|
FreeBSD Installation and Upgrading Installing and upgrading FreeBSD. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|||
FBSD installer took away all control ...
... like Windows or should I pretend to be happy. I just downloaded 9.0 AGAIN about three weeks ago and it only had the January version as usual... now I find this:
05-12-2011 FreeBSD-9.0-CURRENT-201105-amd64-dvd1.iso ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/snapshots/201105/ How to install fbsd 9.0 http://blather.michaelwlucas.com/archives/750 and /tmp is still in there to fill up your HDD a difference way, so ... It seem the new FreeBSD installer force the use of zfs in FBSD 9.0 . I hope this is not true but that's what I got I think. Now I wonder do this mean that Qjail will not work for FBSD-9.0. For the past few days, I left no stone un-turn. I read all, I mean ALL I could find about Qjail and today I just found, downloaded and installed FBSD-9.0 (May 12, 2011) on a test machine. It look sick to me. I think this is zfs so this may be right up the desktop people alley for what I read about zfs. I think FBSD gave-in and using the PcBSD way of doing things. I guest after all the years of people complaining about the old installers .... now look what you get. Quote:
I also read a thread at the qJail Mail-List from last JULY where someone indicated that Qjail do not/did not support zfs. just like I just said in post #3 ... by time I get there it be history. http://www.daemonforums.org/showthread.php?t=6116 I give up. PS: After thinking a bit, if UFS install don't work, I'm sure they will fix it by production. If UFS does work I think this version would make way for perfect qjails with the new .sujournal and all. Its a 32MB file. Anyway, also it throws your HDD out of wack. Under Partition Commander you can see it mark the Primary as "Damaged". This is ny 3rd try and I still found no way to format as UFS. And it destroyed the ready-made one I gave it the first time. I think Qjail said you have to use the same version for Jail that is running on your machine. If so, that may be the next show stopper Ok, I had to try one more time and when I gave it a ready-made 30GB UFS again this time I did it manually and it went farther this time... it started installing but now it gave me this error: Extract Error: Code:
Error while extracting base .txz: Can't set user=0/group for var/emptyCan't update time for var/empty. just one more time: this time I took the guide and it selected the 2nd 30GB UFS but it is now 42GB... That is not what I wrote with P.Commander. It was 30GB, 30GB and 15GB. What happen was, FreeBSD skipped the first one and took the 2nd one and added the 3rd one to it AND made a 2.5GB swap and added the balance of primary-3 12GB out of 15 to Primary-2. That is DIRTY computing, PERIOD. You don't take partitons away and ask nothing about it. Anyway it did a complete install. After reboot, it FROZE at "Loading Operating System" This tells me that zfs is enforced or you got to use the entire HDD or it just don't like sharris anymore, or it never did because I'm the one who told you all how to have more than one FBSD installed on your HDD. Sharris give-it, FreeBSD (may have) took it away. They were in the cut, listening all along. heehee One thing for sure, with-out SLICES you loss two or more PRIMARYS and you only have three ... that would be four when they take away your extented like Windows once dream of. By time you got to Geogia, she was gone! Hope you have better luck Last edited by sharris; 4th July 2011 at 07:01 PM. |
|
|||
Okay, I haven't touched 9 yet or really followed the development closely so I'll be brief.
__________________
May the source be with you! |
|
|||
Quote:
2. I don't know what we are disagreeing about. I'm well aware of everything you said and totally agree with it. Furthermore, I personally don't use ZFS on my desktop systems. Though many people do, including on single disk ones. Just take a look at the official forums and you'll find quite a few people doing so.
__________________
May the source be with you! |
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I just hope all OS developers knows it's alright for them not to meet all expected dead-line functions every 6-months. Just skip it and re-think better for the next round. They came to far to be playing guesting games that could break the OS five to ten years down the line completely. Sometime it's not worth trying to keep up with the Jones and we are not about to turn our backs one of the Greatest OS in the World just because they needed more time to get something new, perfectly implemented. One thing for sure, I learn how to be more careful, but please, no more crash-course. I been learning for a year this is the "daemonforums" ... known around the world to be cool, quite and not so active but I can assure you it on the map BIGTIME. Many other forums members speak highly of this place. I live on google to code Windows and soon BSD, so I can say to developers, don't forget to do a relaxing read here before commenting anything. Not everyone has time to join your mail-list and what nots. You do have people to do some searching other than your own mail-list and PR, don't you? Carpetsmoker's, crew and some long-time members; I can tell you now, you guys are well known and you should be very proud. |
|
||||
OpenSolaris and Solaris use ZFS almost exclusively. Even on a single-disk single-filesystem layout.
