04:02:14 <tuaris> How do I have a rc service file change the working directory?
04:07:45 <TommyC> tuaris: cd ?
04:27:18 <tuaris> Ah, I remembered about `_chdir`.  I tried that once in rc.conf, but it didn't work.  I think that variable can only be set in the service script/
06:15:49 <rwp> tuaris, What rc script are you talking about?  It would help if we knew and then could look at it.
06:16:20 <tuaris> I found what I needed: https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=rc.subr&sektion=8&format=html
06:17:36 <rwp> Woot!
08:14:30 <kerneldove> i can run ping from my user account, but when i run a some ping code using a ping lib i get an error Protocol not supported (os error 43) any clue what's causing that?
08:42:05 <kerneldove> i tried some other ping code from my 14.3 user account and it errors saying permissiondenied operation not permitted
08:42:14 <kerneldove> but i can run `ping` and it works
08:43:22 <bradd> kerneldove: the system ping runs as root. you need to be root to access SOCK_RAW afaik
08:44:47 <kerneldove> what's the difference between system ping and `ping` bin that i run as regular user?
08:45:27 <bradd> system ping runs as root afaik
08:46:50 <bradd> i.e. if  you copy system ping somewhere and make it owned by your user, you will get the error
08:47:49 <otis> true. /sbin/ping is setuid-root
08:52:41 <kerneldove> https://docs.rs/surge-ping/latest/src/surge_ping/config.rs.html#20-29 is the code i'm trying to use
09:01:00 <kerneldove> i don't need to be root to ping using dgram right?
09:02:14 <bradd> if you can, try running your program as root and see what it does
09:06:26 <otis> kerneldove: normally, you need to be root to open a raw sockets (that traditional /sbin/ping uses)
09:06:57 <kerneldove> i ran it as sudo and it worked as expected
09:07:14 <kerneldove> otis ya but i can run `ping` and it works fine, so it must not be sending raw?
09:09:36 <bradd> kerneldove: when you 'ls -l /sbin/ping' you'll see a 's' field, which causes the program to run as root
09:11:45 <kerneldove> ya but i don't run sudo ping, i just run ping, and it works
09:11:50 <kerneldove> am i misunderstanding?
09:12:34 <ivy> kerneldove: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Setuid
09:15:28 <kerneldove> so the setuid bit means any regular user can run it, and when it runs it runs as root?
09:15:39 <ivy> yes
09:15:54 <kerneldove> ok so there's actually no way for freebsd users to send pings unprivileged?
09:16:48 <ivy> no, because you need a raw socket for that and only root can open raw sockets
09:17:18 <kerneldove> i read that to send unprivileged pings, you can send a dgram ping, but that's not true?
09:17:23 <kerneldove> dgram instead of raw
09:17:48 <Remilia> do you mean UDP echo aka what Windows used to use by default
09:18:01 <kerneldove> not sure but maybe
09:19:05 <kerneldove> ya looks like it
09:19:21 <Remilia> it's not enabled by default
09:19:21 <kerneldove> is there any way to enable that so unprivileged users can ping?
09:19:28 <kerneldove> how can i enable it?
09:21:04 <Remilia> you shouldn't
09:21:17 <kerneldove> why not?
09:21:24 <Remilia> you'd have to drop the privileged ports restriction almost entirely
09:22:09 <kerneldove> well how am i going to make a ping bin in rust that runs unpriv?
09:22:23 <Remilia> the answer is you don't
09:22:50 <kerneldove> im making a server monitor tho
09:23:05 <kerneldove> i need to test reachability
09:23:29 <kerneldove> does ssh have ping built in?
09:27:05 <kerneldove> no
09:27:12 <kerneldove> so what do i do?
09:36:03 <kerneldove> Remilia?
09:37:06 <Remilia> do what everyone else does, spawn a new process running a laser-focussed SUID binary
09:37:31 <Remilia> why are you asking me? look at munin, nagios, etc.
09:37:49 <kerneldove> ugh i dont wanna run privileged
09:38:07 <Remilia> you don't want to read
09:38:35 <kerneldove> no i heard you it just makes me sad
09:40:11 <Remilia> I'm not sure why executing a tiny SUID binary made purely to do ECHO requests makes you sad
09:40:54 <Remilia> you could either do that, or compromise your system by setting privileged port limit to something like 6
09:41:25 <Remilia> which would let any user listen on ports like 25, 53, 80, 443, and so on
09:41:58 <Remilia> UDP echo requires port 7 and UDP echo responses are not enabled by default
09:43:05 <kerneldove> if i have a tiny setuid binary for doing ping, i'd just have my program run the system `ping` and parse its output
09:43:26 <Remilia> like it's great that you want to use UDP datagrams to ping stuff, but have you considered that the hosts you ping need to have inetd running and the echo service enabled in inetd.conf?
