On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 12:07:04PM +0200, Jan Stary wrote:
> On Sep 08 16:31:36, thomaswindi...@thomaswindisch.net wrote:
> > I mangaged to restore my drive using
> >
> > #fdisk -iy
> > #disklabel -R
> > #fsck
> >
> > Thanks Geoff and David.
> >
> > After reinstalling OpenBSD everything seems s
On Sep 08 16:31:36, thomaswindi...@thomaswindisch.net wrote:
> I mangaged to restore my drive using
>
> #fdisk -iy
> #disklabel -R
> #fsck
>
> Thanks Geoff and David.
>
> After reinstalling OpenBSD everything seems so be running fine.
If you reinstalled anyway, why did you bother restoring?
>
On 2021-09-08, Thomas Windisch wrote:
> I mangaged to restore my drive using
>
> #fdisk -iy
> #disklabel -R
> #fsck
>
> Thanks Geoff and David.
>
> After reinstalling OpenBSD everything seems so be running fine.
> Almost.
>
> When I now run grep I get this:
>
> $ grep
> warning: libc.so.96.0: min
I mangaged to restore my drive using
#fdisk -iy
#disklabel -R
#fsck
Thanks Geoff and David.
After reinstalling OpenBSD everything seems so be running fine.
Almost.
When I now run grep I get this:
$ grep
warning: libc.so.96.0: minor version >= 1 expected, using it anyway
ld.so: grep: can't loa
On Mon, 2021-09-06 at 12:57 -0400, gwes wrote:
> This doesn't happen often but... maybe a page somewhere online?
http://akpoff.com/archive/2017/that_time_i_nuked_the_disklabel_and_recovered_the_disk.html
Cases are often slightly different depending on how you destroyed your
disk layout. But the gi
On 9/6/21 9:22 AM, Thomas Windisch wrote:
I think I just overwrote my file system by using sd1 instead of sd2:
# pv install69.img > /dev/rsd1c
sd1 is softraid crypto device that holds the system partitions and data:
$ df -h
Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on
/dev/
I think I just overwrote my file system by using sd1 instead of sd2:
# pv install69.img > /dev/rsd1c
sd1 is softraid crypto device that holds the system partitions and data:
$ df -h
Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on
/dev/sd1a 1.9G143M1.7G 8%/
/
INTERESTING FUNNY SHIT
---
From:Marko Cupać
Sent:Saturday, April 24, 2021 14:04
To:Olive Power
Subject:Re: do ffs2 use 4k align on ssd
On 2021-04-24 16:30, Olive Power wrote:
> i see arm64 port got improved ffs
> i think
just a mark for a kind man reply to me
he or she obviously facing the same issue as me
what a slow building machine
From: Janne Johansson
Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2021 09:37
To: Olive Power
Subject: Re: do ffs2 use 4k align on ssd
> build ports for no peo
i see arm64 port got improved ffs
i think u can improve it this time as ssd use 4k align
not 512 bytes
nvme are most ssd so nvme should got 4k align
and can u publish 6.9 this weekend
what are u working on
build ports for no people use arch on a improved qemu patch for openbsd
My problem is slow speed on ffs2 partition on usb3. Here is my dmesg:
https://pastebin.com/MWJVcTNs
I don't know what additional info required, so ask.
My problem is slow speed on ffs2 partition on usb3. Here is my dmesg:
https://pastebin.com/MWJVcTNs
I don't know what additional info required, so ask.
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 10:54:59PM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> I got some questions on ffs2 in 6.7. This is to set the record
> straight, feel free to share on forums like reddit that I do not read,
> let alone post on.
>
> 1. Using 6.7, the *installer* defaults to ffs2 for new
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 07:48:57AM +0200, Matthias wrote:
> On a fresh 6.7 installation, mount(8) shows 'type ffs'. Is there any way
> to figure out the version number?
dumpfs /dev/rsdXY | head -1
-Otto
>
>
> On 2020-05-27 22:54, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> &g
Den tors 28 maj 2020 kl 07:51 skrev Matthias :
> On a fresh 6.7 installation, mount(8) shows 'type ffs'. Is there any way
> to figure out the version number?
>
>
https://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article;sid=20200326083657
--
May the most significant bit of your life be positive.
On a fresh 6.7 installation, mount(8) shows 'type ffs'. Is there any way
to figure out the version number?
On 2020-05-27 22:54, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
I got some questions on ffs2 in 6.7. This is to set the record
straight, feel free to share on forums like reddit that I do not read,
I got some questions on ffs2 in 6.7. This is to set the record
straight, feel free to share on forums like reddit that I do not read,
let alone post on.
1. Using 6.7, the *installer* defaults to ffs2 for new filesystems for
almost all platforms.
2. Using 6.7, a newfs "by hand" stil
On 2020-05-20, Christer Solskogen wrote:
> Is that possible?
umount, dump, newfs, mount, restore
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de
What is the best method to harden OpenBSD in a diskless mode?
