From adam at akarsoft.com  Mon Nov  2 20:53:34 2009
From: adam at akarsoft.com (D. Adam Karim)
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 11:53:34 -0800
Subject: machdep.allowaperture
In-Reply-To: <20091031163655.GA10227@denali.my.domain>
References: <20091031163655.GA10227@denali.my.domain>
Message-ID: <e6f4d0dc0911021153s7fee84ebi99efe1fcf98c8ed2@mail.gmail.com>

http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=xf86&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=OpenBSD+Current&arch=i386&format=html

On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 8:36 AM, Michael <bsd4me at cableone.net> wrote:

> After reading (4)xf86, I checked my /etc/sysctl.conf file to see what I had
> for the setting.
> I expected a 1, but it was 2.
> I changed it to 1 and restarted X. Everything seems to be working/running
> ok.
> Is there something that may have required it to be set to 2?
>
> I have a nvidia riva tnt2 card, and I'm using the nv driver.
>
> Thanks.
>
> btw- really enjoying 4.6 and how nice the installer is :)
>
> --
> "Estimated amount of glucose used by an adult human brain each day,
> expressed in M&Ms: 250"
>
>
>  - Harper's Index
> _______________________________________________
> Openbsd-newbies mailing list
> Openbsd-newbies at sfobug.org
> http://mailman.theapt.org/listinfo/openbsd-newbies
>



-- 
D. Adam Karim
adam at akarsoft.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.theapt.org/pipermail/openbsd-newbies/attachments/20091102/9c6536b0/attachment.htm>

From davidianwalker at gmail.com  Mon Nov  9 00:05:15 2009
From: davidianwalker at gmail.com (David Walker)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 09:35:15 +1030
Subject: Kernel mode pppoe and IPnG.
Message-ID: <a59032090911081505w69480040g67c7b2856fb79df6@mail.gmail.com>

Bonjour.

I have been trying to get kernel mode pppoe to talk to my ISP.
I have successfully been using pppoe(4) for a while now in IPv4 only.
My ISP has gone dual stack to broadband customers and I would like to
get on the wagon.
We get a 64 which is presumably dynamically assigned (we have not been
informed of addresses).

I found this thread:
http://marc.info/?t=118003839500010&r=1&w=4
Particularly:
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=118012030815958&w=4

Having a dynamic address I cannot use the layout that spacehopper did.
It looks like he picked one of his 64 and assigned it to the pppoe interface.
My option is to use the other configuration (example):
!/sbin/route add -inet6 default fe80::20a:e4ff:fe03:87b4%pppoe0

This gels with what Stuart suggested:
"If you only get a /64 you probably need to look up the link-
local address on pppoe0 and use that as the default route ..."
However this doesn't mean much to me:
"... then put an address from within the /64 on another interface
to source packets from."
If I don't know my 64 how can I assign part of it to an interface and
to what interface?

Regardless, my ping6 attempts don't work.

Here is my hostname.pppoe0:
# cat hostname.pppoe0
pppoedev vr0
authproto chap
authname 'diw at ipv6.internode.on.net'
authkey 'password'
up
inet 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255
dest 0.0.0.1
#inet6 ::0 64
#dest ::1
!/sbin/route add -inet default -ifp pppoe0 0.0.0.1
!/sbin/route add -inet6 default fe80::20d:b9ff:fe17:c6f0%pppoe0

I have tried various combinations of uncommenting and changing stuff.
The IPv4 stuff works fine.
The best I can do as far as IPnG goes is to ping6 my loopback.
I have also tried changing my sysctl.conf although I get the idea that
I don't need to.

All help appreciated.

In case this is useful (probably not):
http://ipv6.internode.on.net/configuration/adsl-faq-guide/

Best wishes.

From stu at spacehopper.org  Mon Nov  9 16:23:04 2009
From: stu at spacehopper.org (Stuart Henderson)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 15:23:04 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Kernel mode pppoe and IPnG.
References: <a59032090911081505w69480040g67c7b2856fb79df6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <slrnhfgcuo.io8.stu@naiad.spacehopper.org>

According to your provider's documents, you need to fetch an
address via DHCPv6 PD, I don't think this is possible in base
OpenBSD.

You /may/ be able to do it with dhcp6c from the wide-dhcpv6
package. However from looking at the code, I think it might not
support pppoe yet, I suspect it will require some tweaks to
support interfaces other than ethernet and IEEE802.11.

