From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 12 16:37:18 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04F5637B407 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:37:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.gmx.net (imap.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 19ED543FCB for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:37:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from snowfall@gmx.co.uk) Received: (qmail 22375 invoked by uid 65534); 12 Aug 2003 23:37:11 -0000 Received: from tnt1-148.quicksilver.net.nz (EHLO computer.gmx.co.uk) (202.89.142.148) by mail.gmx.net (mp002) with SMTP; 13 Aug 2003 01:37:11 +0200 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030813034319.022db700@pop.qsi.net.nz> X-Sender: 6803933@213.165.64.20 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 09:48:12 +1200 To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org From: Craig Carey Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" cc: FreeBSD Security Officer Subject: "security" prevents destruction of hard disks X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 23:37:18 -0000 The sysinstall installer is able to delete most of a hard disk. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=i386/29375 [1 Aug 2001] "the disk editor used by /stand/sysinstall gets confused by slices that are not labelled in order and writes the partition table incorrectly." http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=bin/47384 [22 Jan 2003] "Machine has two disks, ad0 (existing 5.0 system) and da0 (scratch disk). Selecting da0 as the target for 'partition' and then following that by the sequence 'label/distribution/commit' results in a wiped ad0." For bug i386/29375 [disordered primary partitions], the bug is outside of the "sysinstall" directory. The i386/29375 bug report does not mention data loss but I guess that is the bug that got a big fraction of one of my hard disks a few years ago. Now reasonably priced IDE hard disk is about 160GB in size. FreeBSD can delete the data on that. The OECD 1980 principles of the 'Guidelines on the Protection of Privacy and Transborder Flows of Personal Data' (Paris, 1980) rule out the loss of personal information in computers. Here is that principle quoted: >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- >| Security Safeguards Principle >| >| 5. Personal data should be protected by reasonable security safeguards >| against such risks as loss or unauthorised access, destruction, use, >| modification or disclosure of data. >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ... >A copy of the OECD Guidelines is here: > >http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/DV/OECDPs.html >http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/DV/PaperOECD.html > (pages by Mr R. Clarke, Canberra) FreeBSD seems to be have a mailing list FreeBSD Security Advisories that is about attacks. The postmaster's (Mr Bresler's) attacks on the public got me unsubscribed in Aug 2002. I never rejoined. It was a list that was always indifferent to data loss. Has FreeBSD embraced a defective unacceptable definition of the idea of "security" ?. These attacks are basically undocumented and there are basically no numbers available. Because of such an onslaught of attacks against FreeBSD, seemingly all *@freebsd.org addresses were having some of their e-mail secretly black=-hole deleted in March and April 2002 but perhaps for senders having no IP number for a very-wrongly LHS truncated hostname. There seemed to be no way to get reasoning from the postmaster (Jon Bresler). The expected bounce messages did not exist. It was all justified as being due to security. It is probably hitting down those innocent ISP in accordance with the hopes of the FreeBSD 'security' officers. Security of computers (at least in Europe) also embraces this idea >Openness Principle > >6. There should be a general policy of openness about developments, > practices and policies with respect to personal data. Means should > be readily available of establishing the existence and nature of > personal data, and the main purposes of their use, as well as the > identity and usual residence of the data controller. Is this correct: legal quality top filesystem programmers must be careful to avoid using the word "security". H Stopping probs from users and i-nets from influencing or knowing. Big government agencies in a rush and hoping for a way to skip checking FreeBSD, would want to look at the version rewrite of security ideals of protecting the common person from the whole gamut of problems that computers present, with some of the hardest to correct being wrong decisions of security officials. C Carey Hitech controversially notes that the GPL allows high charges and withholding for their Gcc-based C compiler: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-08/msg00731.html 12 Aug 2003 A FreeBSD project that aims to get the BSD code redesigned: http://www.dragonflybsd.org/ From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 12 20:43:15 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08E6B37B401; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 20:43:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (adsl-64-169-107-97.