Re: pppd crashes, was: kde-freebsd



Peter Jeremy wrote:
On 2007-Feb-08 17:16:23 -0500, John Walthall <johnzw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
functionally obsolete. User PPP provides better service, and several
tangible design benefits. User PPP is very easy to use, Kernel PPP is not.

Actually, kernel PPP has one significant (at least theoretical)
advantage over user ppp: Network data is not pushed through the
kernel/userland interface an additional two times. This is irrelevant
for low-speed modem interfaces but could be significant for PPPoE on
high-speed broadband. Keep in mind that a firewall host is likely to
be a slow box - either a pensioned-off desktop or a mini-ITX style
system.

FreeBSD is NOT Linux, and SHOULD NOT attempt to model it. FreeBSD is BSD
UNIX! Isn't that the WHOLE POINT (pardon my shouting) for our existence?

I'm not sure I see where Linux comes into this. Looking back into
history, it seems that both ppp(4) and ppp(8) arrived fairly close
together. It appears that ppp(4) was a port of the portable ppp-2.2
code - the same code as used in SunOS AFAIR.


Yes, indeed. I admit I had not thought of that. I was writing from MY personal perspective, With my nice modern machine and my privileged state of not having broadband access (wink, wink). This is a rant, er editorial; I am writing as it seems to *me*. Conceded: this is not true for *everyone*.

As to where Linux comes in. It appears to me that PPP is the more normal way on FreeBSD, whereas, in my own experience Linux, (or at least, the distributions I formerly used) prefer PPPD. Therefore when KDE wrote KPPP, (and they originally wrote it more-or-less for Linux.) They used PPPD. There is nothing theoretically invalid about PPPD. It's just not quite how we do things *most of the time*. Over time FreeBSD and Linux drifted apart on this design issue, and it became something of a characteristic of BSD, perhaps that is why Kernel PPP became less well maintained

I should *not* have said "Did a clumsy job". I probably should have said, "Did a less than perfect job". I guess it's kind of like trying to make a bread recipe with rice flour instead of wheat flour. I retract this phrase.

Regarding the various comments by Michael Nottebrock, Firstly: The bug you mentioned I have not experienced. I never had problems when killing the X-server. I cannot comment on that. I do not often kill my X-Server; perhaps I just didn't do it frequently enough. If you believe that this speech is a rant, you are somewhat correct. I am rather cross and it does show. However I differ with your estimation that it is undignified. Oh, Please! With all due respect you take things entirely too seriously. I am obviously being over-the-sarcastic. If you feel that you "should not dignify this rant by replying to it, but," then don't! No buts! If you really think it is a rant. Ignore it! That's the mature thing to do! As for your opinion that I should close the bug. I will not. An unwise design decision has caused this problem. Because of known problems with PPPD, KPPP should provide at least the option of using user land PPP. You may of course differ from this view. However, unless a large outcry arises, I will not close the bug. I think that it is, in-fact a bug. Bugs are sometimes a bit subjective. The KPPP Developers can always ignore me.

--
Unless instructed to do otherwise, Please
address mail to vistua@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
and not to this address. Thank you.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"



Relevant Pages

  • Re: Kernel error, after shutdowning ppp device
    ... > I can't kill pppd as root with kill -9. ... > Maybe it's a kernel-2.6 bug? ... I had the same problem with kernel 2.6.6.-1.424. ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: [PATCH 1/2] LogFS proper
    ... Please comment the structure with kernel doc comments and avoid the tail ... Do enums have a significant ... Also the BUG itself will give you enough clue where it happened, ... which leaves only the prepared filesystem image to worry about. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: 2.6.25 crash: EIP: [] xfrm_output_resume+0x64/0x100 ss:esp 0068:c03a1e5c
    ... please include in all bug reports as ... This linux box is an ipsec gateway and ... # Linux kernel version: 2.6.25 ... # PCI IDE chipsets support ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Server Crash (2.6.17-1.2157)- BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#3!
    ... I just installed Fedora Core Kernel 2.6.17-1.2157_FC5smp and immediately got a "BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#3!", I've never had this on any other kernel version before, but on my desk top PC and now this server with this specific kernel. ... isg-dev7 kernel: CPU: 3 ... kernel BUG at include/linux/list.h:185! ... MEM window: dd200000-dd3fffff ...
    (Fedora)
  • please pull from the trivial tree
    ... Fix spelling in E1000_DISABLE_PACKET_SPLIT Kconfig description ... +- Finding patch that caused a bug ... +Always try the latest kernel from kernel.org and build from source. ... Length of input string in bytes ...
    (Linux-Kernel)

Loading