You might like to try asking on misc@ as you're more likely to
find someone who has already done this there.


On 2009-11-08, David Walker <davidianwalker at gmail.com> wrote:
> Bonjour.
>
> I have been trying to get kernel mode pppoe to talk to my ISP.
> I have successfully been using pppoe(4) for a while now in IPv4 only.
> My ISP has gone dual stack to broadband customers and I would like to
> get on the wagon.
> We get a 64 which is presumably dynamically assigned (we have not been
> informed of addresses).
>
> I found this thread:
> http://marc.info/?t=118003839500010&r=1&w=4
> Particularly:
> http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=118012030815958&w=4
>
> Having a dynamic address I cannot use the layout that spacehopper did.
> It looks like he picked one of his 64 and assigned it to the pppoe interface.
> My option is to use the other configuration (example):
> !/sbin/route add -inet6 default fe80::20a:e4ff:fe03:87b4%pppoe0
>
> This gels with what Stuart suggested:
> "If you only get a /64 you probably need to look up the link-
> local address on pppoe0 and use that as the default route ..."
> However this doesn't mean much to me:
> "... then put an address from within the /64 on another interface
> to source packets from."
> If I don't know my 64 how can I assign part of it to an interface and
> to what interface?
>
> Regardless, my ping6 attempts don't work.
>
> Here is my hostname.pppoe0:
> # cat hostname.pppoe0
> pppoedev vr0
> authproto chap
> authname 'diw at ipv6.internode.on.net'
> authkey 'password'
> up
> inet 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255
> dest 0.0.0.1
> #inet6 ::0 64
> #dest ::1
> !/sbin/route add -inet default -ifp pppoe0 0.0.0.1
> !/sbin/route add -inet6 default fe80::20d:b9ff:fe17:c6f0%pppoe0
>
> I have tried various combinations of uncommenting and changing stuff.
> The IPv4 stuff works fine.
> The best I can do as far as IPnG goes is to ping6 my loopback.
> I have also tried changing my sysctl.conf although I get the idea that
> I don't need to.
>
> All help appreciated.
>
> In case this is useful (probably not):
> http://ipv6.internode.on.net/configuration/adsl-faq-guide/
>
> Best wishes.


From davidianwalker at gmail.com  Tue Nov 10 00:01:01 2009
From: davidianwalker at gmail.com (David Walker)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:31:01 +1030
Subject: Kernel mode pppoe and IPnG.
In-Reply-To: <slrnhfgcuo.io8.stu@naiad.spacehopper.org>
References: <a59032090911081505w69480040g67c7b2856fb79df6@mail.gmail.com>
	<slrnhfgcuo.io8.stu@naiad.spacehopper.org>
Message-ID: <a59032090911091501r134614efo13f7d858d06d90ee@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Stuart.

Thanks for the reply.

On 10/11/2009, Stuart Henderson <stu at spacehopper.org> wrote:
> According to your provider's documents, you need to fetch an
> address via DHCPv6 PD, I don't think this is possible in base
> OpenBSD.

I noticed that about five minutes before I saw your reply (and after I
spent the last couple of days trying).
Cheers.
I did read the faq, I guess I assumed DHCPv6 would be part of base.

I suspect a conscious decision not to write a client.
DHCPv6 seems to be a "necessity" for ISPs to apply current economic
models that differentiate between dynamic hosts and static hosts.

> You /may/ be able to do it with dhcp6c from the wide-dhcpv6
> package. However from looking at the code, I think it might not
> support pppoe yet, I suspect it will require some tweaks to
> support interfaces other than ethernet and IEEE802.11.

My ISP has a thread for this and a few people are reporting success
(OpenBSD plus WIDE plus PPPoE).
They might be installing WIDE from source. I don't know.

> You might like to try asking on misc@ as you're more likely to
> find someone who has already done this there.

Although I'm itching for IPng it would have been experimental only.
I think I'll wait till my ISP starts handing out static addresses.

Best wishes.