09:43:42 <kerneldove> another idea is i could use the ssh connection to each server that my tool will initiate, send a message over the ssh connection and time how long it takes to get output?
09:43:56 <Remilia> TCP is slow
09:44:25 <Remilia> though if your host listens on a given port, you could TCP connect and time it
09:45:05 <Remilia> it'll still extremely unreliable for timing, of course
09:45:08 <Remilia> be*
09:47:52 <kerneldove> i wonder if `ping` supports libxo so i could take json output
09:49:20 <kerneldove> doesn't look like it from man page
09:49:22 <kerneldove> dang
09:49:39 <kerneldove> so i gotta parse the output for "time=x"
09:49:43 <kerneldove> ugh
09:54:15 <Remilia> implement your own ping tool and SUID it
09:54:49 <kerneldove> but then i just need to parse its output so what's the difference from parsing output of system ping bin?
09:55:11 <kerneldove> make it output in json so i can parse its output easier?
09:55:20 <Remilia> yours might give you more options and produce JSON or whatever you prefer
09:55:44 <kerneldove> ya hm i might need to do that
09:55:45 <Remilia> for example it could take a list of hosts
10:13:27 <kerneldove> ok ty i'll think it over. maybe i can get away with scrapping ping, and just make reachability based on if it can establish an ssh connection and if that later disconnects and fails to reconnect
17:42:56 <kerneldove> is there any way to allow unprivileged user accounts to send raw sockets so they can ping without setuid root? looks like jail has that but not base system?
17:47:14 <ivy> jails do not support that, the allow raw sockets option for jails only allows it for root
17:47:39 <kerneldove> ahh ok, dang
17:48:08 <maccampus> Are BSD Apps cross platform ?
17:50:10 <ivy> maccampus: what do you mean by "BSD Apps"?
17:50:57 <maccampus> things you can open & run & do things BSD doesn't do by its own ?
17:51:28 <maccampus> Firefox
17:51:34 <ivy> so you mean third-party applications like vim, or KDE?  those generally also run on other platforms, yes
17:51:55 <ivy> it would be quite odd if Firefox only ran on FreeBSD
17:52:42 <Llampec> most third party programmes are built against POSIX, not Linux or FreeBSD; POSIX is the common standard to which both operating systems adhere, meaning programmes written to it can compile with minimal, nowadays automatically-done, modifications
17:52:47 <maccampus> yes but obvious Linux Firefox will not work, but will FreeBSD Firefox work on NetBSD ?
17:52:52 <Llampec> nope
17:52:55 <TommyC> no
17:53:01 <Llampec> have to build it separately for each of the BSDs
17:53:42 <maccampus> And why is that, on linux it works on multiple distro's
17:54:03 <ivy> FreeBSD and NetBSD are not "distros", they are completely separate operating systems
17:54:38 <ivy> the only connection is that they are both descended from 4.4BSD, which was released in 1992. a lot has changed in 30 years
17:55:38 <maccampus> Same about linux they all desend from the thing that Swidish guy made, and a lot has changed the last 20 years too
17:56:18 <ivy> maccampus: Linux distros don't "descent" from the Linux kernel, they *are* Linux.  they all use the same kernel.
17:56:23 <batdog> different linux distros all share the same kernel ABI, and generally all include GNU libc. BSDs each have their own kernel and libc.
17:57:22 <maccampus> So why did you never decide to use the same Kernel ?
17:58:13 <ivy> what would be the point?
17:58:51 <ivy> a lot of source code is shared between the various BSD forks, but binary compatibility would be a huge amount of effort for very little gain
18:01:28 <maccampus> Because then one could switch distro when one's preferences and needs changed, want to be mainline, want to be secure, want to be open (nah no point in that changing platform will brake applications anyway)
18:02:24 <divlamir> A bit like asking why an x86 binary won't run on ARM, you need the binary compiled for your platform
18:03:00 <maccampus> thats why i said nah on the OpenBSD see above
18:03:54 <ivy> again, the BSD forks are not "distros", they are completely separate operating systems
18:03:56 <maccampus> But thee is that OS that manages just that
18:04:17 <maccampus> They call is UB2, UB & FAT
18:04:40 <TommyC> A third party application built on one Linux distribution isn't guaranteed to work on another.
18:05:18 <maccampus> then i was lucky so far
18:05:25 <ivy> you may as well why why FreeBSD doesn't have binary compatibility with Solaris so you can switfch OS as your preferences change
18:05:39 <ivy> sure, in theory it would be possible to implement that, but it's a huge amount of work for very little benefit
18:05:41 <maccampus> it instaled on 3 distro's and worked
18:06:03 <TommyC> Great, whatever "it" is.
