03:12:30 go to 2600 Club! :) 03:20:25 darwin: Why are you spamming that? 03:22:42 you'll sometimes find UNIX/*BSD experts there 03:33:39 And this is reason to spam it across all the channels you're in? 03:42:08 i didn't do that 03:48:55 Of course you did. I saw it in at least three channels. 03:49:52 i'm on 150+ channels mostly where it's not relevant to; I didn't do that 03:50:47 one of them was GNU, run by FSF, and FSF themselves mentions 2600 Club 03:51:56 [21:12:30] go to 2600 Club! :) someone using your nick did 06:03:43 how do I find my wireless device or maybe need to load a certain driver? 06:05:14 i found it's iwlwifi0 in dmesg but 'ifconfig iwlwifi0 up' says it doesn't exist 06:06:26 if club2600 doesn't help, try handbook: https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/handbook/network/#network-wireless 06:06:27 Title: Chapter 7. Network | FreeBSD Documentation Portal 06:13:51 yeah no one else showed up tonight there. :\ Thanks; I looked in handbook:netowkr which shows example of Intel adapter, which I have... it says the particular driver iwn is already loaded or in kernel, but after showing in dmesg, my device somehow disappeared... 06:14:27 i have Comet Lake PCH-LP CNVi WiFi 06:15:27 it says to create wlan device for your wireless adapter 06:15:49 the easiest way is using rc.conf, or you could look up correct command in ifconfig(8) man page 06:18:13 okay; I based it on the command in that manual chapter this way: 'ifconfig wlan0 create wlandevice iwlwifi0' which said 'ifconfig: must specify a parent device (wlandev) when creating a wlan device' 06:19:29 maybe I'm supposed to use the driver name instead of device name from dmesg? 06:19:44 well, I tried that with same result now 06:21:33 i think 2600 has been rather on-topic in UNIX discussion areas since 1984 on nntp:comp.unix.freebsd.misc ... the system administrator (sysadmin) who taught me starting FreeBSD 1997 - '8 academic/college year writes articles for 2600 magazine and I've seen it discussed before 06:21:57 '... FreeBSD starting 1997 -...' 06:23:34 Repetition for emphasis? 06:24:56 i corrected my statement section where I had edited beforehand and put words in the wrong order 08:49:55 i see my wireless problem was solved at least six years ago on forums.freebsd.org but the manual is wrong. The correct command is 'ifconfig wlan0 create wlandevice iwm0'... but apparently I have to do this on every boot? 08:58:34 probably not, I am sure there would be an rc.conf entry that would help 08:58:51 wlans_iwlwifi0="wlan0" 08:59:04 try putting that in rc.conf 08:59:08 thanks 08:59:12 :) 08:59:44 might not be exactly what you are after 08:59:51 let me look in to it a bit more 09:00:28 depends on your wifi driver 09:00:32 but something *like* that 09:00:37 in your rc.conf should do it 09:00:45 what driver makes for iwm0? 09:01:02 looking in to it, seems that iwm is the correct driver 09:01:06 so something like 09:01:28 wlans_iwm0="wlan0" 09:01:56 `man iwm` 09:11:07 it was iwm0 on one and iwlwifi0 on the other, but 'wlandev' (not wlandevice) 09:11:44 so you need both? 09:11:52 yes. I setup these, rebooted, and they still show up, but when I try 'WiFi Networks Manager' in XFCE it asks for administrator password then says no wi-fi interface is configured in rc.conf 09:12:22 can you use wpa_supplicant.conf instead? 09:12:52 i don't know if I have that, but I'll be connecting to public networks I don't want to configure that every time 09:14:26 * AumShivaya thinks 09:14:41 I do not know 09:14:47 I just use wpa_supplicant.conf 09:14:58 I would suggest using connman instead of nm 09:15:05 but I do not think FreeBSD has connman? 09:15:23 John Constantine? 09:17:39 https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/ConnMan 09:17:40 Title: ConnMan - ArchWiki 09:19:10 I think it's a NetworkManager bug 09:21:04 what installs nm, darwin ? 09:21:19 rubygem-aws-sdk-networkmanager OR pc-networkmanager ? 