From public at kubikcz.net  Sat Nov 14 20:45:37 2009
From: public at kubikcz.net (MK)
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 20:45:37 +0100
Subject: ftpd, OpenBSD 4.5 memory behavior
Message-ID: <38A77B5A3D03445C86400524807AE47B@mklaptop>

Hello all,

recently I've noticed on my OpenBSD 4.5 Stable box strange memory behavior
while downloading files from its ftpd daemon.
It seems ftpd is somehow allocates more and more memory. Memory is not freed
until something else needs it.
At least it is always freed after daily script runs. I've noticed this
problem while few clients were downloading files from the box and I don't
recall I saw something similar on OpenBSD 4.4.

top output shows something like this: Memory: Real: 53M/836M  (normal state
should be about 53M/170M)
I was also trying to reproduce the "problem" by downloading files from ftpd
and saving remaining free memory every 10 minutes.

Date | Free Memory (KB)

| 2009-11-11 18:30:01 | 807936 |
| 2009-11-11 18:40:01 | 771072 |
| 2009-11-11 18:50:02 | 561152 |
| 2009-11-11 19:00:02 | 329728 |
| 2009-11-11 19:10:02 | 214016 |
| 2009-11-11 19:20:02 | 211968 |

I tested it under Virtual box on OpenBSD 4.6 too and I see same behavior.
Is it a normal situation? I have some background about memory management but 
I'm not able to find the reason why ftpd allocates so much memory and why 
this memory is not returned back after all ftpd activities are finished.

(I posted similar question to misc list but I did not get a reply, I guess 
my question is too lame and I'm missing something obvious)

Thanks for any suggestion
MK
 


From vim.unix at googlemail.com  Sat Nov 28 21:15:15 2009
From: vim.unix at googlemail.com (Pau)
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 21:15:15 +0100
Subject: macbook pro 13"
Message-ID: <30c383e70911281215p302d949bobb8cf981f5c58872@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,

I will be soon getting a macbook pro 13" at work. I was wondering how
well this is supported by openbsd... Has anybody tried it? I have
googled and looked in the archives, but I seemingly was looking not
well enough or there are no reports...

thanks,

Pau

From kousue at gmail.com  Sun Nov 29 23:22:57 2009
From: kousue at gmail.com (Nick Guenther)
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 17:22:57 -0500
Subject: macbook pro 13"
In-Reply-To: <30c383e70911281215p302d949bobb8cf981f5c58872@mail.gmail.com>
References: <30c383e70911281215p302d949bobb8cf981f5c58872@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <98f5a8830911291422i7096d5ew82563658fb94b442@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Pau <vim.unix at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I will be soon getting a macbook pro 13" at work. I was wondering how
> well this is supported by openbsd... Has anybody tried it? I have
> googled and looked in the archives, but I seemingly was looking not
> well enough or there are no reports...
>

Aaron Hsu has one, he's written a guide:
http://www.sacrideo.us/v1/papers/openbsd_macbook.txt. I know when I
went searching the archives I found more than just that, too, maybe
try different keywords?

You're lucky you're getting a pro, the non-pro one gave me all sorts
of pain with OpenBSD.

-Nick

From vim.unix at googlemail.com  Mon Nov 30 13:52:17 2009
From: vim.unix at googlemail.com (Pau)
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 13:52:17 +0100
Subject: macbook pro 13"
In-Reply-To: <98f5a8830911291422i7096d5ew82563658fb94b442@mail.gmail.com>
References: <30c383e70911281215p302d949bobb8cf981f5c58872@mail.gmail.com>
	<98f5a8830911291422i7096d5ew82563658fb94b442@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <30c383e70911300452g14125588ocf9534b2b44d29d4@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Nick,

thanks. Yes, I was imprecise. I was meaning a report on a recent
snapshot or 4.6

I didn't find anything but it's good to see that the keyboard is
well-supported. Thanks,

Pau

2009/11/29 Nick Guenther <kousue at gmail.com>:
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Pau <vim.unix at googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I will be soon getting a macbook pro 13" at work. I was wondering how
>> well this is supported by openbsd... Has anybody tried it? I have
>> googled and looked in the archives, but I seemingly was looking not
>> well enough or there are no reports...
>>
>
> Aaron Hsu has one, he's written a guide:
> http://www.sacrideo.us/v1/papers/openbsd_macbook.txt. I know when I
> went searching the archives I found more than just that, too, maybe
> try different keywords?
>
> You're lucky you're getting a pro, the non-pro one gave me all sorts
> of pain with OpenBSD.
>
> -Nick
>