From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 22 16:33:28 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEB4416A4CE for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:33:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from trans-warp.net (hyperion.trans-warp.net [216.37.208.37]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0362A43D46 for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:33:27 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bsilver@chrononomicon.com) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unverified [65.193.73.208]) by trans-warp.net (SurgeMail 2.2g3) with ESMTP id 748570 for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:33:30 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619.2) In-Reply-To: <802735952.20050322164924@wanadoo.fr> References: <423E116D.50805@usmstudent.com> <423EEE60.2050205@dial.pipex.com> <18510151385.20050321193911@wanadoo.fr> <1975192207.20050322041925@wanadoo.fr> <1688160068.20050322102514@wanadoo.fr> <1404322406.20050322112613@wanadoo.fr> <802735952.20050322164924@wanadoo.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Bart Silverstrim Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:33:18 -0500 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619.2) X-Server: High Performance Mail Server - http://surgemail.com X-Authenticated-User: bsilver@chrononomicon.com X-DNS-Paranoid: DNS ptr lookup of (65.193.73.208) failed Subject: Re: Anthony's drive issues.Re: ssh password delay X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:33:28 -0000 On Mar 22, 2005, at 10:49 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote: > Bart Silverstrim writes: > >> And you ran into a snag that you can't work through. > > Yes, at least not with the time I have available. Classic tune. I play it a lot too. >> Most people if they were doing this on a lark would either replace the >> hardware or try a different distro. > > There's only one "distro" of FreeBSD. Yup, that's why I was referring to Linux with the 'distro thing. Or you can try NetBSD. It came on a CD with this month's Linux Format magazine. Supposed to be compatible with everything short of a toaster. > Replacing the hardware defeats > the purpose of making good use of existing hardware that still runs > perfectly. Well, if it's spewing errors, are you sure that it's running perfectly? :-) Doesn't sound it! I'd still suspect that there's a problem with the hardware at some level and NT just didn't report it to you. But that's just a WAG. That's also why I suggested Linux. See if a version of Linux reports errors as well. Two to one saying something is wrong with the hardware, you might want to look at the hardware. If it's just FreeBSD, then avoid FreeBSD on that hardware. >> When I ran into that error before, I remember seeing another person >> post to a list saying that NT doesn't report the reset error. Linux >> did. Maybe this is what you're running into? > > Well, if NT didn't report the error, and I never lost the data, how do > I > get FreeBSD to stop reporting the error? Obvious answer is grep and commenting the fields out of the source code :-) Obvious concern is that it is a warning that something's wrong (or not set up correctly) and it may fail or cause problems down the road. >> And the design of the OS may be 20 years old, but the OS most people >> are using isn't. > > So? So, you're saying it's 20 years old. I said it's based on a 20 year old *design* that still works very well, but if the OS were 20 years old, it wouldn't run on anything being released today hardware-wise. Thus the OS isn't 20 years old. Hell, cars are *basically* the same as they first were. But I don't think you can swap parts from a model T into an 04' vette and expect it to keep running properly. Unless maybe the seat can be retrofitted. >> Is the hardware on the compatibility list? What is it? > > An AIC7880 SCSI controller. Well, is there a way to dump the code from that controller and compare it to another one that is known not to be tampered with by the OEM? Anyone out there on the list have one they can do this to? > Anything can happen with bad hardware. That doesn't mean that every > error you see is bad hardware. No, but you eliminate the obvious and the easiest-to-fix parts first. Digging through source code and going through debug cycles for legacy hardware isn't exactly time well spent by most sane opinions, when the fix could be a ten minute swap of a drive or something like that. > When the processor failed on my old server, I got segment violations in > all sorts of programs. Does this mean that if I get a segment > violation > on the new server, I should replace all the hardware--since I've seen > segment violations before when a a processor fails? Actually, I think most troubleshooters would get another processor first (or check that cooling was adequate to the CPU and memory) if that was what fixed it last time. Next would be memory. So right off the bat you have fans to check, processor, and memory. None of which are the fault of the OS, all very likely culprits. >> ... you simply refuse to believe the possibility that something could >> have been wrong but NT didn't *TELL* you about it, and then want to >> launch into an attack on the OS in a list where people are running >> FreeBSD quite happily on a wide range of hardware. > > If no data corruption occurred, there was nothing wrong. If NT doesn't > have to tell me about it, neither does FreeBSD. That's an interesting philosophy. I already posted about Linux messaging that the controller was in need of constant resets. The drive was *FAILING*. NT didn't say anything. If you like sticking your head in a hole then go ahead and comment out the code that give the error and all will be well. Most UNIX people like having diagnostic errors in the logs to troubleshoot things. I didn't lose data when that had happened to me. But the failure was *coming*. I had oddball pauses in the OS, I had clicking noises occasionally happening as the drive reset...but didn't lose data. So go ahead and press your luck. Your hardware, your choice. Maybe it's a nothing error, like the ones I see when a bridged set of network cards on the network are making the ARP daemon go nuts on one of the servers with switched from to error messages. > But nobody actually knows what is wrong. Nobody has any clue. That's > the problem. Can you contact whoever the developer is that's in charge of SCSI work? Ask the right person and I bet they could help. That's about as obvious as "I found it in the last place I looked!" :-) > Lots