09:23:01 i don't know 09:23:11 it is probably net-mgmt/networkmgr 09:23:36 NetworkMgr is an open source, Network Manager based on the look of the Linux 09:23:37 Network Manager user interface. It use ifconfig and netif if make all work. 09:23:39 FreeBSD Manual ch34 says use /etc/hostapd.conf ... when I 'service hostapd forcestart' I get errors on both laptops 09:23:46 see if you have that installed 09:23:53 not just using the xfce4 applet 09:24:32 if that does not work, try net-mgmt/wifimgr 09:24:36 ch34.5.1.3.1 ... well I'm trying this now and also installing networkmgr but don't like it 09:25:49 do not like it? 09:25:51 why? 09:26:02 often had/caused problems on GNU/Linux 09:26:07 eh? 09:26:10 it is not the same 09:29:54 does darwin use pkg or ports? 09:30:10 yes 09:31:45 which 09:31:49 networkmgr didn't appear in menu and on command-line just halts with new line 09:31:58 i always use pkg and depending which computer it is, sometimes ports 09:32:06 let me see 09:32:13 what I can get it to do 09:32:55 if you lose me ... I'll be back 09:34:25 i got it working on command-line and took notes for what to do with public wi-fi, though GUI would be better for that 09:37:26 idk darwin 09:37:52 I think there is an issue with my systray 09:54:17 darwin, same thing is happening here with me for networkmgr 09:54:53 does not even allow me to pass flags to it at prompt 10:01:51 I do not know about this networkmgr 10:07:02 try wifimgr 10:58:05 When I try to run a bhyve VM with ppt I get "MPtable is incompatible with multiple PCI hierarchies." 10:58:25 What is happening? Where can I read more about that? 11:16:04 dautor: probably something wrong with your vm configuration? you can read more in usr.sbin/bhyve/amd64/mptbl.c searching for that error message (and it also mentions -Y switch?) 11:21:34 Yes, it does mention it, but I want to know what I'm dealing with. 11:22:06 i'd guess your configuration has non-0 bus number for some device? 11:22:36 You're guessing right :) 11:23:14 I'll try with all of them on bus 0. 11:35:38 yuripv: It starts fine now. Thank you! 11:37:31 i wonder though if mptable is still required or it's a backward compatibility thing today 11:51:33 Is it possible to pass through a NVME device with a working installation of some other UEFI-capable OS installed on it? I'm using BHYVE_UEFI.fd as bootrom but the VM just hangs after some initial output before the OS gets control. 11:53:34 Here is a screenshot if it helps: https://dautor.xyz/files/vm_hanging.png 12:59:49 Solved it! It just wasn't outputing to serial device. 13:32:10 lovely people of #freebsd, hello 13:32:25 there is no chromium in packages? 13:35:14 looks like it's in quarterly but not in latest for some reason 13:36:03 oh 13:36:11 did not expect something like that can happen 13:36:13 seems like it is only in some repos https://www.freshports.org/www/chromium/#packages as there are no fallout reports https://portsfallout.com/fallout?port=www%2Fchromium%24 probably because some dependency failed to build 13:36:14 Title: FreshPorts -- www/chromium: Google web browser based on WebKit 13:36:16 I assume more in latest than quartely ;/ 13:36:32 ye, just checked it in freshport and saw that 13:36:33 latest is less tested, more likely to have build failure 13:37:02 generally if someone builds once in a quarterly branch it will build forever as the branch only gets minor package updates 13:37:06 so it can like appear and then disappear? 13:37:23 in latest 13:37:42 i guess so, i don't use the freebsd.org packages much. but since the package isn't there the answer seems to be yes :-) 13:38:44 okay, makes sense 13:38:46 oh, "build/timeout", but no idea why there is no fallout report 13:38:46 latest is like the -current of ports so, some breakage is to be expected... i would stick with quarterly if using packages although a fair number of people use latest 13:39:04 ye good point 13:39:39 so latest is build like every few days or so? 13:40:29 I wast yesterday in infinite captcha loop in firefox, so wanted to try it but 13:40:54 I saw all hydrants and traffic lights on the earth probably 13:41:02 and a lot of bicykles and buses 13:41:24 afaik for latest and quarterly incremental rebuilds are done in a loop and a full rebuild every two weeks, but latest gets more changes, so more needs to be rebuild on incremental rebuilds 13:42:06 nimaje: do you know if the build logs are available anywhere? there's a 'logs' directory in /FreeBSD:14:amd64/latest but it's a 404 so i assume it's a symlink to somewhere 13:45:04 start from https://pkg-status.freebsd.org/builds?type=package the commit hash brings you to a mirrored site that supports both ipv6 and ipv4 and the bomb icon brings you directly to the builder, in case the mirror doesn't work for some reason, but some builders only have ipv6 (no idea if there are some with only ipv4) 13:48:01 yhsnkd 13:48:06 uh, thanks 15:24:04 are the nginx port defaults the same as the ones that come with the pkg version ? 