| James Turner | iwi firmware error on snapshot
I'm running OpenBSD -current from the snapshot dated 04-06. Everytime I bring
my thinkpad x40 out of sleep I get "iwi0: fatal firmware error". I'm running
the generic kernel and have a intel 2200bg card. Bring the laptop out of sleep
did not yeild firmware errors on 4.0 -release or previous snapshots pre xenocara
(not that the new x has anything to do with it, I just remember it working fine
before I tried out a new snapshot with xenocara). Not sure if this is the right
place to post this, but ...
| Apr 7, 2:08 pm 2007 |
| Mark Kettenis | Sun Fire V215/V245 support
I just committed the final bits that make the Sun Fire V215 and V245
fully supported in 4.1-current. These machines have a PCIe host
bridge, supported by the new pyro(4) driver. Writing this driver was
the biggest challange, since Sun doesn't provide any documentation for
it. So it took some extensive digging through the OpenSolaris code to
figure out how the hardware was supposed to work.
OpenBSD seems to be the first OS besides Solaris to support these
machines (at least I could not find ...
| Apr 7, 8:31 am 2007 |
| Antoine Jacoutot | xdm and bsd_auth
Hi.
I just upgraded to the latest i386 snap and realized that bsd_auth does
not work anymore with xdm (using kerberos here). As I usually use this
particular machine without X, it might have been this way for some time
but I just ran into this today.
Is it a known (mis)behaviour?
--
Antoine
| Apr 7, 6:08 am 2007 |
| Darrin Chandler | Re: waitpid() thread race
If you've got that problem you already have other problems. Breeding and
reaping children with associated shared data structures is asking for
trouble unless you synchronize. If you solve that so that you're either
spawning a child OR reaping a child (never BOTH), then the pid reuse
isn't a problem anyway. And you do need to solve that, or you're going
--
Darrin Chandler | Phoenix BSD User Group | MetaBUG
dwchandler@stilyagin.com | http://phxbug.org/ | ...
| Apr 7, 8:29 am 2007 |
| Philip Guenther | Re: waitpid() thread race
On 4/7/07, Brian Candler <B.Candler@pobox.com> wrote:
Instead of separating the obtaining of the pid from the actual
reaping, you can instead separate the blocking from the return of the
pid+reaping. That lets you lock the datastructure only when you know
wait() won't block. To block until a child is ready to be reaped, use
SIGCHLD, blocking it when you aren't ready, ala:
volatile sig_atomic_t saw_sigchld;
sigset_t orig_sigset
void handle_sigchld(int sig)
{
saw_sigchld = ...
| Apr 7, 10:09 am 2007 |
| Brian Candler | waitpid() thread race
I have a question about the semantics of wait()/waitpid().
My understanding is, as soon as wait() returns, the process is gone from the
process table, and therefore another fork() on the system could immediately
re-use the same PID. Is that correct?
Now let's suppose I have a program which forks children when it needs them.
It maintains a datastructure which is a hash of { pid => info }
Let's say there's a separate thread which blocks on a wait() call, and once
it has gotten the pid it ...
| Apr 7, 4:15 am 2007 |
| riwanlky | altq, web server, and squid
Hi All,
Need help.
128 Kb router link to the internet.
OpenBSD connect to the router on ste2. (100Mb link)
OpenBSD 100Mb internal link ste0.
Running Squid on the OpenBSD. Listening on port 3128
Running Web server on the OpenBSD.
Running named on the OpenBSD.
It seem that the internal users consumed all the bandwidth for http.
where I will like to have spare bandwidth:
32 Kb for smtp, ssh.
32 Kb for others ftp, ftp-data
64 Kb for http and https access.
Any suggestion are very ...
| Apr 7, 2:55 am 2007 |
| Merp.com Volunteer |
| Apr 7, 2:41 am 2007 |
| Rogier Krieger | Re: Problem: Raid mounting root as read-only, and not fr ...
To be blunt: you are using old (3.7) instructions that are not from
the OpenBSD project, that involve compiling your own kernel (see the
FAQ on that [1]), that you do not fully follow either. Why do you
expect help on misc@ (instead of contacting the author of your
Why do you want a separate /boot? If the answer to that question is:
"It works that way on my Linux system" alarm bells should go off,
prompting you to read the documentation. If I misinterpreted things
here, please say so.
The ...
| Apr 7, 4:30 am 2007 |
| Will Maier | Re: Problem: Raid mounting root as read-only, and not fr ...
