03:50:12 Hey guys... got a fbsd VM in a boot loop ending with: https://bsd.to/XnGp 03:50:14 Title: dpaste/XnGp (Plain Text) 03:50:22 Any ideas on how to restore to a working state ? 03:53:00 Is that all you get? With verbose booting? 03:53:38 I get a lot, it's just that's the last part 03:53:49 with verbose & safe mode enabled 03:55:05 any ideas on how to force-check / repair the disk? 03:56:26 What had happened before the boot: sudden power loss, dying disk, other? 03:56:44 most likely - yes, I wasn't at home at the time 03:57:56 (most likely power loss) 03:58:13 You could boot from a installation image & choose "live disk" (or whatever "live X" is called). Then poke the disk from there 03:58:26 hm 03:59:34 What is the file system on the disk? 04:00:21 I wonder if boot partition was damaged ... 04:16:04 from what I remember its ufs 04:16:23 tried running fsck -y /dev/vtbd0p2 ... spammed a lot but after reboot - same thing 04:17:05 as for the boot partition... it boots, reaches some stage and reboots 04:41:16 no help.. ran fsck a few times.. marks the fs as clean but still in a reboot loop 04:45:22 The bothersome thing is that it says device not found. That looks more like a hardware problem to me. Maybe check the cables? 04:47:53 the first (virtual) sata drive is not occupied as is the 3rd and 4th 04:48:03 the 2nd is (scsi2) 04:48:38 the cables work fine, it's a virtual disk on a hdd - the hdd works fine :) there are other vms running off it atm 05:03:34 and theres a ton of stuff in lost+found 07:33:41 is that virtualbox 07:38:51 no, pve 11:29:12 Someone knows how to remove pulseaudio without removing its dependencies using pkg? I would like to use OSS on FreeBSD 12:20:02 freebsd-update now creates boot environments by default? (`CreateBootEnv yes` is commented out in its .conf on my install but it created boot envs for me anyway) 12:21:21 can I just `zfs destroy` a BE to get rid of it or is there more of a procedure to that? 12:38:45 beadm list;beadm destroy why not https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?beadm 12:38:46 Title: beadm 12:40:32 https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/howto-freebsd-zfs-madness.31662/ 12:40:34 Title: HOWTO: FreeBSD ZFS Madness | The FreeBSD Forums 14:51:18 rennj: do you perhaps mean bectl 14:51:47 Remilia: it's much the same 14:52:06 grahamperrin: sure, but beadm is not available by default 16:12:19 grahamperrin: thanks for the review, pushed an update to my report 18:12:31 grahamperrin: the only difference appears to be the language they're written in 18:13:12 Difference between what and what? 18:13:46 Sorry, I should've made it clear what I was talking about; beadm is Bourne shell, bectl is C (well, it's a C library with a tiny front-end binary, so that things other than the binary can use it) 18:17:05 There are slight differences, the first one that comes to mind is option -T 18:18:03 Huh, that's neat. 18:18:58 One other advantage is that bectl has a more complete manual page. :3 18:28:15 The default creation of boot environments made fixing a mistake I made last week super easy. FreeBSD ROCKS! :-) 18:33:15 As I learned things boot environments was originally a recreation of the Solaris feature created for FreeBSD as beadm which is still maintained in ports. 18:33:20 But being such an excellent feature it was rewritten in C and moved into core as bectl. 18:33:25 Fortunately you can read about beadm in old docs and map to using bectl exactly. 18:33:28 So much original documentation writes about beadm. But now bectl is in core and upgrades with it. 18:34:31 And also when I want to know how some particular part of it is implemented then the shell script beadm is available for reading very easily. Super cool. 18:35:37 meena (and all): sorry for not reviewing sooner. Thanks for the notes 18:45:55 rwp: I need to do BEs with UFS… 18:48:25 meena, Do BEs work with UFS? I thought it needed ZFS features in order to support it. 18:48:55 I would imagine that with UFS one would need to boot something live like the freebsd-installer and then use it for recovery. 18:51:17 https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/ufs-boot-environments.79628/ 18:51:18 Title: UFS Boot Environments | The FreeBSD Forums 18:51:25 meena, rwp: 18:51:26 Title: UFS Boot Environments | πšŸπšŽπš›πš–πšŠπšπšŽπš— 18:54:18 From the original developer vermaden! I am definitely bookmarking that reference! Looks like a user space management of DIY snapshots on UFS. 19:15:01 "We've got it all on UFS" 19:17:53 I am going to need to work through some examples of that technique in order to grok it. Looks like a useful technique. 19:18:17 However it needs to be a strategy intentionally deployed explicitly. It's not set up by default, as it is with ZFS. 19:25:41 rwp: yeah, it looks like lots of work 19:26:43 main reason i want to attempt it is so i can upgrade a few VMs with PkgBase 19:27:48 I really wish the VM images we offer would come with a choice of ZFS vs UFS, because i would certainly always pick ZFS 19:30:52 I assumed that the problem was cloud hosting on affordable sized systems. 19:47:12 meena: soon, hopefully, maybe 19:55:59 kevans: can I help? 20:01:47 meena: you can keep an eye on https://reviews.freebsd.org/D34426, but I'm not sure what else 20:01:48 Title: Login 20:02:08 .oO(login?) 20:28:24 kevans: poudriere image has that, but i suppose we don't use poudriere for creating images 20:28:49 nah, release/ scripts 20:29:50 * meena logs in to subscribe 20:30:16 kevans: but even so, the default images are pretty crappy starting off point 20:30:26 kevans: why is sendmail enabled, but no SSH?????? 20:30:38 (i have heard the argument, and I still think it's crap) 20:34:58 I am not the one you need to convince :-p 20:35:06 kevans: who is? 20:35:44 *waves hands* the community *waves hands* 20:36:09 Propose change -> get community acceptance -> convince re@ to accept it -> score 20:37:26 the missing step between #2 and #3 is, naturally, 'make the change' 20:37:54 or that could be part of #1 20:46:12 sendmail takes about half an hour to start on a vm, because of DNS/hostname crap 20:48:18 CURRENT on my VM boots in 13 seconds, and would probably boot a little quicker if i bootet NODEBUG… 20:48:25 well, I'd have to install nodebug for that… 20:50:24 Is there no option to fire off "sendmail" in the background & let do its thing without blocking rest of the booting|"rc"-ing? 20:51:09 As for enabling ssh in VM, where do I sign the petition? 20:53:20 parv: i'll probably start a petition next month 20:54:19 it'll probably be in phabricator, if phabricator hasn't been replaced with something more sensible 20:54:34 meena, Aye. Will ask you then🀞 unless I see that elsewhere 20:55:49 parv: I have a lot on my plate with the whole cloud-init thing, but it's exactly that work that is pointing to lots of deficiencies wrt cloud environments 21:09:55 meena: Maybe seed /etc/hosts with what sendmail wants...? Or change the boot order so it starts after BIND or whatever's gating it? 21:11:13 mason: some of that implies that i can modify the image before first boot, and if I could easily do that, I wouldn't be complaining about it 21:27:58 First, I am biased, but... Postfix by design will run without DNS and therefore will start immediately and run locally until networking becomes available. 21:38:50 rwp: i a allergic to mail 21:39:00 so that's a different issue there 22:02:03 morning 22:05:00 what's the difference between a relent/13.0.0 branch and a stable/13 branch? 22:06:27 former gets only fixes for security advisories/erratas, latter will become next 13.x release so it gets backports from main 22:08:01 yuripv, awesome so if I git checkout stable/13 and do a git log will it only show me the commits along the stable/13 branch? 22:08:28 that's how git works, yes :) 22:09:00 you don't really need to checkout it, just do a `git log stable/13` if that is what you need 22:09:15 yuripv, awesome, thank you now if I git bisect does it only consider commits along that branch? 22:11:42 yes, but as someone's (yours?! if i'm not mistaken) experience shown, it will sometimes land in some vendor commit? :) 22:12:28 yuripv, yup it was mine, but I think kevans pointed that out and kindly showed me the switch to prevent that 22:13:44 has anyone used usb disk enclosures with zfs? 22:15:26 yes, and usb flash drives as well. they're enough like internal spinning rust to be managed the same 22:16:08 geli-encrypted zfs, too 22:18:28 crb: https://twitter.com/FreeBSDHelp/status/1457531204228374534 22:18:30 Title: FreeBSD Help on Twitter: "@probonopd @NealsJoe @FreeBSD_RE FreeBSD Development Lifecycle Version 2. Would appreciate a review, and if you're happy with it, I'll start on a Wiki page. Will be creating ports and docs versions too https://t.co/gGRjWRwSYV" / Twitter 22:19:25 koobs: oh, cool, thank you 22:19:45 pleasure 22:20:40 arielmt: will plugging them into a different port screw things up? 22:21:17 reason i ask is because it's hard to find a sas disk shelf that is cheap and supports sata 22:23:55 sas2 shelves should be really cheap now (used ones) 22:23:56 not by my experience, but the order in which you plug in usb drives definitely will if you rely on /dev/da* device names. also, my experience is limited to single-disk pools. 22:25:11 zfs usually doesn't care if the drive device name changes. I thought it reads the info from the disks themselves to determine the structure of the array 22:26:02 What do you need in a "shelf?" You looking for easy hot removal isertion? 22:26:21 Or just a way to hook up a bunch of disks? Because you can just get an IT mode HBA and wire them up like normal drives. 22:29:49 you still need a case to put those drive in, and shelf (or chassis with proper drive bays) is easier 22:30:06 Of course, but their are plenty of cases that hold 8+ drives. 22:30:23 You only need the fancy hotswap bays if you want hotswap 23:06:52 Erhard: i just need it as a disk array without hot plugging 23:07:13 yuripv: that accept sata drives? 23:07:41 i had a 4 disk enclosure that was esata; worked alright for zfs until it lost power one day 23:12:42 rtprio, Was the enclosure rendered useless due to power loss? 23:13:50 parv: the zpool was-- i had to restore from backups. 23:14:03 rtprio, Ah, ok. 23:17:45 oh damn 23:18:02 is that a common thing? 23:18:52 CCFL_Man: if you lose more than two drives on raidz, yes 23:19:13 and if you just do jbod? 23:19:31 Obviously, need to use RAID-Z3😏 23:19:53 it only had 4 drives! 23:20:12 CCFL_Man: yeah, jbod might have handled it better. 23:20:39 it only happened once in 3 or so years, then i finally got a chassis with 8 drives in it