__________________
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things. |
|
|||
Quote:
Yes, it's true ZFS is used a lot on Solaris (I don't know about OpenSolaris since I don't use it) but the default Solaris 10 install is still UFS. 99.9% of Solaris 10 installs are on big systems with many drives. If you follow the opensolaris zfs list (I do) you can see the questions they ask, nobody ever asked about one drive. They are talking about issues with dozens of drives, setups I would love to have! ZFS on a single drive isn't totally useless, because you do get very nice features like snapshots and not having to decide the size of your partitions when you install. But the main feature that makes ZFS popular for enterprise use is the checksumming and recovery. If you have a single drive all the system can tell you is your filesystem or drive is no good, and refuse to use it. That might even be worse in some cases then UFS. If you have at least two drives, you have a very good chance of surviving the total loss of one drive or heavy corruption on one drive. I recently had a BIOS problem on a Solaris 10 machine with a dead CMOS battery with 2 drives in mirror config. The system came up and started frying one of my drives. I got diagnostic messages from ZFS (although it went into a shutdown and reboot loop) and was able to start in single user mode and find the bad files and do a scrub on the pool and I lost nothing. I would have lost about a month's worth of work if I didn't use ZFS. So yeah, ZFS is great but you really need *at least* two drives or you won't get the most advantage. Drives are cheap. You should really have two if you use ZFS. I have no experience on BSD with ZFS though. And BTW to sharris, ZFS people tell you "DO NOT USE HARDWARE RAID!" if you use ZFS. Let ZFS manage the configuration. You have many ZFS RAID options.
__________________
BSDForums.org refugee #27 Multibooting with LILO |
|
||||
Quote:
I manage very large disk arrays (some in excess of 16 TB) and I can't imagine trying to run one of my larger PostgreSQL databases on software RAID. It doesn't make sense in terms of performance. It's difficult enough to keep an entire state government happy with database performance without shooting yourself in the foot from the very beginning (though I'll admit I didn't take non-hardware RAID very seriously during testing).
__________________
Linux/Network-Security Engineer by Profession. OpenBSD user by choice. |
|
|||
Download-1 - - 413 MB – about 5 hours:
FreeBSD-9.0-CURRENT-2011-04-01-amd64-disc1.iso ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/snapshots/201105/ The beef about this one is above. .................................................. .. .................................................. .. Download-2 - - 1 GB – took over 12 HOURS: FreeBSD-9.0-CURRENT-201105-amd64-dvd1.iso ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/snapshots/201105/ This time I try to install in VirtualBox and it stopped on the first page: [thread pid 0 tid 100000] Stopped at acpi_install_wakeup_handler+0xd9: movq %r15,0x88(%r12) db> ... and on a real-partitions on a fresh HDD, after the install I get: Unable to find device node for /dev.ad4s1b in /dev! The creation of filesystem will be aborted. .................................................. .. .................................................. .. Finally found somewhere else: Download-3 - - 653 MB – in about 20 minutes FreeBSD-9.0-CURRENT-201105-amd64-dvd1.iso http://ftp2.freebsd.org/mirror/FreeB...pshots/201105/ This is another DVD of the same versions and date. Check these web sites and you see they are of difference size if someone did not change things already. 1-GB vs 653MB and they both are suppose to be the same version. Is this normal or is Beastie right... pure desperation with lost of concentration. It took near exact 12 hours for a 1-GB download as I sleep and I got this one else where in under 30 minutes ... Hummm, even Microsoft don't get that busy ??? .. Anyway, this is what I got for my last few, brand new, DVD's and I am not happy. Quote:
Anyway, at boot it boot to this, again: Enter full pathname of shell or RETURN for /bin/sh: That to singe-user-mode on it's own. After that it goes here every time but in difference order and than quit. Keyboad is gone and I have to pull-the-plug: SMP: AP CPU #1 LAUNCHED! SMP: AP CPU #2 LAUNCHED! SMP: AP CPU #3 LAUNCHED! ... and it destroyed the FAT-32 partition that was 2nd on the disk and I only made slices for up to 30GB on the 40GB UFS partition. ................................. ................................. OK, This time I gave the install a COMPLETELY unformatted HDD, and here is what it looks like if you accept the GUIDE. Notice it gave me two boots ... Quote:
