Main
News
Proposal
Readings
Download
Backbone
License
Donate
Feedback
Guestbook
Mon May 11 14:00:00 2026 UTC
FEDAnet source tarball version 0.0.71 uploaded; it contains a minor fix that covers the (previously unknown to me) difference in the tun/tap facility API between FreeBSD and OpenBSD. Yes, they are different. Slightly but sufficient to be incompatible. The new version is reported to compile and run on OpenBSD. Thanks go to EVI for reporting the trouble and trying the fixed version (which involved a lot of work).
Another change since the last release is that logging modules are separated
into a library, named loghorn. This is the first time the
library gets published. However, this change is not visible to users who
don't bother reading the code. I only publish this release because of the
achieved compatibility with OpenBSD.
Let's wait for someone with a NetBSD machine :-)
From vjkarbo (unverified) Sun May 24 16:25:34 2026 UTC
building on DragonFlyBSD
By changing line 18 in the ./src/fsrv_tun.c file to #include net/tun/if_tun.h, further assembly stops with an error: fsrv_tun.c: In function 'push_packet_locally': fsrv_tun.c:334:36: error: initializer element is not constant
reply
From Andrey Stolyarov
Sun May 24 21:04:56 2026 UTC
in reply to
this comment
Re: building on DragonFlyBSD
The line must be 344, not 334. Try replacing
int r; static const unsigned int af = htonl(AF_INET6); struct iovec iov[2];with
int r; unsigned int af; struct iovec iov[2]; af = htonl(AF_INET6);reply
From vjkarbo (unverified) Sun May 24 21:38:50 2026 UTC in reply to this comment
Re: Re: building on DragonFlyBSD
It worked, thank you! I went to test...
reply
From Andrey Stolyarov
Mon May 25 10:31:23 2026 UTC
in reply to
this comment
Re: building on DragonFlyBSD
Please share your experience. That DragonFly thing is definitely of interest for the project.
If you don't have a node key yet, I can provide you with a point within one of my testing nodes; just contact me through the form so we can continue by email (don't worry, I don't send spam).
reply
From vjkarbo (unverified) Mon May 25 21:44:50 2026 UTC in reply to this comment
Re: Re: building on DragonFlyBSD
Thank you for the offer, I generated the keys in good time on a Linux flash drive, noticeably warming up my room for six months (the main use for all these multi-core processors), subsequently switching to generation on a machine with dfly and only recently freed the machine. So i'm not a random person here and I I'll definitely share my experience.
P.S. Sorry for the lack of tags, I'm using the Links browser without Xorg.
reply
From Andrey Stolyarov
Mon May 25 22:33:34 2026 UTC
in reply to
this comment
Re: Re: Re: building on DragonFlyBSD
Sounds good :-)
reply
From EVI (unverified) Wed May 20 05:03:44 2026 UTC
NetBSD
> Let's wait for someone with a NetBSD machine :-)
Nobody? Okay. I successfully built version 0.0.70 on NetBSD machine. Can I use the same serv.conf and key which I used on OpenBSD machine?
BTW, NetBSD have gcc instead of clang by default.
reply
From Andrey Stolyarov
Wed May 20 12:22:43 2026 UTC
in reply to
this comment
Re: NetBSD
> I successfully built version 0.0.70 on NetBSD
Thanks! But, errr, 0.0.70? not 0.0.71? Are you sure?
> Can I use the same serv.conf and key which I used on OpenBSD machine?
Sure, they are not OS-specific in any way. Or, I can generate one more point for you, if, for example, you for some reason want to let both machines run their points.
reply
From EVI (unverified) Wed May 20 18:26:07 2026 UTC in reply to this comment
Re: Re: NetBSD
> But, errr, 0.0.70? not 0.0.71? Are you sure?
Yes. Right now we know that NetBSD doesn't have OpenBSD's quirks. :^)
Okay, I tested 0.0.71. It doesn't work as expected. My suspicion that's because I was forced to run it under root. From NetBSD's man tun:
Has fedanet restriction when running as root? If no, I'll send you log from feedback form.
reply
From Andrey Stolyarov
Wed May 20 19:34:11 2026 UTC
in reply to
this comment
Re: Re: Re: NetBSD
> Okay, I tested 0.0.71. It doesn't work as expected.