15:32:11 last1: all packages are compiled from ports with their default options. 15:33:22 gotcha, thank you 15:41:27 To expand a bit more on that, packages are built from the ports framework using poudriere, which is a small utility that exists to create and destroy jails used for building things cleanly (ie. no environment pollution, et cetera). 15:42:42 This, ie. using poudriere, and the use of the ports framework, is also what makes it easy for other people to build custom package repositories for themselves (or others), or even create overlay repositories that can provide individual custom packages with different options than the default. 15:47:46 found a good fix for my alc(4) problem: ix0: port 0xd020-0xd03f mem 0xfc280000-0xfc2fffff,0xfc304000-0xfc307fff at device 0.0 on pci8 16:32:21 I periodically run into a situation on my FreeBSD NFS server in which nfsd somehow (apparently) loses its registration with RPC and needs to be restarted. it also seems to happen after a reboot. I feel like I'm missing something? 16:33:20 I'll try to mount a share from a Linux client and get "mount.nfs: Protocol not supported" ... and if I run showmount -e on the server, I get "RPC: Program not registered" until I restart nfsd 16:34:20 tsundoku i can confirm, happens to me too, 13.2 16:34:33 I'm on 14.1, but this system started on 13.2 and I think it happened there as well 16:34:37 er 14.0, sorry. 16:36:26 rmacklem@ is actively working on NFS, so my best suggestion is to try and replicate on 15-CURRENT, and if not then file a report on https://bugs.freebsd.org 16:36:27 Title: FreeBSD Bugzilla Main Page 16:36:36 hm 16:37:01 If you can't upgrade your production system to 15-CURRENT, you might do it in bhyve? 16:37:11 you could share with zfs over nfs. I am guessing you are using /etc/exports now. but I wouldn't know how to troubleshoot 16:37:16 oh I can definitely set up a VM, I'm just thinking about the situation 16:37:24 and I'm sharing ZFS as it happens 16:37:32 ah hm 16:37:41 "Sharing with ZFS" just adds lines to /etc/zfs/exports 16:37:47 right, I noticed 16:38:03 It's all the same to nfsd, which reads both. 16:38:15 but doesn't require restarting nfsd 16:38:24 it would be nice if I could get it to stop complaining about /etc/exports not existing, on a related note 16:38:32 and least upon initial share 16:38:48 scoobybejesus: I'm not sure that applies to this issue. 16:38:49 tsundoku mounting with v3 protocol? 16:38:53 v4 16:39:09 oh wait it *is* v3 16:39:11 I want it to be v4 16:39:21 tsundoku: if you're using V4, you need "V4: /" in /etc/exports which'll solve your issue. 16:39:27 that's weird. does FreeBSD's NFS server default to v3 only? 16:39:30 That's the only line you need. 16:39:42 so how do I do that through the zfs command 16:39:52 If you don't specify "V4: /" in /etc/exports 16:39:57 You can't, you need to add the line to the file. 16:39:59 I hope I don't have to manually clean up /etc/zfs/exports after issuing a zfs sharenfs command 16:40:05 You don't. 16:40:07 that's... a little rough 16:40:09 Howdy. 16:40:14 After my failed atempt to upgrade 13.2 to 14, it was suggested that I should try a boot environment, a snapshot of which was probably created by the new upgrade process. However, it seems that I only have one available. Now I'm running a 14 kernel with a 13.2 package set, freebsd-version says 13.2-RELEASE-p9. bectl list gives libbe_init("") failed. freebsd-update fetch tries to pull files from 16:40:15 You never touch /etc/zfs/exports 16:40:16 14.0. What's the best way to proceed? I think I want to have the binary install start over, basically. 16:40:52 wait, this seems like a catch-22. I never touch /etc/zfs/exports, but the only way to serve v4 is to manually edit the file after running the command? 