDs have no issues including specific
code into their base, while another does is a valid one. When asked
"hard questions", labeling the person asking them a troll is sadly a
common occurrence on the intern
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 02:14:23PM +0200, Andreas Gerdd wrote:
> > when 4.8 comes out (a year after 4.6 came out) support for 4.6 will stop.
>
> Quite short time.
>
> > Our advise is to upgrade to a newer version and plan for that now.
> > It's not magic, in fact it is pretty easy in almost all
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Jordi Espasa Clofent
wrote:
>> This is weird, it is claimed that CDDL is going against the BSD
>> philosophy, yet both FreeBSD and NetBSD didn't have any problems
>> including it in their base...
>
> 1. Read a bit:
> http://openbsd.org/policy.html
>
> 2. You're com
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Jan Stary wrote:
> On Mar 22 13:56:05, Dan Naumov wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Kenneth R Westerback
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 01:33:07PM +0200, Dan Naumov wrote:
>> >> Hello
>> >>
>> >> Are there any plans to bring ZFS support to OpenBSD
On 22/03/10 13:33, Dan Naumov wrote:
Hello
Are there any plans to bring ZFS support to OpenBSD so that users
don't have to worry about things like fsck, running out of inodes and
other silly stuff in the year 2010?
Check out http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=123203302805419&w=2
Similar threa
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Andreas Gerdd wrote:
>> when 4.8 comes out (a year after 4.6 came out) support for 4.6 will stop.
>
> Quite short time.
>
>> Our advise is to upgrade to a newer version and plan for that now.
>> It's not magic, in fact it is pretty easy in almost all cases.
>
> It
Maybe because FreeBSD or NetBSD doesn't care so much about problems
with laws against their users in feature?
Integrate good code from any source with acceptable copyright (ISC or
Berkeley style preferred, GPL acceptable as a last recourse but not in
the kernel, NDA never acceptable). We want to m
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 7:36 AM, Andreas Gerdd wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've an OpenBSD 4.6-Stable system. I wanted to ask how long will
> OBSD4.6 has patch/update support?
> If there is a support time limit like lets say up to 12/24 months,
> does it mean after that time, it will not get any update, not
This is weird, it is claimed that CDDL is going against the BSD
philosophy, yet both FreeBSD and NetBSD didn't have any problems
including it in their base...
1. Read a bit:
http://openbsd.org/policy.html
2. You're completely froo to move to another OS.
The weird thing is your ignorance and di
> when 4.8 comes out (a year after 4.6 came out) support for 4.6 will stop.
Quite short time.
> Our advise is to upgrade to a newer version and plan for that now.
> It's not magic, in fact it is pretty easy in almost all cases.
It is not magic, but it is more than magic if you have only remote s
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 01:56:05PM +0200, Dan Naumov wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Kenneth R Westerback
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 01:33:07PM +0200, Dan Naumov wrote:
> >> Hello
> >>
> >> Are there any plans to bring ZFS support to OpenBSD so that users
> >> don't have to wo
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Kenneth R Westerback
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 01:33:07PM +0200, Dan Naumov wrote:
>> Hello
>>
>> Are there any plans to bring ZFS support to OpenBSD so that users
>> don't have to worry about things like fsck, running out of inodes and
>> other silly stuff
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 01:33:07PM +0200, Dan Naumov wrote:
> Hello
>
> Are there any plans to bring ZFS support to OpenBSD so that users
> don't have to worry about things like fsck, running out of inodes and
> other silly stuff in the year 2010?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> - Sincerely,
> Dan Naumov
No
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 01:36:45PM +0200, Andreas Gerdd wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I've an OpenBSD 4.6-Stable system. I wanted to ask how long will
>OBSD4.6 has patch/update support?
>If there is a support time limit like lets say up to 12/24 months,
>does it mean after that time, it will not get any update, n
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 01:36:45PM +0200, Andreas Gerdd wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've an OpenBSD 4.6-Stable system. I wanted to ask how long will
> OBSD4.6 has patch/update support?
> If there is a support time limit like lets say up to 12/24 months,
> does it mean after that time, it will not get any upd
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 01:33:07PM +0200, Dan Naumov wrote:
> Hello
>
> Are there any plans to bring ZFS support to OpenBSD so that users
> don't have to worry about things like fsck, running out of inodes and
> other silly stuff in the year 2010?
Intertruck troll is Intertruck.
>
> Thanks.
>
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Bret S. Lambert wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 01:33:07PM +0200, Dan Naumov wrote:
>> Hello
>>
>> Are there any plans to bring ZFS support to OpenBSD so that users
>> don't have to worry about things like fsck, running out of inodes and
>> other silly stuff in th
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 01:36:45PM +0200, Andreas Gerdd wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've an OpenBSD 4.6-Stable system. I wanted to ask how long will
> OBSD4.6 has patch/update support?
> If there is a support time limit like lets say up to 12/24 months,
> does it mean after that time, it will not get any up
2010/3/22 Dan Naumov :
> Are there any plans to bring ZFS support to OpenBSD so that users
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=openbsd+zfs
if you can get oracle to change the license to something acceptable to the
openbsd tree then id consider porting it.
On 22/03/2010, at 9:33 PM, Dan Naumov wrote:
> Hello
>
> Are there any plans to bring ZFS support to OpenBSD so that users
> don't have to worry about things like fsck, running out
Hi,
I've an OpenBSD 4.6-Stable system. I wanted to ask how long will
OBSD4.6 has patch/update support?
If there is a support time limit like lets say up to 12/24 months,
does it mean after that time, it will not get any update, not even
(possible) critical vulnerabilities?
Kind regards.
Hello
Are there any plans to bring ZFS support to OpenBSD so that users
don't have to worry about things like fsck, running out of inodes and
other silly stuff in the year 2010?
Thanks.
- Sincerely,
Dan Naumov
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 04:41:39PM +0800, Uwe Dippel wrote:
> Having done upgrades from 4.0 onwards, on a OpenBSD-only server
> (amd64), this time something must have gone wrong: Despite of the
> (remote, I have no physical access, via serial console) 'successful'
> upgrade (no error messages), whe
Uwe Dippel wrote:
Having done upgrades from 4.0 onwards, on a OpenBSD-only server
(amd64), this time something must have gone wrong: Despite of the
(remote, I have no physical access, via serial console) 'successful'
upgrade (no error messages), when I was asked to reboot, I did, as
always. A
Having done upgrades from 4.0 onwards, on a OpenBSD-only server (amd64),
this time something must have gone wrong: Despite of the (remote, I have
no physical access, via serial console) 'successful' upgrade (no error
messages), when I was asked to reboot, I did, as always. Alas, it came
up wit
74 matches
Mail list logo
