that's interesting
raises a couple of questions: is softraid to have functions found in
generic volume managers such as zfs and lvm? the answer doesn't really
matter because it's a fact that crypto isn't a raid discipline
given that, is "softraid" a poor name for what it offers?
On Mon, Dec 12,
On 2011-12-12, Pavel Shvagirev wrote:
> You are right. The more better way would be buying a bigger storage,
or writing a concatenation backend for softraid(4).
softraid_raid0.c would be a good starting point.
?P8QP5Q:
> Obviously, an optimal solution would be concatenation. Since that does not
> exist, the closest matching solution without ccd(4) is RAID0. And no, I
> haven't tried it; what I wrote was nothing more than a thought experiment.
--
Best regards,
Pavel Shvagirev
skype: pavel.shvagirev
gt; Out of curiosity, have you actually tried something like this? While I'm
> sure it works technically, I'd imagine the performance would be abysmal.
Obviously, an optimal solution would be concatenation. Since that does not
exist, the closest matching solution without ccd(4) is
On 2011-12-08 20.11, Josh Grosse wrote:
> Pavel Shvagirev gmail.com> writes:
>> Thank you for the reply. Unfortunately RAID0 is not exactly what I was
>> looking for 'cause it does not really concatenate disks - it stripes as
>> you've mentioned. And two disks, 80 and 120 Gb, that were to be
>> co
Pavel Shvagirev wrote:
Very good idea! Why didn't I think of that before?..
Thank you very much! Will try.
08.12.2011 23:11, Josh Grosse P?P8QP5Q:
> Sure they will. Just factor the size. In your example, use 5 x 40GB
partitions:
--
Best regards,
Pavel Shvagirev
cell: +7 903 195-2807
skype: pave
Very good idea! Why didn't I think of that before?..
Thank you very much! Will try.
08.12.2011 23:11, Josh Grosse P?P8QP5Q:
> Sure they will. Just factor the size. In your example, use 5 x 40GB
> partitions:
--
Best regards,
Pavel Shvagirev
cell: +7 903 195-2807
skype: pavel.shvagirev
Pavel Shvagirev gmail.com> writes:
>
> Thank you for the reply. Unfortunately RAID0 is not exactly what I was
> looking for 'cause it does not really concatenate disks - it stripes as
> you've mentioned. And two disks, 80 and 120 Gb, that were to be
> concatenated will never give ~200Gb with RAI
no way to concatenate other than via ccd(4)
that is no longer supported and buggy on my machine as well =]
08.12.2011 22:20, Josh Grosse P?P8QP5Q:
> The RAID 0 discipline provides full capacity with no redundancy. It is
> striping rather than concatenation, but it may meet your needs.
--
Bes
Pavel Shvagirev wrote:
what can be used instead?
softraid(4) will not go since it can not concatenate disks... only a
kind of RAID0/1 or crypto...
08.12.2011 20:36, Amit Kulkarni P?P8QP5Q:
> nobody has worked on ccd for long time...In fact ccd has been removed post
5.0
--
Best regards,
Pa
what can be used instead?
softraid(4) will not go since it can not concatenate disks... only a
kind of RAID0/1 or crypto...
08.12.2011 20:36, Amit Kulkarni P?P8QP5Q:
> nobody has worked on ccd for long time...In fact ccd has been removed post 5.0
--
Best regards,
Pavel Shvagirev
cell: +7
Hello everyone.
I have faced problem with ccd(4) on OpenBSD 5.0 i386 GENERIC#43
When I try to serially concatenate two IDE disks with ccd(4), every
time I get system not responding at all.
I do setup strictry following the man pages. Both disks are connected to
one IDE port on mother board via
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 03:23:16PM -0400, Jiri B wrote:
> theo@ doomed ccd - http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=131805777910632&w=2 -
> and Michal asked what could be replacement for ccd and got no reply -
> - http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=131805777910645&w=2.
>
&g
Hello,
theo@ doomed ccd - http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=131805777910632&w=2 -
and Michal asked what could be replacement for ccd and got no reply -
- http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=131805777910645&w=2.
Do devs want to put ccd-like spanning volume feature into softraid
[+misc@, for users not subscribed to tech@]
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Matthew Dempsky wrote:
> What should be done about ccd(4) and raid(4)? They both seem
> superseded in functionality by softraid(4), which also has much more
> developer interest and active development.