16:42:57 tsundoku: the only way to get nfsd to do V4, as far as I know, is to add the line to /etc/exports and leave /etc/zfs/exports alone. 16:43:09 weird 16:43:46 zale23: /rescue contains a very basic environment that you should be able to bootstrap from 16:44:08 I feel like if that's the case, all of the FreeBSD docs saying "just run this zfs command to share a dataset!" should have the caveat "only if you intend to do NFSv3" attached to them 16:45:39 debdrup: The system is booted currently with the 14 kernel and 13.2 package set. /rescue/bectl list also produces the same error. 16:45:57 I see ldd reports no dynamic linking, so I assume somehting else is going on. 16:46:09 tsundoku: the documentation is part of the FreeBSD project, so you're welcome to submit a patch via GH, BZ, or phabricator. 16:47:10 right 16:47:13 zale23: /rescue is statically linked (and is technically just one single binary, via crunchgen1)), so it can be used in situations where even dynamically linked libraries are broken. Not sure what bectl is attempting and failing with init. 16:47:36 I need to do some research and decide how to set things up, but I need coffee first 16:47:51 I'm a little disappointed that it doesn't just default to v4 like every other OS I've used in recent years, though 16:48:20 tsundoku: I run NFSv4-only for my servers, so I don't have to deal with RPC at all - but that's because I don't have any Linux boxen, as they don't have support for NFSv4 ACLs. 16:48:49 debdrup: that's good to know about, thanks for the info. Do folks usually boot into that, or just execute those paths? Not sure how to make use of it to solve my situation. 16:49:15 It doesn't default to NFSv4 because Linux doesn't implement NFSv4 ACLs among other reasons, and FreeBSD attempts to have interoperability defaults. 16:49:17 Is there a way to force freebsd-update to start over on an upgrade? Or force it to pull from a specific list? 16:49:26 I've been over Solaris, FreeBSD, and various Linux distros lately, and they all do v4 for everything out of the box unless you specify v3, so that's interesting to hear 16:49:42 "Linux doesn't implement NFSv4 ACLs" is news to me 16:50:00 zale23: you can boot into it by setting init_path via the boot loader prompt, which I've sometimes had to do. 16:50:22 I don't think the setting up ACLs is actually necessary to use it in the first place? 16:50:31 It is if you're doing a shared environment. 16:51:09 and Linux just straight up doesn't support them, you say? 16:51:40 isn't it also possible to use traditional access control with NFSv4? I'm not following what you're saying. 16:51:46 tsundoku: nope. 16:52:06 As in, nope it doesn't support them. 16:52:25 Not sure what "traditional access controls" are, in this context. 16:53:08 posix? 16:53:11 yeah 16:53:17 There's POSIX ACLs, but that's not part of the NFSv3 specification, so not every client implementation will support i t. 16:53:21 just setting the user/group and octal permissions 16:53:40 I've never encountered a client that doesn't 16:53:42 The ACLs are pretty boring unless you back it with an authentication system and some crypto. 16:53:42 Windows, for example, doesn't really support it, and I don't know about macOS. 16:53:59 macOS does 16:54:02 NFS+Kerberos isn't exactly unknown. 16:54:02 Windows, I have no idea 16:54:23 debdrup: also not trivial. 16:54:28 trying to serve shares to Windows clients with NFS sounds kind of insane 16:54:39 Anyway, NFSv4 ACLs are also cool because they let you do both NFS and SMB sharing on the same share. 16:54:53 tsundoku: eh, it's fine. Windows has a NFS client that works quite well. 16:55:38 yeah, I mean, I know NFSv4 ACLs have their purpose, but in my simple environment I've just been serving NFSv4 without setting up ACLs and relying on POSIX permissions (and specifying hosts allowed to access the share) for everything 16:56:16 so hearing that NFSv4 doesn't work without ACLs and therefore the default needs to be v3 runs counter to what I've seen other OSs do and what I've done so far 16:56:34 That's not really what I said.. 16:56:36 *and* hearing that Linux doesn't support them is... really odd 16:57:01 Posix isn't an over the wire acl. I think you two are talking about different things. 