[CDBUG-talk] NAS hardware - MaxAttach 3000

[Mark Hutchinson]

See inline

Mark
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdbug-talk-bounces at lists.nycbug.org 
> [mailto:cdbug-talk-bounces at lists.nycbug.org] On Behalf Of Jaime
> Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2008 7:51 PM
> To: CDBUG
> Subject: Re: [CDBUG-talk] NAS hardware - MaxAttach 3000
> 
> On Feb 10, 2008, at 5:26 PM, Mark Hutchinson wrote:
> > uname -mrs shows: FreeBSD 2.05.3075.17 i386
> 
> 	Try uname -a.  However, if it is really running FreeBSD 
> 2.0.x, that is freaking old.  I started with 2.2.x in 1997.  
> Its up to 6 for the stable branch and 7 for the 
> soon-to-be-stable branch.

granite# uname -a
FreeBSD granite. 2.05.3075.17 FreeBSD 2.05.3075.17 #2: Thu Nov  1 15:23:58
PST 2001     root at host26.nsgdev.com:/usr/src/sys/compile/GRANITE.DEBUG  i386

> > 1) One of the web interface management pages requires an 
> old version 
> > of Java (1.42 or older) and will not run on IE7. I'm using an old 
> > Win2000 box with IE6 and MS-Java to change drive shares and 
> > security...
> 
> 	Oh that one is easy.  Don't use Windows.  :)

It's actually easier for me, I RDP to that box and away I go. From what I
read, it's not a Windows issue, but the specific Java that was used.

> > What's the possibility to load something more modern on 
> this, rather 
> > than patching an older OS?
> 
> 	Updating FreeBSD is actually pretty easy over minor 
> versions and even over a single major version.  I imagine 
> that going from 2.0 to even 5.0 would be filled with risks, though.

Would it be worth it (read: fairly easy i.e. inplace upgrade) to bring it up
to 3.x?

> > Here's some hw info from the box (it does support telnet - w00t!)
> 
> 	Probably SSH, too.  Check in /etc or ps auxww| grep ssh 
> for some mention of it.

I already tried, nope, no SSH :( I don't think they had those letters in the
alphabet back then.

> > # dmesg | grep CPU
> > CPU: Pentium/P55C (quarter-micron) (267.27-MHz 586-class 
> CPU) # dmesg 
> > | grep memory real memory  = 33554432 (32768K bytes) avail memory = 
> > 29859840 (29160K bytes)
> 
> 	Dude....  32MB and you're asking about putting 
> something "more modern" on it?  Nice try.  I think that 
> you're going to have to stick  
> with one of those "bare metal" style OSes, like FreeBSD or 
> Slackware.   

Correct, and by more modern, I was referring to the version of FreeBSD.
Rather than trying to figure out what the original dev team did to support
this HW and patching the flaws, I was figuring that it may be faster to
start with a more up-to-date version of the OS. Unless somebody has a 128
Meg SODIMM (PC100 probably) collecting dust, I guess I'd be stuck at 32
Megs.

> Fortunately, even the current stable release of FreeBSD can 
> handle that little RAM.  It won't win any races, but it will work.
> 
> http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.3R/installation-i386.html

I dare say if it could be done, it would work better than it does now.

I think the OS and swap partitions are 32 Megs and 10 Megs, I'm figuring
that would have to change. /bin has about 24 files in it, and /etc has about
60, so it's stripped down pretty far. What would a stripped down version of
6.3 require?

> 
> 	Whatever you try to do with it, good luck.

Thanks!