Well, I'm a bit confused now. Does this mean 0.0.70 works but 0.0.71 doesn't?
> Has fedanet restriction when running as root?
Well, formally no, but certainly it should never be run as root.
Perhaps we'll have to create a stand-alone "starter" for NetBSD, which will open the tun device, drop the privileges and launch
fedaservwith the-toption so that the daemon doesn't have to open the device on its own.BTW, I doubt for long NetBSD is of any good, but for now we should perhaps finally realize NetBSD is not an option at all. However, I still don't mind to provide the possibility of running FEDAnet for those weird people who — for their weird reasons — are still trying to live under NetBSD.
> I'll send you log from feedback form.
Well, what we need to understand is if NetBSD needs anything special on communicating with the device. It is better to gain such info from official documentation, but, sorry, I failed to find anything on this through search engines.
UPD: I was wrong, here is the manual: https://man.netbsd.org/tun.4
Honestly, I now don't really understand why it doesn't work being launched as root, as it should go exacly like under FreeBSD, with the only difference that root privileges are needed. So yes, please show the logs.
UPD2: Thanks for the logs. The problem seems to have nothing to do with the tun driver at all, and — sorry to say this — I've got no idea what goes wrong, and how.
reply
From EVI (unverified) Wed May 20 20:12:07 2026 UTC in reply to this comment
Re: Re: Re: Re: NetBSD
> Well, I'm a bit confused now. Does this mean 0.0.70 works but 0.0.71 doesn't?
Sorry for confusing. I just built it, without testing.
> Perhaps we'll have to create a stand-alone "starter" for NetBSD
I think there's no need to rush. I want to try ask NetBSD community first.
> BTW, I doubt for long NetBSD is of any good, but for now we should perhaps finally realize NetBSD is not an option at all.
Maybe you're right. I was just looking for an excuse to try NetBSD. I like concept of
pkgsrc, but it's not tied to NetBSD. I heard that NetBSD has very good framework for writing drivers. Maybe it's a myth.> So yes, please show the logs.
Done.
reply
From Andrey Stolyarov
Wed May 20 20:17:55 2026 UTC
in reply to
this comment
Re: NetBSD
> Done.
Thanks. Unfortunately, there's nothing to do here without a debugger, and I'm even not sure I'd manage to catch the problem having access to a NetBSD machine with the debugger. Something really weird happens.
reply
From dm (unverified) Tue May 12 07:25:23 2026 UTC
404 Error
Gives an error 404 when you try to access this link (http://www.croco.net/software/loghorn) from the lib/loghorn/Makefile file.
reply
From Andrey Stolyarov
Tue May 12 07:46:24 2026 UTC
in reply to
this comment
Re: 404 Error
Yes, I know. I hope to create a page dedicated to the library in several days, but didn't do it yet.
UPD: fixed, enjoy.
reply
From dm (unverified) Tue May 12 12:47:57 2026 UTC in reply to this comment
Re: Re: 404 Error
It seems to be a typo: Take a loog at the headers though, they contain a lot of commentary.
reply
From Andrey Stolyarov
Tue May 12 17:40:36 2026 UTC
in reply to
this comment
Re: Re: Re: 404 Error
thanks!
reply
From Ivan (unverified) Sat May 16 13:17:53 2026 UTC in reply to this comment
Re: Re: Re: Re: 404 Error
typo is still there, btw
reply
From Andrey Stolyarov
Sun May 17 12:03:00 2026 UTC
in reply to
this comment
Re: 404 Error
Yeah, I forgot one of the commands in the usual chain. Hope everything is okay now.
reply
From EVI (unverified) Sun May 17 04:32:24 2026 UTC in reply to this comment
Re: Re: 404 Error
> UPD: fixed, enjoy.
The title-tag has a code-tag inside:
The _code_loghorn_/code_ library homepage
reply
From dronix (unverified) Mon May 11 18:21:43 2026 UTC
good news
This is good news for me :-)
reply