From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 23 19:11:28 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: Freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82DF41065670 for ; Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:11:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Devin.Teske@fisglobal.com) Received: from mx1.fisglobal.com (mx1.fisglobal.com [199.200.24.190]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46EB28FC08 for ; Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:11:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.fisglobal.com ([10.132.206.31]) by ltcfislmsgpa02.fnfis.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q5NJBRB2002037 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sat, 23 Jun 2012 14:11:27 -0500 Received: from [10.0.0.105] (10.14.152.61) by smtp.fisglobal.com (10.132.206.31) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.283.3; Sat, 23 Jun 2012 14:11:26 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" From: Devin Teske In-Reply-To: <006001cd5072$84247cd0$8c6d7670$@milos.co.za> Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 12:11:23 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: References: <2322BE6D-24A8-4F4A-84B2-4DFE33BCA65B@fisglobal.com> <4FE3EB9D.9070509@fuzzwad.org> <4FE419CD.60708@rdtc.ru> <4FE4245C.3040806@rdtc.ru> <90361FE2-2298-48E5-B8B6-2BA704781098@fisglobal.com> <4FE431C0.8040509@rdtc.ru> <006001cd5072$84247cd0$8c6d7670$@milos.co.za> To: Clayton Milos X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257) X-Originating-IP: [10.14.152.61] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.7.7855, 1.0.260, 0.0.0000 definitions=2012-06-23_07:2012-06-22, 2012-06-23, 1970-01-01 signatures=0 Cc: Freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] Need Testers for: sysutils/bsdconfig X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Devin Teske List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:11:28 -0000 On Jun 22, 2012, at 5:27 AM, Clayton Milos wrote: >>>>>> 5. Same for vlan16. For vlan9 is shows right 'IEEE 802.1Q VLAN netwo= rk >>>>>> interface'. >>>>>> It should work same way for vlan1-vlan4095 interfaces at least. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> I'd like to know if the sysctl MIB's for describing network interfaces >>>>> is reliable. Maybe I'll keep the static list as a fallback. But yes, = you're >>>>> absolutely right -- I should have supported up to 5 digits even (ifco= nfig >>>>> has internal limits of 16-bit unsigned integer for the interface >>>>> instance-number). I've made the necessary changes to support vlan0-vlan99999 (though the syst= em will only support up to vlan65534). >>>>>> 6. Same for ipfw0 pseudo-interface. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> Curious what sysctl says about it. >>>>=20 >>>> I do not know what sysctl subtree do you refer to. >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>> If you're using em(4) device, try: >>>=20 >>> sysctl dev.em.0.%desc >>>=20 >>> Otherwise (for example), if using fxp(4), try: >>>=20 >>> sysctl dev.fxp.0.%desc >>>=20 >>> Or for your vlan: >>>=20 >>> sysctl dev.vlan.16.%desc >>>=20 >>> And try for your ipfw(4) interface: >>>=20 >>> sysctl dev.ipfw.0.%desc >>>=20 >>> Are each of those meaningful? >>>=20 >>> NOTE: They aren't available unless you have the hardware -- so I can't >>> (for example) try "sysctl dev.fxp.0.%desc" unless I have an fxp0 device >>> displayed in ifconfig(8). >=20 >> That's driver-dependent. For example, lagg does not presents %desc nor >> ipfw0 and I suppose pretty many others do not. You could use %desc if it= 's >> present and fall back to internal static list otherwise. >=20 Ok, I've added that functionality, but =85 since neither lagg(4) nor ipfw(4= ) provide %desc MIB, =85 what should we provide as static fallbacks? > Just something cosmetic but when I add a user when it comes to select the > shell it does not have a title like: Select a shell >=20 I fixed this too. > Also it said that my user add failed but it was actually added as uid 100= 5. I'm working on this one. I'm changing the routines to allow the UNIX pw(8) = errors to filter through, rather than masking them with a static error on n= on-success. > I added another user and it stated the uid 1005 when I was creating it but > showed 1006 in the summary screen. It also said that adding the user fail= ed. "pw usernext" is executed to get the next uid/gid pair that is available. I= t's possible a user was added in the process. I've not witnessed this, but = will try to replicate. > Perhaps I used to short a password as there was no password field entered= in > /etc/master.passwd > twat:*:1005:1005::1340540161:1340626570:twat:/home/twat:/bin/sh > test1:*:1006:1006::1340454020:1340496000:test1:/home/test1:/bin/tcsh >=20 The password is only set (as a separate command) if the pw(8) useradd succe= eded. I'm working on catching errors in edge-cases where we should proceed = despite non-success. > When selecting user account expiry the calendar starts at 1 January 1970.= I > understand that this is when Unix time started but it would be nice for it > to start from the current date. >=20 I filed PR docs/169354 against the passwd(5) manual. If nobody picks up the= PR in a timely fashion, I'll pro-actively modify bsdconfig to follow what = the man-page _should_ say versus what it _does_ say about "how to treat the= value of zero" (the default). --=20 Thanks for testing!, Devin _____________ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidentia= l. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message an= d all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any ma= nner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware= that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and revie= w by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.