16:57:03 I said that FreeBSD defaults to being interoperable, because among other things, not everything supports NFSv4 ACLs. 16:57:38 NFSv4, set up properly, doesn't need rpcuserd or any kind of RPC configuration and can be done over a single TCP port. 16:57:53 Is there a way to know what version /boot/kernel.old is? 16:57:53 right, that's part of the reason why I prefer to use it 16:57:57 And with the work by rmacklem@, it can even be done over TLS. 16:58:05 zale23: strings(1) 16:58:13 Nice. 16:58:26 or what(1) 16:58:30 but I've so far not understood ACLs to be a prerequisite for running NFSv4. they're just an optional extra thing you can do if you need more sophisicated access control than traditional POSIX ownership and permissions can express 16:58:43 (as in 'what /boot/kernel.old/kernel', which just prints the version) 16:58:57 Yea, what(1) can do it too, but strings(1) works on arbitrary binaries, so I tend to remember that better. 16:58:59 also I'm still hung up on "Linux doesn't support NFSv4 ACLs." that seems completely improbable to me. I'm trying to find out more 16:59:29 s/sophisticated 16:59:33 tsundoku: good luck. There's been two different attempts at implementing it, approximately a decade ago - neither succeeded for the usual reasons. 16:59:56 ACLs aren't a pre-requisite if you're just a single user with a NFS that you're accessing.. 17:00:24 Just because ACLs don't fit in your use-case doesn't mean FreeBSD has to switch the default.. 17:00:27 my understanding, which may be incomplete, is that NFSv4 without ACLs set up can do all of the same access control that NFSv3 can. 17:00:40 Sure, unless you're doing NFSv4-only. 17:00:46 so I don't understand how defaulting to v3 improves interoperability 17:00:56 tsundoku: you mean posix permissions, correct? 17:01:00 yes 17:01:07 Then that isn't an NFSv4 ACL. 17:01:10 I know 17:01:40 If, for example, you adjust vfs.nfsd.server_min_nfsvers to 4, you probably won't be able to use NFSv3 either, but I'm pretty sure you _still_ need to add the line to /etc/exports 17:01:41 Posix permissions in v3 rely on local passwd database to confirm Id of the user. 17:01:52 I'm trying to understand the scenario where a client doesn't support NFSv4 ACLs and therefore it's necessary to use v3 instead, because doesn't v3 *only* have POSIX permissions? 17:02:08 zale23: right, and you can use v4 that way if your needs are simple enough, too 17:02:14 I'm not sure why you'd try to understand that use-case. 17:02:26 I already outlined one: Windows NFS client. 17:02:56 so I'm not grasping which kind of situation would make it appropriate to use v3 but not appropriate to use v4 without ACLs. as I understand it they are functionally the same when it comes to permissions 17:03:22 because v4 without ACLs will just rely on local passwd database like v3 does 17:03:33 You can't do NFSv4-only if you have a Windows NFS client. 17:03:38 tsundoku: not if it's Windows NFS client. 17:03:47 so it's basically for Windows clients 17:03:51 What do we suppose the chance of booting a kernel from an older zfs snapshot by rsyncing from the snapshot to /boot? 17:03:55 There are probably others. 17:04:18 the defaults I'm used to, for the record, are NFS servers that default to v4 but will serve v3 if the client only supports v3, or asks for v3 17:04:28 Also, the others that "support NFSv4", do they actually default to NFSv4 for the shares? 17:04:34 yes 17:04:41 * debdrup shrugs 17:04:52 So you lose out on Windows clients and others. 17:05:13 I think most vendors expect you to use SMB for Windows clients 17:05:22 SMB is slower, though. 17:05:31 Samba is, at least. 17:05:43 ..it's also a pain. 17:05:46 i think a more pragmatic reason for not requiring nfsv4 by default is that 98% of unix 'admins' don't stay up to date on this stuff and expect nfs to work the way nfsv3 did, even though nfsv4 has been around for 20 years 17:05:48 I mean, fair 17:06:01 but SMB is the Windows standard, so people serving Windows clients usually use it 17:06:09 zale23: I'd say backup your stuff and just re-pave... 17:06:18 Gah, so much! 17:06:25 that's an interesting difference in perspective on the part of FreeBSD, if all of this is true 17:06:27 Yea, it sucks. :( 17:06:30 just trying to understand the situation 17:06:34 zale23: I wish I had a better recommendation 17:07:00 tsundoku: defaulting to interoperability doesn't seem that outlandish. 