>
Hi,
I'm trying to concatenate 2 disks using ccd. With an interleave factor
of 0, as described by the man page of ccd(4), it doesn't work. An
interleave factor of 1 works, though. Also, the fstype is 4.2BSD in my
example, but there's no difference if I set it to CCD.
This
On 2007/09/13 10:10, Raimo Niskanen wrote:
> By the way, I recall rumours about some other RAID implementation coming
> in OpenBSD 4.2. Does anyone know, just rumours?
It's there, but not in GENERIC. Note the CAVEATS.
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=softraid
.com/articles/52713
> >
> > good luck :)
> >
> > On 9/12/07, Steve Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Jake Conk wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I've searched hi and low for hours on how to setup my system of a R
gt; wrote:
> > > Jake Conk wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I've searched hi and low for hours on how to setup my system of a RAID
> > > > 1 and basically what it comes down to is ccd and/or Raid Frame. I've
> > > > found h
good luck :)
>
> On 9/12/07, Steve Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Jake Conk wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I've searched hi and low for hours on how to setup my system of a RAID
> > > 1 and basically what it comes down to is ccd and/
up my system of a RAID
> > 1 and basically what it comes down to is ccd and/or Raid Frame. I've
> > found helpful docs on using some of the commands and where to put my
> > configurations but nothing seems complete enough for me to figure it
> > out.
> >
> &g
Jake Conk wrote:
Hello,
I've searched hi and low for hours on how to setup my system of a RAID
1 and basically what it comes down to is ccd and/or Raid Frame. I've
found helpful docs on using some of the commands and where to put my
configurations but nothing seems complete enough
thing or if there is a way to configure my disks for ccd and
> mirror them to the second disk then I'm willing to do that also.
>
> Basically I don't know how to get this ball rolling
I'm very new to OBSD and BSDs in general, coming from Debian Linux
(which now does raid1
Hello,
I've searched hi and low for hours on how to setup my system of a RAID
1 and basically what it comes down to is ccd and/or Raid Frame. I've
found helpful docs on using some of the commands and where to put my
configurations but nothing seems complete enough for me to figure it
ou
On 3/12/07, Sebastian Rother <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello everybody,
I`ve a ccd wich contains sensetiv data.
The Server crashed for technical reasons.
After it booted up again it told me to do a fsck.
I did and the data is gone now.
I think I shouldn`t have done it is the
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 04:08:25AM +0100, Sebastian Rother wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I`ve a ccd wich contains sensetiv data.
> The Server crashed for technical reasons.
> After it booted up again it told me to do a fsck.
> I did and the data is gone now.
>
&
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Sebastian Rother wrote:
And I forgot to say: It`s a private Server but even privat can have
some value sometimes (and it was too big to backup. bigger HDDs are
planed to replace the CCD (later..)).
IMO the data cannot be valuable if you don't have backups for it
:) ).
Is there any tool to repair this kind of damage?
Or does somebody know a extraction methode to reassemble the file?
And I forgot to say: It`s a private Server but even privat can have
some value sometimes (and it was too big to backup. bigger HDDs are
planed to replace the CCD (later..)).
Kind regards,
Sebastian
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Sebastian Rother wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I`ve a ccd wich contains sensetiv data.
> The Server crashed for technical reasons.
> After it booted up again it told me to do a fsck.
> I did and the data is gone now.
>
> --
> fsck /dev/ccd0c
&
On 3/12/07, Sebastian Rother <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello everybody,
I`ve a ccd wich contains sensetiv data.
The Server crashed for technical reasons.
After it booted up again it told me to do a fsck.
I did and the data is gone now.
I think I shouldn`t have done it is there A
Hello everybody,
I`ve a ccd wich contains sensetiv data.
The Server crashed for technical reasons.
After it booted up again it told me to do a fsck.
I did and the data is gone now.
--
fsck /dev/ccd0c
** /dev/ccd0c
** Phase 1 ..
..
..
..
..
** Phase 5 - Check Cyl groups
1 files, 1 used
Hello everybody,
I made a misstake during setting up a ccd.
One of the HDDs was not unmounted but ccd didn`t told me
during using cddconfig.
My problem looks like:
Script started on Fri Feb 9 01:46:05 2007
# mount
/dev/sd0a on / type ffs (local, softdep)
/dev/sd0g on /crypto/home type ffs
On Sunday 28 January 2007 17:47, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
> christian widmer wrote:
> > man ccd:
> > "Note that the `raw' partitions of the disks should not be combined.
> > Each component partition should be offset at least one cylinder from the
> > beginnin
On 2007/01/28 23:09, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
> ==> where is the disklabel stored, and what is its size? <==
> The question was generic, and I wanted a generic answer.
There isn't a generic answer, this OS runs on 17 supported platforms
and it varies. On some of them, disklabel -v -r will tell y
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
> Guys,
>
> this is all turning to complete bullshit, and it's not only my fault.
> If anyone actually cared reading my post, my question was simple:
>
> ==> where is the disklabel stored, and what is its size? <==
Strange that nobody distilled tha
its size? <==
Being that I'm a ccd newbie, not an OpenBSD developer, etc., take the
following with a grain of salt...
In ccd(4)...
Note that the `raw' partitions of the disks should not be combined. Each
component partition should be offset at least one cylinder from the
On 1/28/07 11:09 PM, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
Guys,
this is all turning to complete bullshit, and it's not only my fault.
If anyone actually cared reading my post, my question was simple:
==> where is the disklabel stored, and what is its size? <==
If you don't know the answer you don't know
Guys,
this is all turning to complete bullshit, and it's not only my fault.
If anyone actually cared reading my post, my question was simple:
==> where is the disklabel stored, and what is its size? <==
The question was generic, and I wanted a generic answer. Not the answer
to the question "wh
person's time. In your case,
both.
The value of the dmesg was already demonstrated (see KRW's post).
CCD works great as you are trying to use it. BTW: This message is
coming to you from a computer with a ccd stripped /usr partition. It
works. I used the man page documentation
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
> Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> > How are we supposed to help if you omit all relevant info? dmesg,
> > disklabels, fdisk info...
>
> A good start would be to read my post, all the information is there. Except
> for dmesg, which is not useful in this case.
small partition 'a' which should not be made
> part of the
> >> JBOD.
> >
> > I think you misread. It's enough to make sure the a partitions starts
> > after the first track. Just run fdisk -i on a new (ccd) disk. It
> > takes care of that.
&
Patrick Useldinger wrote:
> Does the name really matter?
Yes.
> Whether your partition is called 'a' or > 'd', doesn't the disklabel
> get stored into the beginning of the first
> partition anyway?
No.
Actually, you have 16 partitions stored in the disklabel.
This is OpenBSD not DOS.
christian widmer wrote:
man ccd:
"Note that the `raw' partitions of the disks should not be combined. Each
component partition should be offset at least one cylinder from the beginning
of the component disk."
What is a "raw" partition in that case? In the examples
Otto Moerbeek wrote:
How are we supposed to help if you omit all relevant info? dmesg,
disklabels, fdisk info...
A good start would be to read my post, all the information is there.
Except for dmesg, which is not useful in this case.
-pu
gt; > should allocate a small partition 'a' which should not be made part of the
> > > JBOD.
> >
> > I think you misread. It's enough to make sure the a partitions starts
> > after the first track. Just run fdisk -i on a new (ccd) disk. It
> > take
It's enough to make sure the a partitions starts
after the first track. Just run fdisk -i on a new (ccd) disk. It
takes care of that.
I am talking about the physical disk, not the ccd disk.
In this case, the physical disk is wd1, which has been initialized by
fdisk -i. I then cre
On Sunday 28 January 2007 15:19, Kenneth R Westerback wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 12:14:00PM +0100, christian widmer wrote:
> > On Sunday 28 January 2007 11:02, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
> > > I am currently experimenting with ccd(4) and although it appears to
> > &g
On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 12:14:00PM +0100, christian widmer wrote:
> On Sunday 28 January 2007 11:02, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
> > I am currently experimenting with ccd(4) and although it appears to
> > work, I am uncomfortable with one point.
> >
> > I have config
On Sunday 28 January 2007 11:02, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
> I am currently experimenting with ccd(4) and although it appears to
> work, I am uncomfortable with one point.
>
> I have configured 2 partitions as a JBOD (interleave 0). However, the
> first of these partitions is parti
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
> I am currently experimenting with ccd(4) and although it appears to work, I am
> uncomfortable with one point.
>
> I have configured 2 partitions as a JBOD (interleave 0). However, the first of
> these partitions is partition
I am currently experimenting with ccd(4) and although it appears to
work, I am uncomfortable with one point.
I have configured 2 partitions as a JBOD (interleave 0). However, the
first of these partitions is partition 'a' of one disk. So the first
effect I had was that ccd0 appear
n ccd0, you must use ccd0c.
i don't know what makes you thing so. but it's wrong.
from the FAQ - 14.18.1 - CCD:
" Just use disklabel on it like you normally would to make the partition or
partitions you want to use. Again, don't use the 'c' partition as an actual
p
0GB.
You can't create a partition on ccd0, you must use ccd0c.
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Chris Mika wrote:
I've read that. That's why I began the offset using disklabel's default
setting, which is 63. Sorry, that's why I said you can ask for
clarification.
As for the secon
gan the offset using disklabel's default
setting, which is 63. Sorry, that's why I said you can ask for
clarification.
As for the second part, it wasn't so clear, but with FreeBSD's ccd you
create the file system on /dev/ccd0c so I assumed it was the same. If you
use diskla
e read that. That's why I began the offset using disklabel's default
setting, which is 63. Sorry, that's why I said you can ask for clarification.
As for the second part, it wasn't so clear, but with FreeBSD's ccd you create
the file system on /dev/ccd0c so I assumed
I've read that. That's why I began the offset using disklabel's default
setting, which is 63. Sorry, that's why I said you can ask for
clarification.
As for the second part, it wasn't so clear, but with FreeBSD's ccd you
create the file system on /dev/ccd0c so
first:
YOU WROTE: "-> creating one partition of type ccd spanning entire disk"
i take you're word then you should have a close look at 'man ccd'
"Note that the `raw' partitions of the disks should not be combined. Each
component partition should be
I'm trying to get CCD working correctly, but it just doesn't want to.
I have two identical 300GB disks that I'm trying to interleave.
Here's exactly what I'm doing:
# fdisk -i wd1
# fdisk -i wd3
# disklabel -E wd1
-> creating one partition of type ccd spaning en
On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 03:16:39PM +0200, Michael wrote:
> Hi,
>
> today I ran into trouble while upgrading the system using the current
> snapshots bsd.rd.
>
> On this system /usr, /var and /home are mirrored and /tmp is striped
> over both disks using ccd.
>
>
Peter Philipp wrote:
> If devices are missing there is always the /dev/MAKEDEV file.
>
> to add any missing wd1 devices you'd do,
>
> cd /dev/
> sh MAKEDEV wd1
>
> that should do it.
>
> You then want to mount the root drive (wd0a?) in order to configure t
On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 02:36:53PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2006/10/16 15:16, Michael wrote:
> > Anyone got an idea how I can upgrade the system anyway without having to
> > compile the kernel and everything else from source while the system is
> > running?
>
> untar (with the p flag) t
On 2006/10/16 15:16, Michael wrote:
> Anyone got an idea how I can upgrade the system anyway without having to
> compile the kernel and everything else from source while the system is
> running?
untar (with the p flag) the distribution *.tgz on the running system.
Hi,
today I ran into trouble while upgrading the system using the current
snapshots bsd.rd.
On this system /usr, /var and /home are mirrored and /tmp is striped
over both disks using ccd.
When trying to update, the updater complains because of those entries in
fstab and wants me to manuelly
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 06:09:11PM +0200, Hans van Leeuwen wrote:
> Hello misc,
>
>
> I run a server with two harddiscs running as a software RAID1 using ccd.
Erm... search the archives for why you shouldn't use ccd to mirror and
then think you have a RAID.
> Yesterday I
Those are intermittent errors that are not relevant to your failure. I did fix
those in -current.
You simply have a dying HDD.
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 06:09:11PM +0200, Hans van Leeuwen wrote:
> Hello misc,
>
>
> I run a server with two harddiscs running as a software RAI
Hello misc,
I run a server with two harddiscs running as a software RAID1 using ccd.
Yesterday I started to import a large database in PostgreSQL, and found allot
of these errors in my logs:
error reading: Processor VRM
error code: ae
error code: ae
kcs_sendmsg: 18 22
bmc_io_wait fails : v
Nathan Johnson wrote:
trying to get ccd going on openbsd 3.9 i386 with no interleave
(concatenation). I have wd1 and wd2 which are different sized disks.
