headers
Daniel R. Killoran,Ph.D. | 4 Mar 2005 22:00
Favicon

netatalk for NetBSD 2.0???

I am installing NetBSD 2.0 on my Mac IIvx.
The version of netatalk in the corresponding package folder 
(ftp://ftp.NetBSD.org/pub/NetBSD/packages/2.0/mac68k/net) goes no 
higher than netatalk-1.5.3.1.tgz. But when I try to pkg_add this 
version, I get:

pkg_add: Package 'netatalk-1.5.3.1.tgz' OS mismatch
pkg_add: NetBSD/m68k 1.6_RC1 (pkg) vs NetBSD/m68k 2.0 (this host)

????

Dan Killoran
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Tim & Alethea Larson | 9 Mar 2005 05:08
Picon

Re: netatalk for NetBSD 2.0???

Daniel R. Killoran,Ph.D. wrote:
> I am installing NetBSD 2.0 on my Mac IIvx.
> The version of netatalk in the corresponding package folder 
> (ftp://ftp.NetBSD.org/pub/NetBSD/packages/2.0/mac68k/net) goes no higher 
> than netatalk-1.5.3.1.tgz. But when I try to pkg_add this version, I get:
> 
> pkg_add: Package 'netatalk-1.5.3.1.tgz' OS mismatch
> pkg_add: NetBSD/m68k 1.6_RC1 (pkg) vs NetBSD/m68k 2.0 (this host)

Have you tried building from source?

--

-- 
Tim & Alethea
christtrek.org
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Daniel R. Killoran,Ph.D. | 9 Mar 2005 14:42
Favicon

Re: netatalk for NetBSD 2.0???


On Mar 8, 2005, at 11:08 PM, Tim & Alethea Larson wrote:

> Daniel R. Killoran,Ph.D. wrote:
>> I am installing NetBSD 2.0 on my Mac IIvx.
>> The version of netatalk in the corresponding package folder 
>> (ftp://ftp.NetBSD.org/pub/NetBSD/packages/2.0/mac68k/net) goes no 
>> higher than netatalk-1.5.3.1.tgz. But when I try to pkg_add this 
>> version, I get:
>> pkg_add: Package 'netatalk-1.5.3.1.tgz' OS mismatch
>> pkg_add: NetBSD/m68k 1.6_RC1 (pkg) vs NetBSD/m68k 2.0 (this host)
>
> Have you tried building from source?
>
> -- 
> Tim & Alethea
> christtrek.org
>
>

Yes, I am doing that now - but this is a Mac IIvx. The compilation 
started before supper last night, and is still running after breakfast!

My point is that netatalk is "just another package" to MOST ports, but 
tp mac68k and macppc it is an extremely important one that ought to be 
included, in binary form, so that it can be used immediately.

For the record, it took me THREE TIMES as long to get a binary version 
of netatalk working, in spite of considerable help from this list, than 
it took to get the base version of 2.0 installed and working. This is
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Tim & Alethea Larson | 9 Mar 2005 19:10
Picon

Re: netatalk for NetBSD 2.0???

Daniel R. Killoran,Ph.D. wrote:
> 
> On Mar 8, 2005, at 11:08 PM, Tim & Alethea Larson wrote:
>> Have you tried building from source?
> 
> Yes, I am doing that now - but this is a Mac IIvx. The compilation 
> started before supper last night, and is still running after breakfast!

Hee hee.  Try an SE/30.  ;)

> My point is that netatalk is "just another package" to MOST ports, but 
> tp mac68k and macppc it is an extremely important one that ought to be 
> included, in binary form, so that it can be used immediately.
> 
> For the record, it took me THREE TIMES as long to get a binary version 
> of netatalk working, in spite of considerable help from this list, than 
> it took to get the base version of 2.0 installed and working. This is 
> excessive for such an important package.

I tend to agree that binary packages take a long time to appear after a 
revision (of either OS or package).  I don't know if they are produced 
in some kind of prioritization order, but if so I'd suggest putting 
netatalk toward the top for mac68k.  If I were a NetBSD maintainer I 
wouldn't want to start altering the base install packages by platform, 
but making binaries available more quickly would sure help.

