O. Hartmann | 28 Jul 17:02 2014
Picon
Picon

net/openldap24-server: lstat(/usr/ports/net/openldap24-server/work/stage/usr/local/libexec/openldap/smbk5pwd.so.0.0.0):


Updating of port net/openldap24-server fails grandios with the following error:

===>  Installing for openldap-sasl-server-2.4.39_2
===>   Registering installation for openldap-sasl-server-2.4.39_2
pkg-static:
lstat(/usr/ports/net/openldap24-server/work/stage/usr/local/libexec/openldap/pw-sha2.so.0.0.0):
No such file or directory pkg-static:
lstat(/usr/ports/net/openldap24-server/work/stage/usr/local/libexec/openldap/smbk5pwd.so.0.0.0):
No such file or directory *** Error code 74

Great.

The OS is 

FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #0 r269157: Sun Jul 27 22:57:48 CEST 2014 
O. Hartmann | 28 Jul 15:50 2014
Picon
Picon

local_unbound: since update sporadic hangs in connections


Since local_unbound update and the suggested update procedure as requested with TAG
20140719 the connection to the net hangs (DNS resolving). This is very often with the
freebsd.org domain the case, while domestic domains rarely show this strange behaviour.

The problem occurs on ALL CURRENT systems with updated unbound!

Updates via svn also show those hangs (FBSD SVN server).

This is nasty ...

oh
Cy Schubert | 26 Jul 20:43 2014

Re: Future of pf / firewall in FreeBSD ? - does it have one ?

In message <53D395E4.1070006 <at> fastmail.net>, Darren Reed writes:
> On 24/07/2014 1:42 AM, Cy Schubert wrote:
> >>>
> >>> But, lack of ipv6 fragment processing still causes ongoing pain.  That'=
> >>> s our=20
> >>> #1 wish list item for the cluster.
> > Taking this discussion slightly sideways but touching on this thread a 
> > little, each of our packet filters will need nat66 support too. Pf doesn't 
> > support it for sure. I've been told that ipfw may and I suspect ipfilter 
> > doesn't as it was on Darren's todo list from 2009.
> 
> ipfiler 5 handles fragments for ipv6.

Switching gears and leaving the discussion of ipv6 fragments to mention 
nat66. A lot of people have been talking about nat66. I could be wrong but 
I don't think it can handle nat66. I need to do some testing to verify 
this. I remember reading on sourceforge that it was on your todo list. It 
doesn't look like it was checked off as being completed.

--

-- 
Cheers,
Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert <at> komquats.com>
FreeBSD UNIX:  <cy <at> FreeBSD.org>   Web:  http://www.FreeBSD.org

	The need of the many outweighs the greed of the few.

_______________________________________________
freebsd-current <at> freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe <at> freebsd.org"
(Continue reading)

Thomas Mueller | 26 Jul 08:00 2014
Picon

Unreadable DVD in FreeBSD and NetBSD

I have a DVD, a data DVD rather than movie or music, from Seagate Business Storage 2-bay NAS, that is
mountable with mount_cd9660 but not readable in FreeBSD and NetBSD, using current amd64 versions of
FreeBSD and NetBSD.

ls /cdrom showed nothing; ls -al /cdrom showed

total 6
dr-xr-xr-x   2 root  wheel  2048 Nov  1  2012 .
drwxr-xr-x  26 root  wheel  1024 Jul 25 03:31 ..

df showed

Filesystem      1K-blocks     Used     Avail Capacity  Mounted on
/dev/gpt/WD2G04 121863804 52278052  59836648    47%    /
devfs                   1        1         0   100%    /dev
/dev/gpt/WD2G05 142191228  8022016 122793916     6%    /home
/dev/cd0          1832610  1832610         0   100%    /cdrom

so it looked like something was there.

Mounted under Linux (System Rescue CD 4.3.0), main directory showed 

autorun.inf
Rally Driver Installation Instructions
Resources
Seagate EULA
Seagate NAS Backup
Seagate NAS Discovery
Seagate NAS Discovery Install Package
Seagate Privacy Policy
(Continue reading)

Cy Schubert | 26 Jul 04:46 2014

Re: FreeBSD Quarterly Status Report - Second Quarter 2014

In message <20140725211249.GA3933 <at> brick.home>, Edward Tomasz 
=?utf-8?Q?Napiera=
C5=82a?= writes:
> On 0725T1019, Cy Schubert wrote:
> > In message <20140724183353.GL1065 <at> hub.FreeBSD.org>, Glen Barber writes:
> > > New Automounter
> > > 
> > >    Contact: Edward Tomasz Napieral/a <trasz <at> FreeBSD.org>
> > > 
> > >    Deficiencies in the current automounter, amd(8), are a recurring
> > >    problem reported by many FreeBSD users. A new automounter is being
> > >    developed to address these concerns.
> > > 
> > >    The automounter is a cleanroom implementation of functionality
> > >    available in most other Unix systems, using proper kernel support
> > >    implemented via an autofs filesystem. The automounter supports a
> > >    standard map format, and will integrate with the Lightweight Directory
> > >    Access Protocol (LDAP) service.
> > 
> > Will it also integrate with NIS (as SunOS and Solaris do)? FreeBSD's amd 
> > currently integrates with NIS as well.
> 
> It's just a matter of testing, apart from a trivial shell script.
> Would you be able to help me with this?
> 

Sure! Just point me in the direction of the patches.