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [64.169.107.97]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AC3943F75; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 20:43:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from rot13.obsecurity.org (rot13.obsecurity.org [10.0.0.5]) by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9F9366B04; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 20:43:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rot13.obsecurity.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C53B6788; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 20:43:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 20:43:13 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway To: Craig Carey Message-ID: <20030813034313.GA51348@rot13.obsecurity.org> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030813034319.022db700@pop.qsi.net.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="UlVJffcvxoiEqYs2" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030813034319.022db700@pop.qsi.net.nz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org cc: FreeBSD Security Officer Subject: Re: "security" prevents destruction of hard disks X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 03:43:15 -0000 --UlVJffcvxoiEqYs2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 09:48:12AM +1200, Craig Carey wrote: >=20 >=20 > The sysinstall installer is able to delete most of a hard disk. THE BLACK HELICOPTERS ARE HOVERING OUTSIDE YOUR WINDOWS!!! Kris --UlVJffcvxoiEqYs2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE/ObPRWry0BWjoQKURAijRAJ9x5EgaQYh0OPwlR0rzWgaJkusjxACfdJJp XxoIWTUty/ruB/pH49bRl8o= =RUi1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --UlVJffcvxoiEqYs2-- From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 12 22:25:09 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88E9937B401; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 22:25:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C08643F85; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 22:25:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7D5OuCD032691; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 07:25:01 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk) To: Kris Kennaway From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 12 Aug 2003 20:43:13 PDT." <20030813034313.GA51348@rot13.obsecurity.org> Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 07:24:56 +0200 Message-ID: <32690.1060752296@critter.freebsd.dk> cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org cc: FreeBSD Security Officer Subject: Re: "security" prevents destruction of hard disks X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 05:25:09 -0000 In message <20030813034313.GA51348@rot13.obsecurity.org>, Kris Kennaway writes: > >--UlVJffcvxoiEqYs2 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >Content-Disposition: inline >Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > >On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 09:48:12AM +1200, Craig Carey wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >> The sysinstall installer is able to delete most of a hard disk. > >THE BLACK HELICOPTERS ARE HOVERING OUTSIDE YOUR WINDOWS!!! He's actually British, I belive the thing over there is that they put things in the water or beer. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 14 12:19:00 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3645D37B401 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 12:19:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail2.dbitech.ca (radius.wavefire.com [64.141.13.252]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 70BB043FBD for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 12:18:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from darcy@wavefire.com) Received: (qmail 24286 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2003 19:45:31 -0000 Received: from dbitech.wavefire.com (HELO dbitech) (darcy@64.141.15.253) by radius.wavefire.com with SMTP; 14 Aug 2003 19:45:31 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Darcy Buskermolen Organization: Wavefire Technologies Corp. To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 12:18:57 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200308140927.34659.darcy@wavefire.com> Subject: OpenGFS or other multisystem R/W filesystems X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 19:19:00 -0000 Has there been any work done porting this (or any other simular filesyste= m) to=20 FreeBSD accomplished, I've scanned the archives, and I see that in 2001 = that=20 there was work done to port Sistina's GFS code, but it looks like they ha= ve=20 dropped support for it.=20 --=20 Darcy Buskermolen Wavefire Technologies Corp. ph: 250.717.0200 fx: 250.763.1759 http://www.wavefire.com From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 14 12:22:14 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD49437B401 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 12:22:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail2.dbitech.ca (radius.wavefire.com [64.141.13.252]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4702643FDD for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 12:22:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from darcy@wavefire.com) Received: (qmail 24346 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2003 19:48:46 -0000 Received: from dbitech.wavefire.com (HELO dbitech) (darcy@64.141.15.253) by radius.wavefire.com with SMTP; 14 Aug 2003 19:48:46 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Darcy Buskermolen Organization: Wavefire Technologies Corp. To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 12:22:12 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200308141222.12925.darcy@wavefire.com> Subject: raidframe in -CURRENT X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 19:22:15 -0000 Is there any work being done in -CURRENT to attempt to correct the panics= when=20 using raidframe? --=20 Darcy Buskermolen Wavefire Technologies Corp. ph: 250.717.0200 fx: 250.763.1759 http://www.wavefire.com From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 15 02:01:34 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE05737B401; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 02:01:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from comp.chem.msu.su (comp-ext.chem.msu.su [158.250.32.157]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F23B43F3F; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 02:01:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from yar@comp.chem.msu.su) Received: from comp.chem.msu.su (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by comp.chem.msu.su (8.12.3p2/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h7F91UhV002231; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 13:01:30 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from yar@comp.chem.msu.su) Received: (from yar@localhost) by comp.chem.msu.su (8.12.3p2/8.12.3/Submit) id h7F91Up3002230; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 13:01:30 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from yar) Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 13:01:29 +0400 From: Yar Tikhiy To: fs@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20030815090129.GA1035@comp.chem.msu.su> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i Subject: Mount point mode after mount_mfs(8) X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 09:01:35 -0000 Hi folks, As some of you could have noticed, mount_mfs(8) in STABLE will leave the mount point mode 1777, which is not always desired. Doing chmod(1) on it just after mount_mfs(8) isn't elegant due to a race. There is a PR open on the issue -- bin/54897. I've got a patch (see below) that adds a new option to mount_mfs(8), -P mode, to specify the initial mode for the mount point (i.e., for the root directory of the MFS created.) On the one hand, this patch is simple, so it would be rather safe to commit it to STABLE. On the other hand, I feel it shouldn't be committed if the originator of the said PR and yours truly are the only people who need the functionality in question, particularly granted that 4-STABLE is gradually reaching its end of life. Does anybody else think this feature is really needed? -- Yar Index: mkfs.c =================================================================== RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sbin/newfs/mkfs.c,v retrieving revision 1.29.2.7 diff -u -r1.29.2.7 mkfs.c --- mkfs.c 12 Aug 2003 13:19:17 -0000 1.29.2.7 +++ mkfs.c 12 Aug 2003 13:58:51 -0000 @@ -91,6 +91,7 @@ * variables set up by front end. */ extern int mfs; /* run as the memory based filesystem */ +extern mode_t mfs_mode; /* permission bits for mfs root */ extern char *mfs_mtpt; /* mount point for mfs */ extern struct stat mfs_mtstat; /* stat prior to mount */ extern int Nflag; /* run mkfs without writing file system */ @@ -1009,7 +1010,7 @@ * create the root directory */ if (mfs) - node.di_mode = IFDIR | 01777; + node.di_mode = IFDIR | mfs_mode; else node.di_mode = IFDIR | UMASK; node.di_nlink = PREDEFDIR; Index: newfs.8 =================================================================== RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sbin/newfs/newfs.8,v retrieving revision 1.26.2.15 diff -u -r1.26.2.15 newfs.8 --- newfs.8 13 May 2003 12:16:08 -0000 1.26.2.15 +++ newfs.8 12 Aug 2003 13:58:51 -0000 @@ -69,6 +69,7 @@ .Nm mount_mfs .Op Fl NU .Op Fl F Ar file +.Op Fl P Ar mode .Op Fl T Ar disktype .Op Fl a Ar maxcontig .Op Fl b Ar block-size @@ -149,6 +150,23 @@ format filesystem. This options is primarily used to build root filesystems that can be understood by older boot ROMs. +.It Fl P Ar mode +Set the file permissions on the root directory of +the file system created by +.Nm mount_mfs +to the specified +.Ar mode . +The +.Ar mode +argument can be in any of the formats recognized by +.Xr chmod 1 . +If a symbolic mode is specified, +the operation characters +.Dq + +and +.Dq - +are interpreted relative to the default mode of +.Dq a=rwxt . .It Fl T Use information for the specified disk from .Pa /etc/disktab Index: newfs.c =================================================================== RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sbin/newfs/newfs.c,v retrieving revision 1.30.2.9 diff -u -r1.30.2.9 newfs.c --- newfs.c 13 May 2003 12:03:55 -0000 1.30.2.9 +++ newfs.c 12 Aug 2003 13:58:51 -0000 @@ -166,6 +166,7 @@ #define NSECTORS 4096 /* number of sectors */ int mfs; /* run as the memory based filesystem */ +mode_t mfs_mode = 01777; /* permission bits for mfs root */ char *mfs_mtpt; /* mount point for mfs */ struct stat mfs_mtstat; /* stat prior to mount */ int Nflag; /* run without writing file system */ @@ -231,6 +232,7 @@ struct statfs *mp; int fsi, fso, len, n, vflag; char *cp, *s1, *s2, *special, *opstring; + void *set; #ifdef MFS struct vfsconf vfc; int error; @@ -249,7 +251,7 @@ } opstring = mfs ? - "NF:T:Ua:b:c:d:e:f:g:h:i:m:o:s:v" : + "NF:P:T:Ua:b:c:d:e:f:g:h:i:m:o:s:v" : "NOS:T:Ua:b:c:d:e:f:g:h:i:k:l:m:n:o:p:r:s:t:u:vx:"; while ((ch = getopt(argc, argv, opstring)) != -1) switch (ch) { @@ -271,6 +273,12 @@ case 'F': filename = optarg; break; + case 'P': + if ((set = setmode(optarg)) == NULL) + fatal("%s: bad file mode", optarg); + mfs_mode = getmode(set, mfs_mode); + free(set); + break; case 'U': Uflag = 1; break; @@ -758,6 +766,8 @@ fprintf(stderr, "\t-N do not create file system, just print out parameters\n"); fprintf(stderr, "\t-O create a 4.3BSD format filesystem\n"); + if (mfs) + fprintf(stderr, "\t-P permissions for the root directory\n"); fprintf(stderr, "\t-S sector size\n"); #ifdef COMPAT fprintf(stderr, "\t-T disktype\n"); From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 15 09:19:49 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2E7A37B401 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 09:19:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail2.dbitech.ca (radius.wavefire.com [64.141.13.252]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A724643F3F for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 09:19:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from darcy@wavefire.com) Received: (qmail 5461 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2003 16:46:31 -0000 Received: from dbitech.wavefire.com (HELO dbitech) (darcy@64.141.15.253) by radius.wavefire.com with SMTP; 15 Aug 2003 16:46:31 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Darcy Buskermolen Organization: Wavefire Technologies Corp. To: "Andrew P. Lentvorski, Jr." Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 09:19:46 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200308150919.46072.darcy@wavefire.com> cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: raidframe in -CURRENT X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 16:19:50 -0000 On Friday 15 August 2003 03:07, Andrew P. Lentvorski, Jr. wrote: > I'm not going to speak for Scott Long, but I actually looked into doing > something about RAIDFrame. > > The problem is that GEOM provides a significant superset of the same > functionality as RAIDFrame. GEOM virtualizes different storage layers = in > much the same way as RAIDFrame did (but with more flexibility). > > The problem is that Poul-Henning Kamp hasn't gotten around to implement= ing > the RAID virtualized modules yet. > > Consequently, FreeBSD is currently in a state where the GEOM equivalent= to > RAIDFrame doesn't yet work, but doing the work to fix RAIDFrame is just= as > much work as doing it in GEOM. :( > > -a Scott, Poul-Henning, can either of you provide any insight as to when a v= iable=20 software RAID archetecure will be available in -CURRENT, I have tried vin= um,=20 however its' inability to handel hotspare has turned it into a non option= for=20 me at this time. --=20 Darcy Buskermolen Wavefire Technologies Corp. ph: 250.717.0200 fx: 250.763.1759 http://www.wavefire.com From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 15 20:20:08 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E00C37B404 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 20:20:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.mho.com (smtp.mho.net [64.58.4.6]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EDAD243FE0 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 20:20:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Received: (qmail 2436 invoked by uid 1002); 16 Aug 2003 03:20:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO freebsd.org) (64.58.1.252) by smtp.mho.net with SMTP; 16 Aug 2003 03:20:05 -0000 Message-ID: <3F3DA2EB.4030801@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 21:20:11 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Darcy Buskermolen References: <200308150919.46072.darcy@wavefire.com> In-Reply-To: <200308150919.46072.darcy@wavefire.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org cc: "Andrew P. Lentvorski, Jr." Subject: Re: raidframe in -CURRENT X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 03:20:08 -0000 Darcy Buskermolen wrote: > On Friday 15 August 2003 03:07, Andrew P. Lentvorski, Jr. wrote: > >>I'm not going to speak for Scott Long, but I actually looked into doing >>something about RAIDFrame. >> >>The problem is that GEOM provides a significant superset of the same >>functionality as RAIDFrame. GEOM virtualizes different storage layers in >>much the same way as RAIDFrame did (but with more flexibility). >> >>The problem is that Poul-Henning Kamp hasn't gotten around to implementing >>the RAID virtualized modules yet. >> >>Consequently, FreeBSD is currently in a state where the GEOM equivalent to >>RAIDFrame doesn't yet work, but doing the work to fix RAIDFrame is just as >>much work as doing it in GEOM. :( >> >>-a > > > Scott, Poul-Henning, can either of you provide any insight as to when a viable > software RAID archetecure will be available in -CURRENT, I have tried vinum, > however its' inability to handel hotspare has turned it into a non option for > me at this time. > > It's a matter of time, really. It will probably take about 500 hours to convert RAIDframe to GEOM and then make it robust. If I was doing it as a day job, that equates to 3 months. Trying to do work on it for an hour or two each evening really isn't possible. I share your concern about the state of software raid in FreeBSD. When I started RAIDFrame I was in a position to devote full-time hours to it. Now, I'm not, and I'm at a loss of what to do about it. Scott