Jump to content

wilsontc

Atomican
  • Content Count

    516
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by wilsontc

  1. wilsontc

    Someone with BSD knowledge plz

    Can you ssh into the box (use Putty or similar) and copy and paste those commands? Squallstrife's suggestion is a good one, but there's probably a reason why FreeNAS is taking the card down.
  2. wilsontc

    What data has changed?

    try adding "-n" or "--dry-run" to your rsync command :) I don't know if this is an OSX specific addition though. timothy@CrapBook:~$ rsync --version rsync version 2.6.9 protocol version 29 Copyright (C) 1996-2006 by Andrew Tridgell, Wayne Davison, and others. <http://rsync.samba.org/> Capabilities: 64-bit files, socketpairs, hard links, symlinks, batchfiles, inplace, IPv6, 64-bit system inums, 64-bit internal inums
  3. wilsontc

    FileServerOS: Argue with me!

    Oh yeah, suggesting a developer build is much better than suggesting FreeBSD :| The only problem with ZFS on FreeBSD 7.2 is the feature lag. If you read the mailing lists occasionally you might realise that hundreds of users are using it in production environments. The caveat is that you need to run the AMD64 distribution of FreeBSD; I wouldn't touch the 32 bit distro with a 10 foot barge pole... While that might be the case on Linux, it's not the case with FreeBSD or Mac OSX. Might be a good idea to know what you're talking about :)
  4. wilsontc

    Someone with BSD knowledge plz

    You don't need a "BSD" expert. You'll need to get a console on the machine. When you have, can you post the result of: ifconfig -a and probably netstat -rn
  5. wilsontc

    Kernel maintainers

    Most people just don't care dude. Sad, but true. Users don't care, but plenty of nerdy IT people do. That's why Linux has made inroads into commercial businesses, and that's where a lot of the patches are coming from :) All I'm saying, is that it's a double edged sword. You can't have one without the other, not while software patents exist in the US at least.
  6. wilsontc

    FileServerOS: Argue with me!

    OpenSolaris. You are correct that UFS does not support journalling, but the UFS2 filesystem which FreeBSD 7.0 uses (and recent versions of FreeNAS by extension :) does. I'd go for OpenSolaris.
  7. wilsontc

    Kernel maintainers

    That's right. Nexenta is a great example; OpenSolaris kernel, GNU user land. As for the OP's question, I think politics is a very important part of leading a project. Take Theo de Raadt. Due to his campaigns, many wireless and RAID chipset companies provided the community with documentation necessary to write drivers. This positive action resulted in wireless drivers for not only OpenBSD, but Linux as well. Because of politics, Mathew Dillon's opinions on where FreeBSD should go were ignored, so rather than complain, he started the DragonflyBSD project and the Hammer FS was created. Linux has become a victim of it's own success unfortunately. Because of it's highly commercial nature, a lot of contributors are made by organisations. This means that patches aren't always accepted, regardless of how technically sound they are. There's also an extremely high volume of patches :) I do agree with Greg's opinion about binary modules though. It's unfortunate that Linux allows them. I can't believe it when I hear people say "Nvidia has excellent Linux support!". But most users are completely ignorant.
  8. wilsontc

    Kernel maintainers

    Err, BSD or Solaris? What exactly don't they do for you that Linux does?
  9. I tried it and it didn't do it for me. Therefore any mindset I have is mine. But I am not so stubborn or narrow minded as to not let that cloud my views or suggestions to others. Fair enough :) Agreed. I'm really looking forward to btrfs :) I wonder if Oracle will continue to fund it though... Linux will never get ZFS though; I thought the only reason it hasn't is because of the incompatible licenses. Fuse doesn't count :P
  10. If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always got. I find it amusing that you can tell someone else to switch systems if it will do the job better, but won't consider FreeBSD yourself because of an alleged mindset Max. I wonder just who's mindset it is that's preventing you from using a BSD... If familiarity is a requirement Stadl, and you're limited to OpenSolaris or some variant of Redhat Linux, you should use Linux for hardware support reasons. I agree with Zebra's assertion about FC12 being "smooth sailing" compared to OpenSolaris.
  11. You know, as much as ZFS wows me, the need to be on either Solaris or some variant of BSD doesn't. As narrow minded as it seems, I probably won't be on ZFS till it hits debian, because that is what we use as our main OS at work. That makes me a sad (but realistic) panda. I have to ask Max, what doesn't wow you about FreeBSD? I totally get not wanting to use [Open]Solaris...whenever I use it I feel like I'm in the 90's. Weird Screen bugs, no dvorak support, weird keyboard mappings, barely any packages etc etc. Stadl; I feel that FreeBSD 7.2 would be a good middle ground you might not have considered. Hardware support is there, you get ZFS, and if you get stuck, here is the ultimate documentation resource.
  12. wilsontc

    Loving the new firefox

    Stainless is good if you don't want / need plugins (other than Flash of course :P)
  13. wilsontc

    Thieves clean out Apple store in 31 seconds

    "Police need your help in bringing these criminal pro's to justice". Criminal Pro's?
  14. wilsontc

    Dating Deal Breakers

    I'm similar to Kothos: - no sex by the third date - smoker / religious...instant fail! - drugs, excessive alcoholism I know few guys who feel the same about these ones though: - someone older than me - anyone into RNB - anyone with a completely identical opinion to me - anyone who doesn't speak a second language Thankfully I found an amazing women who I am now married to :) Even with my constraints, I never really found it hard to meet and date girls, but never really fell in love with anyone until I met my wife.
  15. wilsontc

    Multi-site one domain

    ...which requires a domain! Work groups are more secure from the point that no information is stored centrally. Placing a DC on as many sites as possible has obvious benefits; speed and reliability, but that is offset against cost. The downside is that if a DC is compromised / stolen, the criminal has access to all the accounts. This may or may not be an issue. It's for this reason that RODCs were developed by Microsoft; you can limit the damage that this can have. Quite frankly with this many PCs, I'm surprised that UserInterface's organisation has lasted this long on workgroups! But I guess it depends on the nature of his/her business. One last point that's worth mentioning. When machines are on a domain, all logon requests have to go through a DC. Notice I said logon requests and not just account logons; that's right, even accessing a file share on your local site requires permission from the DC. So when we're talking about speed, it's not just network account logons, but access to any shared resource (even at the local site!) too. And obviously if no domain controllers are available, you can't log on* *unless cached credentials are used, but this circumvents security and can cause problems of it's own. As I mentioned, best practice would be a RODC at each site. This isn't possible for UserInterface, but I would be looking to place more DCs at some of the larger sites at a minimum.
  16. wilsontc

    Snow Leopard GET!

    Ah, well if that's the case, then not upgrading is fair enough. It's very sensible to research beforehand; your earlier post just sounded like you hadn't. My research was using the developer builds on my MacBook with all the apps that I normally used, and save for one that required a minor tweak, it's been very stable. I figured my usage patterns are probably quite similar to a regular user, but it seems yours aren't. I hadn't heard about this stuff for Mac, but given your security background (iirc), we probably read different stuff :) Isn't / doesn't the OLPC use Bitfrost?
  17. wilsontc

    Snow Leopard GET!

    Okay, you've got me. Why? Because I was there for 10.5.0. Fuck that piece of shit. Did you follow the Leopard developer builds? I didn't download any of the Leopard development builds last time, but I've installed at least three versions of Snow Leopard this time around, and I have to say, it's very, very stable. It's a big improvment, and for $15....I bet you that price won't be around for ever. Why not buy it now, and then install it when your precious point release appears?
  18. wilsontc

    Server Motherboard + CPU

    I'd be looking at AMD for this one. They have much better onboard graphics options; lots of their regular boards have 6-8 SATA ports and a Radeon built in.
  19. This is one of those things where there is no correct answer that fits in 100% with every environment. On my MacBook, I generally use ~/opt/bin for scripts and other system stuff that only my user runs. But for system wide things that are run as root, /usr/local/sbin is probably the best place. As long as you're consistent, and if you're working with other people, self documenting, it doesn't really matter. Just make sure you put this location in your $PATH (if necessary).
  20. Hello, I've been trying to learn C the last week and a bit or so, and it's been a journey of fun and frustration in almost equal amounts :) What I want to do, is read all the lines in a text file, and put them into an array. Now, as far as I know C doesn't have dynamic arrays unless I use a structure and a pointer (a linked list?), so I thought I would read in a maximum of X lines. This code works, but the "else break;" looks a little out of place. How is this normally done? I'm not interested in learning "good enough" C, I want to learn properly. This is made harder when learning oneself. Any suggestions as to how I could improve this code snippet are appreciated! #define STRING_SIZE 100 #define MAX_LINES 25 FILE *fp; char oneString[STRING_SIZE]; char allStrings[MAX_LINES][STRING_SIZE]; fp = fopen("strings.txt", "r"); for(i=0; i<MAX_LINES; i++) { if(fgets(oneString, STRING_SIZE, fp) != NULL) { strcpy(allStrings[i], oneString); } else { break; } }
  21. wilsontc

    Multi-site one domain

    What you're wanting requires a domain controller and that all your branch office PCs must joined to the domain. You need to look at the Active Directory Sites and Subnets snap in to define replication / logon routes. The domain controller doesn't have to live locally at each branch office though. There's probably little point in having a DC where there are just 4 computers. However, it might be worth thinking about placing a RODC that several sites can share. Say you have a larger branch, about 30 computers, and several smaller ones nearby. You would place a RODC at the larger site, and then the smaller sites would access it via VPN. RODCs must be running Windows Server 2008, and the domain and forest functional levels must be at least 2003, so if you have any 2000 or NT domain controllers, you have to use regular DCs instead, which is obviously less secure and requires greater management.
  22. Well, as long as we each know what we're referring to, I guess it doesn't really matter.
  23. Wow, I didn't even notice. Should I leave it there for posterity? :P
  24. wilsontc

    Reading lines into an array of strings in C

    Hmm, I haven't seen this in the books I've been reading. Is it a C99 thing? The books I have refer to K&R C. Could I trouble you for a short example? Your explanation was good, thank you!
  25. The asterisk is the wildcard for 'all', so it covers all unix variants in one go. E.G., IRIX, AIX, HPUX etc.., it's not totally correct, as the term still refers to Linux and Solaris for example, but it's nice shorthand to refer to all unix like operating systems without being specific and referring to UNIX... I know what * means :) I just thought that it was a silly use of the asterisk, because of how it works in Unix systems when it's combined with other characters, ie *nix can expand to "unix or Unix", but doesn't expand to "Linux" for example. If *nix includes all Unix-like systems, then what does "Unix" mean? To my knowledge, there has never been a product released called "Unix" (but there was once a UNIX). I know it's picky, and in most cases it doesn't usually matter. But I'd still rather type "Unix-like systems" than "*nix". Then start with Centos or Fedora. While the differences are subtle, they do exist between different systems. Most of what you learn on Centos or Fedora is transferrable to other systems, but why learn FreeBSD and then have to learn the differences when you use a Redhat system? The asterisk is the wildcard for 'all', so it covers all unix variants in one go. E.G., IRIX, AIX, HPUX etc.., it's not totally correct, as the term still refers to Linux and Solaris for example, but it's nice shorthand to refer to all unix like operating systems without being specific and referring to UNIX... I know what * means :) I just thought that it was a silly use of the asterisk, because of how it works in Unix systems when it's combined with other characters, ie *nix can expand to "unix or Unix", but doesn't expand to "Linux" for example. If *nix includes all Unix-like systems, then what does "Unix" mean? To my knowledge, there has never been a product released called "Unix" (but there was once a UNIX). I know it's picky, and in most cases it doesn't usually matter. But I'd still rather type "Unix-like systems" than "*nix". Then start with Centos or Fedora. While the differences are subtle, they do exist between different systems. Most of what you learn on Centos or Fedora is transferrable to other systems, but why learn FreeBSD and then have to learn the differences when you use a Redhat system?
×