I am going to use Librebooted X86 amd64 + Linux for a ZFS host, in a very
minimum config like:
https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=21098#p21098
short (30-50cm) direct dedicated Ethernet cable between Orange PI ONE and X86
hos
According to:
https://web.archive.org/web/20200520085926/https://itsfoss.com/hyperbola-linux-bsd/
They are going to add following:
>We have plans on porting BTRFS, JFS2, NetBSD’s CHFS, DragonFlyBSD’s
>HAMMER/HAMMER2 and the Linux kernel’s JFFS2, all of which have licenses
>compatible with G
> "Possible" is irrelevant. Lots of things are _possible_ but not done.
Then only rsyncing?
Why not adding at least one of a well tested journaled FS like XFS to OpenBSD?
Is XFS too fat and complex to be secure?
Does OpenBSD work well if system root is stored via NFS, say on a Linux ZFS?
Am Mi., 20. Mai 2020 um 11:41 Uhr schrieb Михаил Попов :
> What is the best method to harden OpenBSD in a diskless mode?
Manually converting the fs to FFS2 using ed. That's what you are
interested in, right?
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 10:44:42AM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 11:30:00AM +0300, Михаил Попов wrote:
> > > "Possible" is irrelevant. Lots of things are _possible_ but not done.
> >
> > Then only rsyncing?
>
> There is also dump and restore.
>
> > Why not adding at leas
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 11:30:00AM +0300, Михаил Попов wrote:
> > "Possible" is irrelevant. Lots of things are _possible_ but not done.
>
> Then only rsyncing?
>
> Why not adding at least one of a well tested journaled FS like XFS to OpenBSD?
> Is XFS too fat and complex to be secure?
>
> Does
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 11:30:00AM +0300, Михаил Попов wrote:
> > "Possible" is irrelevant. Lots of things are _possible_ but not done.
>
> Then only rsyncing?
There is also dump and restore.
> Why not adding at least one of a well tested journaled FS like XFS to OpenBSD?
> Is XFS too fat and c
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 9:58 AM Philip Guenther wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 10:50 PM Christer Solskogen <
> christer.solsko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Is that possible?
>>
>
> "Possible" is irrelevant. Lots of things are _possible_ but not done.
> "Has anyone actually written a tool to do th
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 10:50 PM Christer Solskogen <
christer.solsko...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is that possible?
>
"Possible" is irrelevant. Lots of things are _possible_ but not done.
"Has anyone actually written a tool to do this, and would you *trust* it?"
are the proper question...and the answ
Is that possible?
--
chs
On 2014-03-17 Mon 21:19 PM |, Adam Thompson wrote:
> OK, obviously I missed something.
> How do you resize ffs filesystems without a dump/restore step?
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.os.openbsd.misc/207756
ote:
>>> On 2014-03-17, Nick Holland wrote:
>>>> (Exception: when you make a partition small enough to be ffs, but
>>plan
>>>> to growfs it later to a bigger size -- growfs works on ffs and ffs2,
>>but
>>>> doesn't convert from one to
On 3/17/14 10:19 PM, Adam Thompson wrote:
> OK, obviously I missed something. How do you resize ffs filesystems without
> a dump/restore step?
> -Adam
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=growfs
a partition small enough to be ffs, but
>plan
>>> to growfs it later to a bigger size -- growfs works on ffs and ffs2,
>but
>>> doesn't convert from one to the other. Oh poo. Just realized I
>forgot
>>> to do this recently... )
>>
>> But you have
On 03/17/14 21:24, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2014-03-17, Nick Holland wrote:
>> (Exception: when you make a partition small enough to be ffs, but plan
>> to growfs it later to a bigger size -- growfs works on ffs and ffs2, but
>> doesn't convert from one to the other.
On 2014-03-17, Nick Holland wrote:
> (Exception: when you make a partition small enough to be ffs, but plan
> to growfs it later to a bigger size -- growfs works on ffs and ffs2, but
> doesn't convert from one to the other. Oh poo. Just realized I forgot
> to do this recently..
On 03/16/14 17:43, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 09:53:29PM +0100, carsten.ku...@arcor.de wrote:
>> > i just want to know how to format a partition in OpenBSD for ffs2 ?
>>
>> You could have a look in the newfs(8) manpage for the option
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 09:53:29PM +0100, carsten.ku...@arcor.de wrote:
> > i just want to know how to format a partition in OpenBSD for ffs2 ?
>
> You could have a look in the newfs(8) manpage for the option "-O". -O 2
> should be FFS2.
>
But don't use FFS2 fo
> i just want to know how to format a partition in OpenBSD for ffs2 ?
You could have a look in the newfs(8) manpage for the option "-O". -O 2 should
be FFS2.
Hi folks,
i just want to know how to format a partition in OpenBSD for ffs2 ?
May some one help me ?
Thanks a lot
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 14:01, Clint Pachl wrote:
> I created a new filesystem on a 232.9 GB partition on a 500 GB external
> USB drive that will be used as backup storage for dump files. Out of
> curiosity, I recreated the filesystem using FFS2 (I never created an
> FFS2 before). I no
I created a new filesystem on a 232.9 GB partition on a 500 GB external
USB drive that will be used as backup storage for dump files. Out of
curiosity, I recreated the filesystem using FFS2 (I never created an
FFS2 before). I noticed it was much faster, so I clocked it for comparison
't know about dumpfs, exactly what I was looking for.
>
> Thanks also, for the confirmation!
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Philip Guenther wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Brandon Tanner
> > wrote:
> > > How do I know if I'm
Sweet, didn't know about dumpfs, exactly what I was looking for.
Thanks also, for the confirmation!
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Philip Guenther wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Brandon Tanner
> wrote:
> > How do I know if I'm using ffs2 on a partition.
&g
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Brandon Tanner wrote:
> How do I know if I'm using ffs2 on a partition.
sudo dumpfs /storage | head -1
...
> However, I think I read that > 2TB volumes automatically use FFS2 when
> using newfs, yet mount only shows ffs (is it transparent or
How do I know if I'm using ffs2 on a partition. My softraid 1 volume is
2.7TB, and mount shows it as:
/dev/sd3a on /storage type ffs (local, nodev, nosuid, softdep)
However, I think I read that > 2TB volumes automatically use FFS2 when
using newfs, yet mount only shows ffs (is it transp
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 05:23:05PM +0300, Alex V. Breger wrote:
> Hello
>
> Does scan_ffs supports ffs2 (ufs2) ?
No,
-Otto
Hello
Does scan_ffs supports ffs2 (ufs2) ?
--
WBR, Alex V Breger
On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 7:41 AM, Pedro Martelletto
wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 01:06:17AM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:
>> As a general matter, I'm a bit of a downer on ffs2 because I think
>> it's the wrong solution. FFS was (and is) great for its problem
>>
On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 01:06:17AM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:
> As a general matter, I'm a bit of a downer on ffs2 because I think
> it's the wrong solution. FFS was (and is) great for its problem
> domain, but outside the comfort zone it's not so hot.
there's always
On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 01:06:17AM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 11:54 PM, Denis Doroshenko
> wrote:
> >> even if it worked, you won't be able to run fsck after the fact.
> >
> > could you please be more informative? won't it work becaus
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 11:54 PM, Denis Doroshenko
wrote:
>> even if it worked, you won't be able to run fsck after the fact.
>
> could you please be more informative? won't it work because of FFS2 or
> because of 1.5TB? it seems that the man page for growfs(8) doesn&
On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 2:21 AM, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 6:07 PM, Aaron Stellman wrote:
>> Before I screw up my filesystem, I would like to see if it's safe to
>> proceed. I have a 1TB FFS2 partition, which I'm about to grow to ~1.5TB
>
>
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 6:07 PM, Aaron Stellman wrote:
> Before I screw up my filesystem, I would like to see if it's safe to
> proceed. I have a 1TB FFS2 partition, which I'm about to grow to ~1.5TB
> Looks quite suspicious to me -- please comment.
even if it worked, you w
Before I screw up my filesystem, I would like to see if it's safe to
proceed. I have a 1TB FFS2 partition, which I'm about to grow to ~1.5TB
original disklabel:
a: 2097157167 63 4.2BSD 8192 655361
^
c: 39070310400 unu
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 08:53:24PM -0400, jmc wrote:
> --- John Nietzsche [Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 07:19:11PM -0300]: ---
> > Dear OpenBSD friends,
> >
> > how may i format a slice with FFS2? and what to put into /etc/fstab
> IIRC from some list traffic, you have to be care
--- John Nietzsche [Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 07:19:11PM -0300]: ---
> Dear OpenBSD friends,
>
> how may i format a slice with FFS2? and what to put into /etc/fstab
i think you have to be running >= 4.2 to have FFS2 support. from
newfs(8):
-O filesystem-format
2Enhanc
Dear OpenBSD friends,
how may i format a slice with FFS2? and what to put into /etc/fstab
Thanks.
On Sun, 20 May 2007, Bryan Vyhmeister wrote:
> Having searched through the archives and found a number of cvs entries related
> to FFS2, I was wondering if support is to the point where it can actually be
> tested or if it is still very much in progress. I noticed that options FFS2
&
Having searched through the archives and found a number of cvs
entries related to FFS2, I was wondering if support is to the point
where it can actually be tested or if it is still very much in
progress. I noticed that options FFS2 has been added to options(4)
which makes me think maybe it
58 matches
Mail list logo