You sound like a Linux shop. It doesn't sound like your group has
sufficient background to migrate whole-hog to OpenBSD (or Solaris,
or AIX, or Windows). What problem are you trying to solve by
This list (and the other various parts of the user and developer
communities) is a great resource, but it shouldn't be part of your
migration plan. From what you've described, OpenBSD is a fine
technical solution to your problem. But with your group, it doesn't
sound like you can make it work in the ...
| Apr 7, 12:32 pm 2007 |
| jared r r spiegel | Re: Problem: Raid mounting root as read-only, and not fr ...
first, caveat that i've never setup root-on-raid; however sometime in the
near future i will be, so i've looked at the docs a couple of times.
i thought you could only do root-on-raid[frame] if you used a nonraid
boot partition:
from raid(4):
---
RAID filesystems which are automatically configured
are also eligible to be the root filesystem. There is currently no sup-
port for booting a kernel directly from a RAID set. To use a RAID set as
the root filesystem, a kernel is ...
| Apr 7, 12:01 pm 2007 |
| Merp.com Volunteer | Re: Problem: Raid mounting root as read-only, and not fr ...
Thanks for the much more productive and helpful response. ;-)
Responses below...
That would explain why they were setup that way when I came onboard (though it
wasn't working, that could have been because of the fstab not matching).
This definitely seems less robust and reliable, and easily recoverable than
the other software raid implementations I've experienced. Hopefully the
benefits of OpenBSD in general will outweight the consequences of this kind
of setup.
Thanks for the specific ...
| Apr 7, 12:29 pm 2007 |
| Merp.com Volunteer | Re: Problem: Raid mounting root as read-only, and not fr ...
So where would some up to date instructions on software raid for 4.0 be found?
Several volunteers tried several times to find a 1u rackmount server that
wasn't full of cheap crap, but that we could afford, that had what was
supposed to have been hardware raid.
Our current old server has "real" scsi raid array, but is now more than 6
years old and starting to show it's age.
We ended up with the ASUS RS120-e3 (PA2).
The purchaser thought it was hardware raid, but apparently it is only ...
| Apr 7, 12:11 pm 2007 |
| Didier Wiroth | Re: lastest snapshot + xenocara + thinkpad x60s + i810 problem
----- Original Message -----
From: Stuart Henderson <stu@spacehopper.org>
Date: Saturday, April 7, 2007 1:04
Subject: Re: lastest snapshot + xenocara + thinkpad x60s + i810 problem
Yes, I tried without the BusID line, but that didn't help.
I left the BusID line disabled for now, see my xorg.conf below.
Currently Driver "i810" is disabled and I'm using Driver "Vesa" to be able to start X.
Here is my current xorg.conf, and the output of lspci.
Section "ServerLayout"
Identifier "X.org ...
| Apr 7, 2:30 am 2007 |
| Claudio Jeker | Re: carp, ospf can't see carp state
If you are just running with two routers you don't need to use OSPF.
Use CARP for the inside network, setup the upstream sessions on each
router (perhaps even using "depend on carp" to fail over the sessions) and
setup a IBGP session between the two routers -- best via a dedicated
interface. Set "set nexthop self" on the IBGP sessions and you should be
fine.
| Apr 7, 11:08 am 2007 |
| Claudio Jeker | Re: carp, ospf can't see carp state
That's normal. Carp interfaces are always DOWN aka passive because it is
impossible to run OSPF over a carp interface.
The routes covered by carp are included in the router LSA as stub
networks. ospfctl show data router and ospfctl show rib will show these
networks.
| Apr 7, 4:36 am 2007 |
| Henning Brauer | Re: carp, ospf can't see carp state
this might be related to carp's incorrect way oif dealing with routes.
can peole please test this diff for me and report back? it allows bgpd
to act correctly even wen a carp interface was not master at the time
of bgpd startup. it will fix other problems too, it might fix yours. if
people don't test this it'll just rot in my tree...
tech talk: it adds the missing route messages upon route
insertion/deletion.
Index: ...
| Apr 7, 3:54 am 2007 |
| François Rousseau | Re: carp, ospf can't see carp state
But how I'm suppose to annonce the route for the right carp interface?
Right now my servers can always reach the router because of the CARP
interface but the router can't always reach the servers...
If I unplug the cable of my CARP interface (bge2 for example), all
traffic from this router (directly from him or from my upstream
provider) can't reach the servers because the router still have only 1
route going directly to his bge2 interface (the interface with carp)
and he have no clue of the ...
| Apr 7, 9:21 am 2007 |
| Stuart Henderson |
| Apr 7, 1:32 pm 2007 |
| Alex de Joode | Re: bcw(4) is gone
On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 11:55:19AM -0400, Eric Furman wrote:
Not relevant in some jurisdictions.
--
Exit! Stage Left!
| Apr 7, 1:04 pm 2007 |
| Stephen J. Bevan | GRE over IPsec
Chris Jones writes:
> .... Fortigates and Netscreens both use GRE interaces as
> "tunnel interfaces" when creating route-based VPN tunnels.
FortiGates do not use GRE interface when creating route-based VPN tunnels.
The route-based VPN on a FortiGate creates packets that are identical
to IPsec tunnel mode i.e. IP|ESP|IP. As far as I'm aware, Netscreen do
the same. Are you sure you don't have any Cisco's in your network?
They use GRE for IPsec unless you've got a farily recent version of
IOS ...
| Apr 7, 4:30 pm 2007 |