17:07:08 If I compiled from source, would the install be successful? 17:07:13 I'll be honest, my needs are simple and I have just been using NFSv4 the same way as v3 all of this time (on Solaris and Linux) 17:07:57 debdrup: I don't disagree, but other platforms I've used default to serving v4 or v3, depending on what the client asks for. not v4 only 17:08:11 so I'm not following why in FreeBSD it needs to be either-or. 17:08:34 or maybe it doesn't need to be, and they just decided to do it this way for other reasons 17:09:16 It's just as likely that nobody has seen the need to make it default to V4, because there isn't any real reason for it. 17:09:30 Unless you do NFSv4-only, you still need to configure RPC for NFSv3 clients. 17:09:37 Its a little faster iirc. 17:09:44 that's what I thought too 17:09:51 zale23: it's quite a bit faster if you do NFSv4-only, yes. 17:10:00 But I have a server doing both v3 and v4. Pretty sure. 17:10:20 In my testing, the biggest speed-gain was had from doing NFSv4-only. 17:10:35 debdrup: was that because of delegations, or something else? 17:10:35 I'm used to things doing v3 and v4 out of the box with no configuration necessary beyond exporting the share, unless you want to restrict access beyond what the POSIX permissions do 17:10:54 unixwitch: that's an excellent question. Next question. :D 17:10:57 tsundoku: Your client isn't upgrading the connection. 17:11:04 with v4 being the default for clients who don't ask for v3 17:11:20 upgrading? 17:11:22 And does 'mount' client side report v4 mounts? 17:11:33 tsundoku: one issue here is that freebsd requires the V4 root to be specified in /etc/exports before v4 will work, so it can't be enabled by default. you'd need to default the root to / or something, which may not be a good idea (not sure) 17:11:49 unixwitch: the root share, not necessarly / 17:12:07 If everything you've shared is in /srv you can specify that rather than / 17:12:07 interesting. and this is specific to FreeBSD? or other platforms have a default? 17:12:08 debdrup: isn't that what i said? 17:12:22 zale23: yes, it did 17:12:24 you have to specify "the V4 root", which doesn't need to be / 17:12:35 unixwitch: fair, I missed that. 17:12:36 Then you don't need v3 tsundoku, correct? 17:12:42 I don't. 17:12:51 Do we have docs on v4 only? 17:13:08 tsundoku: read the NFS protocol specs for details I suppose. 17:13:17 nfsv4only is an optin in rc.conf(5), I think? 17:13:28 I'm talking about on my old server environment that this FreeBSD server is replacing, and others I've used. all of my mounts were v4, but if I had a client requesting v3, it would get v3 17:13:36 but I might as well set it to v4 only for this 17:13:44 nfs4_server_only* 17:13:53 occasionally I connect an old system that doesn't have v4, but that's rare. 17:14:03 tsundoku: Right, support what your clients need. The fstab line will tell you which protocol. 17:14:07 s/optin/option/ 17:14:15 thanks debdrup 17:14:21 weirdly nfsv4_server_only isn't mentioned in nfsv4(4). should probably submit a patch for that 17:14:22 I don't really care whether it's v4 only, I just want clients that don't specifically request v3 to get v4 17:14:37 unixwitch: I'll approve. :) 17:14:59 and I'd prefer to be able to use the zfs commands to export shares, without having to remember to ignore that whole feature and write /etc/exports by hand 17:15:09 I don't know how other nfsd implementations manage to oppotunistically default to v4, and I don't know if nfsd in FreeBSD can do it - but what I do know is that unless a copyfree-licensed doesn't do it, rmacklem@ will have to figure out how without reading any code.. 17:15:14 tsundoku: then you want something that isn't nfs. Like I said, nfs doesn't upgrade the connection from 3 -> 4. the client makes a request for a specific version and gets that version. 17:15:31 zale23: yep. 17:15:35 I never said anything about upgrading a connection 17:15:48 unixwitch: yes, yes you should. 17:15:48 I was not expecting that. 17:15:50 When you say "to get 4", that's what I heard. 