Tim
--

-- 
Tim & Alethea
christtrek.org
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
David Kachel | 10 Mar 2005 21:44

Installing on SE30

Hi,

I am having a problem installing on an SE30.
I have 32megs of RAM, a 1 gig Seagate HD, and the following partitions, 
in this order:

80 megs Root
700+ megs Usr
70 megs Swap
80 megs Mac

I am using the "Quick" install, from a CD.
I get through to the beginning of actual installation when the 
installer tells me it can't find the files etc.tgz and base.tgz at:

/mac68k/binary/sets

If I reset the path to:

/binary/sets

the installer starts to run OK, but then I get this message:

tar: Failed to write ./netbsd (No space left on device)

followed by an endless string of "failed to write" messages.

Can you tell me what's going on? I double-checked the partitions and 
sizes and reformatted, but get the same result.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Michael G. Schabert | 11 Mar 2005 02:42
Picon

Re: Installing on SE30

At 1:44 PM -0700 3/10/05, David Kachel wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I am having a problem installing on an SE30.
>I have 32megs of RAM, a 1 gig Seagate HD, and the following 
>partitions, in this order:
>
>80 megs Root
>700+ megs Usr
>70 megs Swap
>80 megs Mac
>
>I am using the "Quick" install, from a CD.
>I get through to the beginning of actual installation when the 
>installer tells me it can't find the files etc.tgz and base.tgz at:
>
>/mac68k/binary/sets
>
>If I reset the path to:
>
>/binary/sets
>
>the installer starts to run OK, but then I get this message:
>
>tar: Failed to write ./netbsd (No space left on device)
>
>followed by an endless string of "failed to write" messages.
>
>Can you tell me what's going on? I double-checked the partitions and 
>sizes and reformatted, but get the same result.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Tyler Mitchell | 18 Mar 2005 10:55
Picon
Gravatar

SIGSEGV during __bt_search

Hi,

I (finally) got around to finishing the NetBSD 2.0 setup on my Apple 
PowerBook 165.

The problem is, some processes segfault consistently, always while in 
printf (which calls __bt_search, which is where it dies).  Programs that 
I've found that break so far: ps -u (but not ps -ax), w, uptime,
swapctl -l, awk (various incantations), vmstat, and many others.

For example:

# gdb ps
 	[ ... ]
(gdb) set args -u
(gdb) run
Starting program: /bin/ps -u
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
USER PID %CPU   %MEM  VSZ  RSS TT STAT STARTED    TIME COMMAND
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x040c3164 in __bt_search () from /lib/libc.so.12
(gdb) bt
#0  0x040c3164 in __bt_search () from /lib/libc.so.12
#1  0x040c4b68 in __dtoa () from /lib/libc.so.12
#2  0x040c14c0 in vfprintf_unlocked () from /lib/libc.so.12
#3  0x040c11ac in vfprintf_unlocked () from /lib/libc.so.12
#4  0x040c00a8 in vprintf () from /lib/libc.so.12
#5  0x040b5560 in printf () from /lib/libc.so.12
#6  0x00003fe6 in doubleprintorsetwidth ()
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
mckale695j | 21 Mar 2005 17:37
Picon
Favicon

What is a blog?


I found this url surfing, http://blogs.ardice.com
But can someone explain to me what a blog is?   -   Mckale695j
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
William Duke | 30 Mar 2005 22:26
Picon
Favicon

Re: Just curious

Tim & Alethea Larson wrote:

> iMac wrote:
>
>> I'm just curious as to what types of tasks you folks are using your BSD
>> running 68k Macs for.   So, what are you doing with your 68k Macs?
>>
>> I'd really like to hear from people that are not doing mundane things 
>> like
>> running them as a router or firewall.
>
>
> I was running my main webserver on a SE/30, but I've transitioned that 
> elsewhere.  So right now, my NetBSD box sits idle.  I'm thinking of 
> running internal DNS on it though, and I'm building another.  Mostly I 
> just want to keep my hand in.  Occasionally track development of 
> projects I am interested in, to see if they still run in this 
> environment.  I just think they are very neat machines, and I am glad 
> that NetBSD keeps them alive, else I'd probably throw them out.
>
> Tim
>
I think I agree with you.  As you probably already know from following 
the list, I'm totally new to NetBSD and have just finished installing 
2.0 on my LCIII, 2.0.2 on my PM7300/200, and I'm in the process of 
installing 2.1.RC6 on my Quadra 700.  I have no idea what I'm going to 
do with the Q700 and LCIII, but the idea of building a Beowulf cluster 
seems most appealing at the moment.

Ideally, I'd like to setup a mac68k Beowulf cluster of between ten and
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane