Retired > 1.2.3-PRERELEASE-TESTING snapshots - RETIRED


(1/5) > >>

As we get closer to release for 1.2.3, we need to test NanoBSD packages as much as possible. I have a Google Docs spreadsheet available with the list of packages that are currently available on NanoBSD. This list may shrink or grow as packages are added or removed due to testing results.

The spreadsheet is here:

It would help to get all of these results compiled in a central place. Some packages may just need minor fixes, and others may need excluded entirely. The main thing is that they all need to be tried. Not just installed, but tested. Some of these packages depend on certain environments (Like OpenBGP) or certain hardware (Like NUT), so if you have access to a means for testing a package, try it out and add some notes to the spreadsheet and this thread.

Be sure to install, change settings, try to run the package, and report any errors you encounter (either on screen, in system logs, etc). The most common errors will probably be referencing a "read only filesystem" which indicates that the package needs some code added to properly switch to and from read/write and read only modes for the CF.

If you encounter an error with a package, it may also help to try the same package on a full install if you have one handy, to be sure the error is actually from NanoBSD and not a problem with the package itself.

Lots of views, no replies.  ;D

I have fixed a LOT of packages today, the number of packages that do not work on NanoBSD is now in the single digits.

The following packages need testing, but appear to work:
Proxy Server with mod_security

Hi, Jimp.  I replied in the hardware thread (since I had mentioned a few days ago trying to switch from full/HD to nano/CF).  I do not see havp on your spreadsheet at all.  It should be useable (I would think), since it can be set to use the ramdisk filesystem it creates.  Unfortunately, I do not know where to get the package from (it does not show up in the list on the dashboard for a nanobsd install.)

Squid, Squidguard, HAVP, and some others have already been flagged as not being "nano-safe" for one reason or another.

I would like to get squid and squidguard working, and perhaps HAVP if I can, but it will take a lot more testing.

The problem with nano is that generally there is not enough RAM to handle all of these things, plus you would need to have a squid cache size of 0 since there is nowhere to write the cache.

Well, my interest (and what I was doing before), was running havp as a transparent proxy, without any squid involvement.  I get that /var and /var/log use some RAM.  One can always tweak the settings for havp to not scan above a certain size (I think it already defaults to 5MB or so?)  I'd be happy to help test this out - if all else fails, I'd be willing to run a totally unsupported havp package, since I don't really want to switch back to HD :(


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version