ada0 .. 74 GB .. GPT ada0p1 ... 64 kb ... freebsd-boot ada0p2 .... 5 GB ... freebsd-ufs ada0p3 .. 5.0 GB ... freebsd-ufs ada0p4 .. 5.0 GB ... freebsd-ufs ada0p5 .. 5.0 GB ... freebsd-ufs ada0p6 ... 20 GB ... freebsd-ufs ada0p7 ... 64 GB ... freebsd-boot ada0p8 ... 32 GB ... freebsd-ufs .. / ada0p9 .. 1.7 GB ... freebsd-swap Bottom line, at release time if Partition-Commander show me a red ring at the top of the long cylinder image and all of my other PRIMARIES are gone and only BSD remain, FreeBSD-9.0 +++ is HISTORY! Even you want to be KING. Look at the MAC, he has his own agriculture to rule over. Every OS writer knows Windows-8 to Windows-9 is up to something. They all are running wild because they know there is only room for two real WINNERS. I forgot what's it call but I read about something like this a few years back, where consumers will no longer owns their machines. It will be owned by a single operating system on tailored Hardware ... making hacking for ownership and privacy, impossible. It will only share you and yours with Face-Book, tweeter and the LAW for your own protection. How lovely... and to boot you still have vBOX ... One ruling OS over many (pee-ons) is the plan. I hope I'm just speculating but if it turns true, I got my plan-2. When the day come, "it works for you and not for him", that's is D-END of operation snow-ball. Btw: Finding things like this don't turn me on but it keeps me on my toes because this could destroys all of my/our hard work and enthusiasm all in a day. Just like it did for DOS, AT, XT, i386, including Windows-98. They all got kick to the curb, face down, or was it belly-up ... heehee .. and it's nothing but the way of Todays Technology. I tried hard. You do the math, I'll just wait! Last edited by sharris; 7th July 2011 at 11:25 PM. Reason: Making sure version are in-order. |
|
||||
Quote:
In sysinstalls, fdisk you can - or should be able to - select the T option for file system type of a partition, then use 165 for UFS, did you try that?
__________________
"The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words." -Philip K. Dick |
|
|||
Sorry but I do not understand single thing you are posting.
I use CURRENT all the time, but I do not reinstall CURRENT from install disk all the time. The sysinstaller is probably broken because it does not use gpart at all, you can manage partitions with gpart, do not use other tools. You can install boot code to mbr/slice with gpart. New installer is not yet complete. To correctly install CURRENT you should probably use gpart in fixit shell. You can post "flames" on @current mailing list, posting it on this forums is like talking to wall. |
|
|||
If you don't understand it, don't worry about it. Somebody will.
If it works for you, be happy. And don't try to tag this thread as flame. The word itself is only design to start a flame war and to give me a rep and you know it. This been days of 24/7's trying hard to make the new freebsd installer work as I laugh to keep myself from crying. No one would take my comments personal unless it's all true. Just look at the error messages. I can't make up something that was just invented for tomorrow. Everything in color is all the proof anyone would ever need. I'm sure not everyone have had the same issues when using PORT and hacks. I don't know how to do all of that and should not have too. How about the people who download the ISO. That's what this thread is all about. One person had tons of issues ... That means "one million users too many". I post in hope give the FreeBSD developers a clue of what should be fixed. I did not send in a resume to the PR to be at the bottom of the stack. They have to find it here. The choices are, they find it, someone here warn them or simply use your time to tag people like me to be banned, kicked to the curb, face-down to keep it on the hush-hush. Heehee This the 2nd time I had to explain my intentions with all the facts hanging right over your head. I am not like anyone here so don't expect me to be. I tell the story my way, not your way. By the way, Thanks to the next poster ... WoW J65nko, vermaden will be my way. I'll get on it today. But I'm still glad I posted so FreeBSD can figure out what we see out here. I do my best for FreeBSD FOREVER, regardless of what I say. It's a love thing Last edited by sharris; 7th July 2011 at 11:41 PM. |
|
|||
If you feel comfortable and/knowledgeable enough you can easily install FreeBSD without the IMHO terrrible sysinstall. For example see HOWTO: Modern FreeBSD Install (vermaden way)
__________________
You don't need to be a genius to debug a pf.conf firewall ruleset, you just need the guts to run tcpdump |
|
|||
I finally got it installed but I still see problems. That damage HDD red-ring indicator is still at the top of the cyc image among the few other thing. It keep takeing over the other partitons but that could be something I'm not doing right. Who knows.
Good luck Last edited by sharris; 8th July 2011 at 03:38 AM. |
|
||||
If you want ZFS, skip sysinstall entirely.
Either use the bsdinstall-based CDs, or the PC-BSD CD. Those both support ZFS installs (and gmirror installs, and anything you can do with [man=8]gpart[/man]). The bsdinstall CDs are really nice, as the installer is a LiveCD with several opportunities to "do it yourself". Drop to a shell, use gpart to configure the disk, create the filesystems, mount them to wherever it needs them (it tells you), then restart the installer and away it goes. The disk partitioner is also much nicer in bsdinstall. You can get the bsdinstall CDs here. |
|
|||
If my extended comment boar someone out there, just SPEED-READ or turn the page from USA to your home town.