of people are willing to wildly speculate on this or > that hardware problem in order to create the impression that they know > what they are talking about, but careful scrutiny of what they say > reveals that they are totally ignorant of the real problem. *sigh* they were offering assistance in the form of "when I had a similar problem, I tried X, and it worked...try X." You tell them they're idiots. Now, I can't imagine WHY people would get a bad impression of you. This is a free list for trying to help people. To "try to create the impression they know what they're talking about", they won't achieve much on a mailing list for other geeks and admins. That's also why most of them have no trouble telling you that you've treated people like crap and can shove that server where the sun doesn't shine if you have so little respect for their suggestions, since they aren't paid to get insulted or thanked on this list. Whether you get your stuff to work isn't their problem. They were just offering free advice. Want paid support? Doesn't Walnut Creek still do that? There's other consulting firms too who I'm sure would work with you on it once the contract is inked. Then you have every right to raise a stink. > They have > no idea but cannot bring themselves to say so. And their idea of > troubleshooting is to replace hardware forever because they don't know > what the software is doing. Maybe it's a legacy from supporting Windows, or it's the fact that sometimes it's just *faster* to replace an ill-supported video card with one that works rather than work on a new driver. I mean, *duh*. >> The stories just don't jive. You're implying it doesn't work and is >> crap because all your hardware isn't working with it. This list is >> populated by people that have worked out problems and configuration >> errors and are running it without trouble. > > On the same hardware? Evidently not. It's legacy hardware you're using! :-) >> Something just intuitively tells me that at this point you're more >> concerned with pissing people off to make a point. > > No, although I do get tired of talking to people who sound like they're > still in grade school. I'm accustomed to working with professionals, > and professionals address the problem, they don't shoot the messenger. Really? I'd didn't get that impression after a few ad hominem attacks on people in the list. Although I'm having fun with the occasional barb being tossed just because it appears that you have insulted so many on this list that you're rapidly losing hope of getting anyone to help you if for no other reason than you seem unwilling to work with their suggestions in the first place and attack people for being idiots when you aren't getting them to dive right in with the debugger for an eight-year-old HP system. The grade school approach would have been to tell you to just go away and take your server with you right off the bad. To the contrary, Ted has continued to offer suggestions despite your attacks, and other people have just started ignoring you, while a couple are sitting back and enjoying whatever fallout comes from your quandary since they have better things to devote time to than getting insulted. >> Probably the best thing for you to try is Linux Knoppix on your >> server, >> see if it boots and sees errors. > > I suppose I may be forced to try something else; it doesn't look like > I'm ever going to get any help with FreeBSD. Haven't you ever used Knoppix? It's liveboot. it *doesn't install* to your system. Just runs straight from CD. That's the point. Easy way to try things, try to recover from problems, test for problems, trial Linux, etc...? You're telling me you've never heard of it before? > The problem is, most open-source communities are populated by the same > sort of adolescent mentalities; all they want to do is defend their > beloved favorite hardware and software and attack anyone who disagrees > with them. Quite the leap. You're insinuating everyone is a doodyhead on the list while at the same time saying that they just want to defend their OS because you can't convince the list users to dive in with debugger and screwdriver in hand to fix the problem you're having specific to your machine, a machine that you said yourself would be difficult to get another of the same configuration for testing. If it's difficult to get it for testing, how in hell do you expect the developers to reproduce the problem? Ship them your server? Your current approach seems to be tell them their nitwits then ask for help...how ridiculous is that approach? The only "attacks" I saw on you were retaliation for your own inflammatory comments. I don't recall EVER seeing someone on this list start flaming on someone without that someone baiting others into it. I've seen rude, I've seen curt, but not flames. That tells me that when flames are billowing the other person brought their own gasoline to the party. As far as the "open-source communities" are concerned, they're not doing it for a specific person. Different people have their own agendas, but make no mistake...they do this because they want to work with the software. They're not out to make a buck, they're not out to please the desktop users who insist on clicking on porn popups and viruses in email. They really don't care if you want to use it or not. They didn't force you to use it! You came to the OS yourself. If you don't like it, switch to something else...LIS, try the Knoppix CD to see if the error is there too! > It's all one big weekend hobby to them, or one sacred > religion, or both--but it's certainly not professional IT. They're not driven by profit. Deal with it! And if you want to maintain that proprietary is the way to go because they aren't leaping in to fix a bug on an 8 year old computer you can't find a duplicate of for testing *yourself*, then that's fine with them. Maybe you should tell Google or Yahoo that their OS is unsuitable for professional production environments. Meanwhile I came back monday to a locked up Win2k laptop. Hmm... Did you even look at the link/google searches I sent previously for people to ponder over with some critical thinking, the Shatter attack and Why I Hate MS pages? > That's why > open-source is never likely to replace proprietary software ... nobody > in the open-source community is willing to grow up. You're entitled to your opinion. If it's worth getting this worked up over, try emailing the dev team and ask them nicely to look at it with you. Stomping your feet and sulking while screaming about everyone ELSE being childish isn't going to get you very far.