--

-- 
Cheers,
(Continue reading)

Cy Schubert | 25 Jul 19:52 2014

Re: Future of pf / firewall in FreeBSD ? - does it have one ?

Sorry for the late reply. It's a busy time right now.

In message <53D0239D.1050906 <at> a1poweruser.com>, Fbsd8 writes:
> Cy Schubert wrote:
> >> On 20.07.2014 18:15, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
> >>> In my opinion, the way forward is to forget (at least temporarily) the
> >>> SMP changes, bring pf in sync with OpenBSD, put a policy in place to
> >>> follow their releases as closely as possible, and then try to
> >>> reintroduce all the SMP work. I think the latter has to be done
> >>> upstream, otherwise it'll always be a story of diverging codebases.
> >>> Furthermore, if FreeBSD developers were willing to spend some time
> >>> improving pf performance on OpenBSD, then Henning and other OpenBSD
> >>> developers might be more receptive to changes that make the porting
> >>> process easier.
> >> Even if you just drop current PF from FreeBSD, there is nobody, who want
> >> to port new PF from OpenBSD. And this is not easy task, as you may
> >> think. Gleb has worked on rewriting PF more than half year. So, return
> >> back all improvements after import will be hard enough and, again,
> >> nobody want to do it. :)
> > 
> > One way or another something needs to be done and agreed it would be a lot 
> > of work. Our options are,
> > 
> > a) Import OpenBSD pf thereby throwing away our current investment in pf. 
> > All our work to get it up to snuff with our IP stack, SMP, and VIMAGE would
>  
> > be all for naught. We do get a new pf though. Won't be a quality port 
> > though. Personally, not my #1 option.
> > 
> > b) Merge updates from OpenBSD pf to our pf. Once again a lot of work but we
(Continue reading)

Boris Samorodov | 25 Jul 18:40 2014
Picon

[make xdev, libatf]: error: cstdarg: No such file or directory

Hi All!

Here are errors I get with sources at r269089.

-----
% uname -a
FreeBSD bb052.bsnet 11.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #113 r269019: Wed
Jul 23 23:24:47 SAMT 2014
bsam <at> bb052.bsnet:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/BB64X  amd64

% sudo make -C /usr/src TARGET=arm TARGET_ARCH=armv6 WITH_GCC=1
WITH_GCC_BOOTSTRAP=1 WITHOUT_CLANG=1 WITHOUT_CLANG_BOOTSTRAP=1
WITHOUT_CLANG_IS_CC=1 xdev
[...]
===> lib/atf (obj,depend,all,install)
===> lib/atf/libatf-c (obj)
===> lib/atf/libatf-c++ (obj)
===> lib/atf/libatf-c (depend)
===> lib/atf/libatf-c++ (depend)
rm -f .depend
CC='cc -isystem //usr/armv6-freebsd/usr/include
-L//usr/armv6-freebsd/usr/lib  --sysroot=//usr/armv6-freebsd/
-B//usr/armv6-fr
eebsd/usr/libexec  -B//usr/armv6-freebsd/usr/bin
-B//usr/armv6-freebsd/usr/lib' mkdep -f .depend -a    -DHAVE_CONFIG_H
-DATF_A
RCH='"arm"' -DATF_BUILD_CC='"cc -isystem //usr/armv6-freebsd/usr/include
-L//usr/armv6-freebsd/usr/lib  --sysroot=//usr/armv6-
freebsd/ -B//usr/armv6-freebsd/usr/libexec
-B//usr/armv6-freebsd/usr/bin -B//usr/armv6-freebsd/usr/lib"'
(Continue reading)

Beeblebrox | 25 Jul 12:04 2014

Several minor annoyances on Current

Hello. Several questions for 11-Current:

* I keep getting <appname>.core (gedit.core, midori.core, etc) files being
created either in /home/myuser or in the folder I run the command in on
terminal emulator (for example if I'm in ~/mydocs on terminal and run "$
gedit filename", that folder gets a gedit.core file). Any way to stop this?

* I noticed the system now does a dhcp lookup during boot, while in the past
it did not do so (I have static IP defined in rc.conf). Any reason for this
change, and how can I disable it (already have dhclient_enable="NO" in
rc.conf)

* Are there any tweaks (sysctl or such) for fastest possible shutdown for
"poweroff"?