18:06:15 <maccampus> Firefox
18:07:03 <TommyC> Ubuntu, Fedora and even RHEL all build firefox differently. If you happened to copy the firefox binary from Ubuntu and got it working on RHEL, that is amazing indeed.
18:08:21 <Llampec> good god
18:08:47 <Llampec> how old are you, maccampus ? and how long have you been involved in computers at this level?
18:14:59 <Remilia> TommyC: well, RPMs generally work across RH-derived distros just as if it's .deb it will *probably* work on Debian-derived
18:15:09 <Remilia> you can't just copy the Firefox binary after all
18:15:34 <divlamir> Copying binaries between systems, I've done it too on my first 8-bit pc :)
18:16:26 <Remilia> divlamir: I think binaries would generally work between CP/M, MP/M, and MSX-DOS, though for the latter you'd need to do some patching iirc
18:17:28 <Llampec> the OS was very little, in those days
18:17:34 <Llampec> UNIX operating systems are a lot more
18:17:39 <Remilia> oh but Turbo Pascal 3.0 for CP/M, as an example, would fail to give you command line arguments if you compile on MSX-DOS
18:18:06 <Remilia> there was Pascal/TURBO+ which was a clone of TP3 I think
18:18:50 <Remilia> Llampec: yeah it's like trying to copy an OS/2 binary to Windows and expecting it to work
18:19:03 <Remilia> (note: a Windows 3.x binary will run on OS/2 Warp 3.0)
18:19:07 <TommyC> Remilia: I'm aware.
18:20:25 <TommyC> Remilia: Truth is I don't believe that maccampus got a binary copied from <insert very different distro A> to <insert very different distro B> and got it working unless the copied-from distro used the Mozilla-provided static firefox binary.
18:20:29 <Remilia> actually what if you compile Firefox as an entirely static binary? that would theoretically work on every Linux distro as long as syscalls are fine
18:21:55 <divlamir> lol, that would be a fat one :)
18:29:06 <ivy> Remilia: or compile it normally but ship the shared libraries with the binary
18:29:39 <Remilia> ivy: I guess if you install it in something like /opt
18:29:46 <Remilia> it would be easy to move around
18:29:46 <Llampec> my brain is full of cursed nonsense
18:30:15 <Llampec> provided the appropriate namespace
18:30:28 <Llampec> there could be the remote psosibility of conflicts
18:36:25 <tuaris> Is it possible to convert a FreeBSD installation from BIOS to UEFI?  The system supports both.
18:38:05 <Llampec> I can see no reason it would not be.
18:38:37 <tuaris> This is what gpart show is: https://bin.morante.net/?c4b5668c2ae52def#3EakJoHWPmLKarjLUKwuEdSjngN8YUHLMgp9gLccmYqJ
18:39:56 <tuaris> I'd have to add an efi partition, wouldn't I?
18:51:41 <Remilia> tuaris: if you are already using GPT this is somewhat easy, even if you do not have an EFI partition
18:53:11 <Remilia> tuaris: you have a 512K partition of type freebsd-boot; delete that and create a 512K EFI partition instead, the loader will fit
18:53:52 <Remilia> tuaris: https://pastee.dev/p/LH0o4rgS from my scratchpad
18:54:17 <Remilia> double check indices, device names, etc.
18:54:21 <ivy> Remilia: are you sure?  the 15.0 amd64 EFI loader is 647KB
18:54:26 <Remilia> oh
18:55:15 <Remilia> I guess things changed since 13
18:55:33 <Remilia> can't cheat any more
18:55:35 <ivy> i would suggest reducing the size of the swap partition to create an EFI partition
18:55:58 <ivy> and delete the freebsd-boot partition at the same time
18:56:11 <tuaris> I can expand the volume.  It's a VM.
18:56:43 <ivy> if you can expand the volume, just add another 256MB or something and create an EFI partition there, that's probably the easiest way
18:57:01 <tuaris> Oh, it doesn't have to be at the start?
18:57:16 <ivy> it does not, it only needs to have the 'efi' partition type and the firmware will find it
18:57:24 <tuaris> oo, interesting
18:59:34 <ivy> well... the quality of EFI firmwares does vary and i could imagine a firmware that requires the partition to be at the start of the disk
18:59:45 <ivy> but it *shouldn't* require that
19:00:18 <tuaris> EFI needs to be formated as FAT, correct?