17:15:56 same. 17:16:04 then you misinterpreted 17:16:16 nothing about "get" inherently implies "starting with one thing and changing to another"... 17:16:50 so fine, clients are requesting v4 and getting v4, in the setup I'm used to and want to end up with. 17:16:50 Mostly what I'm saying is the client is making a request for a specific version. The server either supports it or it doesn.t 17:17:13 what I'm used to for defaults is that almost all clients will request v4, but if a client requests v3, it will get v3 17:17:33 Not much good can come from trying to attribute blame for miscommunicating, since there's at least 4 chances of error to occur in information transfer. 17:18:04 yep, no finger pointing from my perspective. Just want to be accurate about what we're speaking too. 17:18:35 okay, so I'm just trying to understand where FreeBSD is relative Linux and Solaris, basically 17:18:58 because in all the Linux and Solaris I've used, for a long time, the default is to serve v4 and v3, depending on what the client asks for 17:19:17 and if you don't set up ACLs, v4 will just use POSIX permissions 17:19:19 like v3. 17:19:47 but it sounds like nfsd in FreeBSD is different and maybe can't do both at once, so the default has to be v3 for edge cases with non-*nix clients? 17:19:58 See my comment at ~17:15:09 UTC.. 17:20:14 Anyway, dinnertime! 17:23:05 debdrup: well i did! https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/pull/1008 17:23:06 Title: nfsv4(4): mention the nfsv4_server_only setting by lexiwinter · Pull Request #1008 · freebsd/freebsd-src · GitHub 18:03:46 okay, i am looking at zfs send -I and -i.. what the heck is the difference? utlimately i want to take my baseline daily snapshot from t-2 and APPLy t-1 daily snapshot in an incremental fashion to it 18:05:03 voy4g3r2: -I sends all the snapshots that exist between the two you specified, -i only sends the two snapshots you asked for 18:05:39 for backups, you probably want -I, so all your snapshots are copied 18:06:21 so -I has more "logic" to figure out what is needed, where -i is more explicit? 18:06:47 i definitely do not want to send over a 180gig music drive everyday.. as i just added more concerts to the library.. in order of 3.4gig 18:08:52 makes sense, now to figure this out, thank you unixwitch 18:09:06 might as well learn this, since it is snowing.. and can not do anything.. first snow fall of the season 18:10:33 and i really need to get in habit of reading stuff like this: https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/handbook/zfs/#zfs-send-incremental 18:10:34 Title: Chapter 22. The Z File System (ZFS) | FreeBSD Documentation Portal 18:10:58 voy4g3r2: imagine you snapshot music@monday, music@tuesday and music@wednesday, then do 'zfs send -i music@monday music@wednesday', you will end up with music@monday and music@wednesday on the destination. if you specify -I instead, you will end up with music@monday, music@tuesday and music@wednesday. the only difference in the amount of data copied would be if music@tuesday had a significant amount of referenced data which had been deleted in mus 18:11:55 ahhh!! 18:12:05 minus my time machine backups, second is definitely number in priority 18:17:50 i get more and more why there are 18:18:01 "tools" to do this.. this is not easy to get "right" 18:18:39 it is not... fwiw, i quite like syncoid, which is part of sysutils/sanoid. it will automatically create snapshots and sync them to a remote host over ssh 18:23:06 the perl program.. i saw the presentation on that one.. looked real cool 18:23:13 unixwitch: https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/commit/?id=fbbdfa2b8a42 18:23:14 Title: src - FreeBSD source tree 18:23:35 i am in the phase, okay i understand how it "works" let me use a tool, that can do it better than i can.. plus i can offload "support/maintenance" to an expert 18:24:01 debdrup: ty! 18:24:52 i hate my inbox and want it to suffer, so i have subscribed to freebsd-desktop@ 18:26:31 Only one list? ;) 18:26:55 I'm _very_ glad neomutt has proper list support, including reply-to-list functionality. 18:27:00 debdrup: well i'm already on current, stable, ports, questions, fs and hackers... 