* I have a kernel with all witness/debug code disabled, and the zfs root is
on a Sata3-SSD. The boot process seems a little slow to me and I'm curious
as to possible reasons. Other than disabling debug, what else can I do to
speed-up boot process (CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 B60 3415.38-MHz K8-class)

Thanks and Regards.

-----
FreeBSD-11-current_amd64_root-on-zfs_RadeonKMS
--
View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/Several-minor-annoyances-on-Current-tp5931653.html
Sent from the freebsd-current mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current <at> freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
(Continue reading)

Cy Schubert | 23 Jul 22:08 2014

Re: Future of pf / firewall in FreeBSD ? - does it have one ?

In message <alpine.LRH.2.11.1407201430030.2748 <at> nber7.nber.org>, Daniel 
Feenberg
 writes:
> 
> 
> On Sun, 20 Jul 2014, Lars Engels wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 12:18:54PM +0100, krad wrote:
> >> all of that is true, but you are missing the point. Having two versions of
> >> pf on the bsd's at the user level, is a bad thing. It confuses people,
> >> which puts them off. Its a classic case of divide an conquer for other
> >> platforms. I really like the idea of the openpf version, that has been
> >> mentioned in this thread. It would be awesome if it ended up as a supporte
> d
> >> linux thing as well, so the world could be rid of iptables. However i gues
> s
> >> thats just an unrealistic dream
> >
> > And you don't seem to get the point that _someone_ has to do the work.
> > No one has stepped up so far, so nothing is going to change.
> >
> 
> No one with authority has yet said that "If an updated pf were available,
>   would be welcomed". Rather they have said "An updated pf would not be
> suitable, as it would be incompatible with existing configuration files".
> If the latter is indeed the case, there is little incentive for anyone
> to go to the effort of porting the newer pf. After all, the reward for
> the work is chiefly in glory, and if there is to be no glory, the work
> is unlikely to be done.

(Continue reading)

Cy Schubert | 23 Jul 21:59 2014

Re: Future of pf / firewall in FreeBSD ? - does it have one ?

In message <53CCF596.1070302 <at> yandex.ru>, "Andrey V. Elsukov" writes:
> This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
> --EITUmaAVUtsHLdssNwHpA0G0W8jTQ9d3L
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
> On 20.07.2014 18:15, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
> > In my opinion, the way forward is to forget (at least temporarily) the
> > SMP changes, bring pf in sync with OpenBSD, put a policy in place to
> > follow their releases as closely as possible, and then try to
> > reintroduce all the SMP work. I think the latter has to be done
> > upstream, otherwise it'll always be a story of diverging codebases.
> > Furthermore, if FreeBSD developers were willing to spend some time
> > improving pf performance on OpenBSD, then Henning and other OpenBSD
> > developers might be more receptive to changes that make the porting
> > process easier.
> 
> Even if you just drop current PF from FreeBSD, there is nobody, who want
> to port new PF from OpenBSD. And this is not easy task, as you may
> think. Gleb has worked on rewriting PF more than half year. So, return
> back all improvements after import will be hard enough and, again,
> nobody want to do it. :)

One way or another something needs to be done and agreed it would be a lot 
of work. Our options are,

a) Import OpenBSD pf thereby throwing away our current investment in pf. 
All our work to get it up to snuff with our IP stack, SMP, and VIMAGE would 
be all for naught. We do get a new pf though. Won't be a quality port 
though. Personally, not my #1 option.
(Continue reading)

Cy Schubert | 23 Jul 17:42 2014

Re: Future of pf / firewall in FreeBSD ? - does it have one ?

In message <20381608.Hhy3QfhrOP <at> overcee.wemm.org>, Peter Wemm writes:
> On Saturday 19 July 2014 13:06:52 Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 03:22:18PM -0400, Allan Jude wrote:
> > > On 2014-07-18 15:07, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> > > > On 18 July 2014 07:34, krad <kraduk <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> that is true and I have not problem using man pages, however tha=
> ts not
> > > >> the
> > > >> way most of the world work and search engines arent exactly new =
> either.
> > > >> We
> > > >> should be trying to engage more people not less, and part of tha=
> t is
> > > >> reaching out.
> > > >=20
> > > > Then do the port and maintain it.
> > > >=20
> > > > The problem isn't the desire to keep things up to date, it's a la=
> ck of
> > > > people who want that _and_ are willing/able to do it _and_ are fu=
> nded
> > > > somehow.
> > > >=20
> > > > So, please step up! We'll all love you for it.
> > > >=20
> > > >=20
> > > >=20
> > > > -a
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > freebsd-current <at> freebsd.org mailing list
(Continue reading)


Gmane