I did fdisk reinit on both drives, then ran disklabel and set up an
'a' partition (inside the 'c' partition) on both dis
On 7/25/06, Nathan Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
trying to get ccd going on openbsd 3.9 i386 with no interleave
(concatenation). I have wd1 and wd2 which are different sized disks.
I did fdisk reinit on both drives, then ran disklabel and set up an
'a' partition (inside t
trying to get ccd going on openbsd 3.9 i386 with no interleave
(concatenation). I have wd1 and wd2 which are different sized disks.
I did fdisk reinit on both drives, then ran disklabel and set up an
'a' partition (inside the 'c' partition) on both disks offset 1
cylinder f
On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 07:56:05AM +0100, Anthony Howe wrote:
> This page http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq14.html#RAID briefly mentions
> that ccd(4) could be used for mirroring.
>
> OpenBSD 3.7-stable and later also includes mirroring as a
> feature of the ccd(4) driv
This page http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq14.html#RAID briefly mentions
that ccd(4) could be used for mirroring.
OpenBSD 3.7-stable and later also includes mirroring as a
feature of the ccd(4) driver. This system is built into the
GENERIC kernel and is in the bsd.rd kernel
On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 22:02:45 +, Stuart Henderson proclaimed...
> try having dd scribble /dev/zero over the start of the devices, or
> maybe 'g d' in disklabel -E will help somewhere.
>
Good idea
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sd0g
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sd1g
Seems to have worked. Thank
On 2006/02/16 15:37, eric wrote:
> I have a problem on a Dell 2850 machine when trying to use ccd(4) devices.
try having dd scribble /dev/zero over the start of the devices, or
maybe 'g d' in disklabel -E will help somewhere.
Right, this is what I did as well. Tested. Works much better than the
previous config.
Any thoughts on monitoring the status of the ccd?
Bobby Johnson
On Wed, 2005-12-28 at 21:28 +0100, kami petersen wrote:
> Nick Holland skrev:
>
> > (hint: you can do a CCD of just one disk).
Nick Holland skrev:
(hint: you can do a CCD of just one disk).
(hint 2: you can't use the same partition twice, it will generate an error).
(hint 3: Errors can be your friend, they are not always to be avoided)
warning, spoiler below:
#
# /etc/ccd.conf
# Configuration file for concate
Bobby Johnson wrote:
> A few questions in regards to the discussion between Robert Haarman and
> mickey around Nov 24 on ccd mirroring. The conclusion is don't use c
> for a usable partition in a ccd device.
If "conclusion" is the right word in a discussion between someo
A few questions in regards to the discussion between Robert Haarman and
mickey around Nov 24 on ccd mirroring. The conclusion is don't use c
for a usable partition in a ccd device.
This sounds fine until I try to recover from a disk failure. When I use
the c partition in a ccd mirror dev
s for pretty quick recovery of the RAID set -- perhaps
to the point where one doesn't think it's doing anything at all...
(I don't know -- I'll admit that I'm more of a fan of software RAID
because I know how the bits are stored, and I know I can get them off
the disk aga
On Sun, Dec 04, 2005 at 03:58:26PM -0500, Nick Holland wrote:
> up toasting them, far from the end of the world. I can give you a very
> good explaination (or several) for why a disk powered down mid-write
> could be dammaged, it is really odd how RARELY this actually happens in
> real life. I co
k 1, and
don't let anything else happen in between." I've heard they don't
perform as well as some of the "pure software mirroring" solutions, so
that may be evidence of this.
>> My three tests indicated one can't universally even
>> demonstrate a diff
Nick Holland writes:
> Greg Oster wrote:
> ...
> > Here's what I'd encourage you (or anyone else) to do:
>
> actually, I'd encourage you do try your own test. Results were interesting.
Well... as we see, you did *your* version of the test, not mine ;)
>
Greg Oster wrote:
...
> Here's what I'd encourage you (or anyone else) to do:
actually, I'd encourage you do try your own test. Results were interesting.
> 1) Create a ccd as you describe in the HOWTO and mount the filesystem.
used my own instructions, if you don't m
robably.
For "probably" I'll use Windows. OpenBSD is for stuff
that needs a positive number of nines in reliability.
Making OpenBSD friendly like Windows. I think the best
you can hope for is a very bad Windows.
Moral of the story. (Certainly not just ccd)
Listen to the old-timers
y the
> >> catastrophic failures you describe are, versus
> >how likely it is that
> >> things fail in a way where ccd actually helps
> >you. I was hoping someone
> >> else would comment on that, but that doesn't seem
> >to have happened so
> &g
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>Robbert Haarman writes:
>> Greg,
>>
>> Again, you raise some interesting issues. I
>wonder how likely the
>> catastrophic failures you describe are, versus
>how likely it is that
>> things fail in a way where ccd actually
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
> Greg Oster
> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 12:26 PM
> To: Robbert Haarman
> Cc: misc@openbsd.org
> Subject: Re: Updated CCD Mirroring HOWTO
>
> Robbert Haarman writes:
&
Robbert Haarman writes:
> Greg,
>
> Again, you raise some interesting issues. I wonder how likely the
> catastrophic failures you describe are, versus how likely it is that
> things fail in a way where ccd actually helps you. I was hoping someone
> else would comment on that
Greg,
Again, you raise some interesting issues. I wonder how likely the
catastrophic failures you describe are, versus how likely it is that
things fail in a way where ccd actually helps you. I was hoping someone
else would comment on that, but that doesn't seem to have happened so
far.
Hi
[at the risk of straying on-topic...]
On misc@openbsd.org you said:
> Dear list, especially Greg and Mickey,
>
> I've updated the working copy of the CCD Mirroring HOWTO. In particular,
> I've split off the comparison to software RAID into a separate section
> an
steps a user might want or need to take.
>
>There's something to that, too. I didn't want to bug the developers,
>afraid as I was that the questions I had would annoy them, and result in
>a pointer back to previous misc@ threads at best. Instead, I decided to
>figure out
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OpenBSD claims to be done for the benefit of its developers and every
indication that I've seen says that they mean exactly what they say.
True and nothing wrong with that.
Concerns of users are secondary at best.
The developers will help you if you have something g
Robbert Haarman wrote:
[snip]
> As it stands, OpenBSD is the only operating system I am aware of that
> has had the full base system completely audited and has buffer overrun
> and other protections enabled for all software on it. This, by itself,
> makes it more secure than other systems, regard
. Instead, I decided to
figure out for myself how I could get things to work, and document the
steps, so that others might benefit. It seems that, in doing so, I've
annoyed people even more. Again, I must apologize. This was not my
intention.
> better than a HOWTO that claims to be a sho
Daniel Ouellet wrote:
> In all these:
>
> >>I'm going to take this thread for what I think it is... the old guard
> >>telling us youngin's that our efforts are appreciated, but we've got a
> >>bit more to learn about how things work, and how to write good
> >>documentation, before we're really read
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 01:58:04 +0100, frantisek holop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>hmm, on Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 09:34:39AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said that
>> Yes, OpenBSD is the _only_ operating system that takes security as
>> seriously as it should be taken. Consider the why of OpenBSD's
>
>this
In all these:
I'm going to take this thread for what I think it is... the old guard
telling us youngin's that our efforts are appreciated, but we've got a
bit more to learn about how things work, and how to write good
documentation, before we're really ready to jump into these things the
way we
Are you subscribed to newbies? We don't do the bullshit like the
HOWTOs or openbsdsupport.org. We teach you how to help yourself. The
answers come with learning, so you can be a better admin.
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 00:30:21 -0800
"J.C. Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Things like "HowTo" do
hmm, on Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 05:00:39PM +, Michael Quaintance said that
> /Please/ don't loose your verbosity.
>
> For newbies like me, your lengthy descriptions of why the OpenBSD
> community thinks like it does are incredibly useful. Short, pithy
how can you believe one man's opinion to b
hmm, on Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 09:34:39AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said that
> Yes, OpenBSD is the _only_ operating system that takes security as
> seriously as it should be taken. Consider the why of OpenBSD's
this is a silly argument.
of course it is not the only system. don't think nobody else
t
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 16:54:04 -0500, Chris Zakelj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>J.C. Roberts wrote:
>
>>I'm just a normal user who doesn't contribute a great deal to the
>>project, so there is a *HUGE* difference between me and the people who
>>actually have both the expertise and dedication needed
1 - 100 of 174 matches
Mail list logo