PRIMARY-1 ... Windows trickery *TRY* to enforce this on me, but did on most but MS was still was smart enough to keep Windows in a single partition. Just like programming tools. Is it C++, Perl, PHP or what ... You use the one that is tailored for the job. Windows did the best job as a desktop up to XP. Now it's a KDE/EXPLORER operating system ONLY. So it's DIE with vista ++. PRIMARY-2 .. FreeBSD is happy .. he got SLICES ... You can get up to {8} PARTITIONS under its own UNIVERSE, and you can throw any possible clown in jail to help ensure your system is secure ... Windows or LINUX cannot do this. Patrick Henry meant to say: Give me my choice of which UNIVERSE I want or give me LINUX. http://libertyonline.hypermall.com/henry-liberty.html PRIMARY-3 .. PcBSD is happy .. but with PcBSD-9.0 he got gPart issues big-time. This is why I think I seen the light already. Anyway, PcBSD play with LABELS. Maybe that's a ZFS thing, I don't know. Here's something I found about REAL BSD labels: http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/ahci.html EXTENDED-4.. Since Linux is weaker than BSD ... It's because must have a separate PARTITION for swap and more if he wants better security. The good thing is he can waste PARTITION inside EXTENDED where you own up to 15 to 29 logical partition depending on OS used. But tthe OS really don't call the shots if you know what your doing with standard MBR. Problem is the new FreeBSD installer seems to be stepping on some toes. Maybe this links can help explain some of my concerns: http://wiki.minix3.org/en/UsersGuide/DiskPartitions Quote:
Quote:
gpart is the problem I think. The new FreeBSD installer seem to waste three PRIMARY partitions *OR* at lease two FOR SURE ... I get a BOOT partition, a SWAP partition and the standard UFS partition for root, usrs and such. The reason I know is that I watch and I check. After the install I use *Partition Commander* to view the disk. *Partition Commander* knows that this is not a common FreeBSD-UFS partition and that is why it marks the partition as DEFECTED. Now should I say, all is well... NO, because I think the new installer has actually stole all three of my PRIMARY partitions, trying to do things the LINUX way "BUT" it can't live on EXTENDED where partitions are plentiful so now the user suffers. Quote:
Anyway, it don't matter because I will be hacking it soon until that is taken away, and if so, I'll write my own BSD. I always wanted to piece things together from places like the link you posted. That is the only way to deal with BSD. As far a a desktop, PcBSD may be the winner once they cut down on memory usages in 9.0 and solve the gPart issue. Hope you know I appreciate your thoughts. Thanks phoenix BTW, I hate writing because I don't know how to talk and I have no time to learn how-to present myself. I rather code and I know a lots of people that will tell you the same. But here I need someone to know what the issue is, but if you dedicated the disk your whole computing life, you will never know. |
|
|||
Hey, I got the live-cd. I'm going to take all the suggestions given here and learn to hack it. After waiting a whole year for FreeBSD-9.0 it never cross my mind that it could turn out like the GNOME-3 thing did. vermaden makes it seem so easy so I should have something up and running in a few days even if I have to drop back to 8.2, I'll still use it. I should have been there a long time ago. Kind of funny, you guys did not know what I was talking about and I did not know what you guys was hinting at...
Thanks again PS: I have one question, is Gparted, FreeBSD gpart(8) and GNU parted the same thing? I checked a google but it never tells me and difference so I take for granted freeBSD has a build in GNU parted, but I also thought FreeBSD did not like GNU license. This is what I tried and it don't make UFS partitions that's why I dump it for cfdisk. It works for ALL formats, not just LINUX like Windows works for Windows only for instance. And I don't think whatever FreeBSD use is going out of its way either. http://www.gnu.org/software/parted/index.shtml Last edited by sharris; 9th July 2011 at 09:11 AM. Reason: PS: |
|
||||
No. GPartEd is a Linux-based GUI LiveCD partition manager thingy that uses GNU parted to do the actual partitioning.
gpart is the FreeBSD command-line tool for partitioning disks. No relation whatsoever between them, although they do similar tasks. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What is the command to control more than one processor? | bmk1st | OpenBSD General | 1 | 2nd February 2010 01:33 PM |
Fan control in OpenBSD | Angevin | OpenBSD General | 6 | 20th November 2009 03:06 AM |
NetBSD installer cannot find hard drive | ionflux | NetBSD Installation and Upgrading | 4 | 14th September 2009 03:52 PM |
booting vista installer dvd | bsdnewbie999 | Other OS | 9 | 15th October 2008 06:16 PM |
mandatory access control (MAC) | buba | OpenBSD Security | 3 | 22nd May 2008 07:25 PM |