19:00:39 <ivy> yes, use newfs_msdos(8)
19:01:16 <Remilia> if it's a VM you probably have that open source EFI thing which definitely does not care about where the partition is
19:01:28 <ivy> EDK-II, yeah
19:01:47 <tuaris> Then I just mounnt it and "cp /boot/loader.efi /mnt/efi/efi/freebsd/loader.efi "
19:01:56 <tuaris> or something like that
19:02:16 <Remilia> you'd need to set EFI boot variables for that to work
19:02:16 <tuaris> This should be a fun experiment
19:02:18 <ivy> tuaris: i recommend placing the loader in \EFI\BOOT\BOOTX64.EFI, this is the most compatible path
19:02:24 <Remilia> ^ this
19:02:31 <ivy> tuaris: so if it's mounted on /mnt/efi, then /mnt/efi/efi/boot/bootx64.efi
19:03:10 <tuaris> cool, let me do a backup of my VM, then I'll give this a try.
19:04:04 <Remilia> what annoys me is that the UEFI firmware for apu4d4 is borked so I am stuck with gptzfsboot
19:04:49 <Remilia> like, it boots and works but the watchdog timer triggers every hour :D
19:05:07 <ivy> Remilia: that sounds weird and annoying
19:05:21 <ivy> can you not disable the watchdog?
19:05:32 <Remilia> ivy: it's in the firmware and it just hard resets the system
19:05:39 <Remilia> known issue
19:05:39 <ivy> hm
19:05:48 <ivy> does it need a driver?  or is it just a firmware bug?
19:06:10 <Remilia> I'd tell you more but I last poked it in late 2019
19:06:37 <Remilia> and I cannot poke it now because there's 2000+ km between me and the router, and there is no one who can console into it to fix
19:08:32 <Remilia> ivy: apparently it does need a driver and you can disable it at firmware compile time now...
19:41:43 <rhaberkorn> I think NetBSD will greatly benefit from all SciTECO power users that are now considering switching to NetBSD.
19:42:07 <rhaberkorn> Oops, wrong channel. Sorry.
19:43:12 <flatdog> shit happens
19:48:41 <tuaris> Thought about it and decided that I'd probably want to move the swap to the end in case I ever need to grow my ZFS partition.  So this is what I ended up with: https://bin.morante.net/?ac7ac36869c9eb70#C7CKvyUEXzXoiY2LKvCpwyLiyRZtGcaei9uBFQNu97JC
19:49:15 <tuaris> it wasts about 2GB, but that's not a big deal
19:54:52 <tuaris> Okay, the loader is in place: https://bin.morante.net/?ef9ece2594158db7#9WuBtKy1VnZTD514f79Vvu2wQquymQ3x8YHmq73e3Chr
19:55:21 <tuaris> What do I need to do for this? "set EFI boot variables for that to work"
19:55:31 <ivy> nothing
19:56:04 <ivy> remilia's comment about EFI vars was if you did not use \EFI\BOOT\BOOTX64.EFI as the loader path
19:56:11 <ivy> but since you did, it should it detected automatically
19:56:40 <tuaris> ah okay.  So I'll just reconfigure the vm to boot with UEFI and see if it works.
19:56:44 <tuaris> lets see...
20:02:13 <tuaris> wow, it booted
20:02:37 <tuaris> I'll post some links to before/after vids
20:03:11 <ivy> btw, your pastebin site's TLS certificate is not trusted by Firefox
20:03:27 <tuaris> yeah I know :)
20:09:05 <tuaris> You know what's interesting... I forgot to update the swap entry in fstab.  The system didn't complain at all and swapinfo says the device is activated
20:20:21 <flatdog> what about swap size?
20:29:00 <tuaris> It was showing something small, but usage was 0, so I wonder if it was going to just write to the EFI partition.  I turned off swap and fixed it asap
20:34:12 <flatdog> writing to EFI can be bad news (I hope it didn't). Next boot will tell.
20:34:25 <tuaris> it didn't.  It booted up fine
20:35:07 <tuaris> The before and after videos: https://download.morante.net/unibia/screenshots/freebsd/VM-FreeBSD-BIOS-Boot.mkv and https://download.morante.net/unibia/screenshots/freebsd/VM-FreeBSD-UEFI-Boot.mkv
20:36:08 <flatdog> great. Apologies for interrupting a constructive conversation.
20:37:14 <Ltning> Oops, -current pkg repos are currently almost empty.. :D
20:38:01 <ivy> Ltning: they did a special build for re@ containing only the packages required to build the snapshots, the next build will include all packages again
20:39:16 <Ltning> Yea I almost did pkg upgrade -y here. Would have been fun. But anything to get snapshots and release building :D
23:42:26 <topcat001> In editline I can use `bind -v` to set vi mode. Is there a way to display a mode indicator prompt?