18:27:07 but desktop seems to have more mail than all of those combined :-) 18:27:40 probably because it gets all the bugzilla desktop@ mail 18:27:56 desktop@ is one of the lists I'm not subscribed to, but follow via mlmmj-webview. 18:28:33 you know, it would be nice if there was (read-only) IMAP access to the list archives. i have absolutely no idea how difficult that would be to support though 18:29:02 unixwitch: mail from bugzilla-noreply@ doesn't count in my world, as that gets filtered into its own mailbox by my MUA. 18:29:16 ah, i just dump everything into one freebsd folder 18:29:35 if i had a separate bugzilla mailbox i'd just forget to check it until it had 10k mails in or something 18:29:46 I have a freebsd directory with subdirectories for doc, current, hackers, status, and a few others. 18:30:01 unixwitch: You can send a mail to postmaster@ with a recommendation, but I can make _absolutely_ no promises. 18:30:19 i don't think i want it enough that i'd consider actually asking for it, i'm sure it would be non-trivial 18:31:14 i'm sure postmaster has better things to do 18:31:17 * voy4g3r2 takes notes on what lists to not join, desktop@ 18:31:40 i was worried about -current, with that one checksum issue i saw.. it is relatively quiet in comparison to my past experiences with listserv 18:32:09 most of the lists are fairly quiet, the general ones like fs@ and net@ are quite busy because they also get bugzilla traffic 18:32:16 although really not *that* much traffic 18:34:13 wpow it is still around: https://lists.psu.edu/ 18:34:14 Title: Welcome to LISTSERV 17.0 18:36:05 oh, i used to use listserv on freebsd. aside from not coming with source code it's quite a nice bit of software 18:36:25 i preferred it to mailman, never tried mlmmj though 18:37:19 debdrup: do you want me to close the nfsv4(4) PR or will you leave it open until MFC? 18:39:12 unixwitch: go ahead, the MFC notice is a tooling thing for the repo of record, because there's a cronjob that scans and keeps track of all commits, and sends the relevant reminder when it's time. 18:39:52 Github is still _just_ a mirror (though it now accepts PRs, which we grab via gh(1) using a git-remote(1)). 18:40:04 oh man, i use to work on this server a lot when i was at uni: https://www.reddit.com/r/PennStateUniversity/comments/4n7tvv/penn_state_shutting_off_its_open_source_mirror/ before they instituted bandwidth limits, damn you napster! 18:40:49 * debdrup remembers when ftp.cdrom.com ran on FreeBSD, and was one of the servers that got the most traffic on the internet. 18:41:15 The warstories from its operators at the time are _something_. 18:41:19 debdrup: nothing like dating ourselves.. i remember prodigy on my ibm pcjr 18:41:35 i STILL have that computer.. not even sure if it works 18:41:48 Hopefully there's no battery in it, or it probably won't. 18:41:53 i get the evil eye from the wife, when she sees it and we are rearraning our storage room 18:43:07 i remember ftp.cdrom.com, but i always got my BSDs from sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk because it was closer 18:43:15 plus you could mount it over NFS :-) 18:44:19 i honestly do not know if there is a battery in it 18:44:39 but i do have fond memories of using cassette tapes to backup gw-basic programs and "forgetting" to NOT have it by the monitor 18:46:00 sad: ftp: Can't lookup `sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk:ftp': Name does not resolve 18:46:20 Yea, sunsite is gone :( 18:46:59 i guess oraclesite didn't have the same ring to it 18:49:54 tsx-11.mit.edu is dead too, i wonder how many interesting old files have vanished in the last 20 years 18:50:17 at least TUHS is still around 18:56:30 is there a cache somewhere where pkg keeps its info ? 18:57:03 I've updated to 12.4 and pkg install pkg complains that Bootstrapping pkg from pkg+http://pkg.FreeBSD.org/FreeBSD:12:amd64/quarterly 18:57:10 but that URL no longer has info about 12.x 18:59:03 last1: 12.x just went EOL 18:59:21 darn it, is there an archive site I can use temporarily ? 19:01:47 i managed to crash freebsd 14-RELEASE by using the serial port... any ideas how s_ttyvp ends up as 0x38? https://0x0.st/H6Dg.txt 19:04:43