Successful Install on Watchguard Firebox X700!
-
See first posts in this thread for more detail but as standard….
1.2GHz Celeron (P3 core), 256MB, 6X Realtek NICs, Compact flash slot, mini-PCI slot (usually with SafeXcel 1141!).
All of that is upgradable, except the NICs unfortunately. :(Steve
Edit: Did I imagine it or has this thread been merged?
-
Same problem as some other people
i have successfully imaged 2.0 beta 5 from jan 15th to a 4gig cf card and have my x700 booting from it
i can then set my wan and lan ports alright
then the console continues to "Bootup complete"
then stops nothing more happens… i have tried connecting my laptop to port 1 (that i set as lan) and nothingany ideas?
imaging with 1.2.3 works fine for me as well
i can update from the web gui and then use teh 2.0 web gui but the console still stops at "Bootup Complete"
-
Same problem as some other people
i have successfully imaged 2.0 beta 5 from jan 15th to a 4gig cf card and have my x700 booting from it
i can then set my wan and lan ports alright
then the console continues to "Bootup complete"
then stops nothing more happens… i have tried connecting my laptop to port 1 (that i set as lan) and nothingany ideas?
imaging with 1.2.3 works fine for me as well
i can update from the web gui and then use teh 2.0 web gui but the console still stops at "Bootup Complete"
Same issue still.
I also noticed that if I did activate the Serial console from inside the webGUI, the firebox is essentially bricked on the next boot. webGUI won't work, and console still doesn't.
-
is console not already activated on embedded?
or are you running full from a hdd? -
With that and your LCD script problem it could be a problem with the lastest snapshot.
I'm running a Jan 13th beta5 in my x750e without problems.Steve
-
thanks! i'll give that a try!
-
jan 13th will also not go past "Bootup Complete" havent tested lcd yet
-
tested rw on jan 13th build with the same result
[2.0-BETA5][root@pfSense.localdomain]/var/tmp(6): tar -xvf lcdd3.tar
x ./install-embed.lcdd.sh
x ./lcdd/
x ./lcdd/drivers/
x ./lcdd/LCDd.conf
x ./lcdd/lcdd.sh
x ./lcdd/lcdproc
x ./lcdd/LCDd
x ./lcdd/drivers/curses.so
x ./lcdd/drivers/sdeclcd.so
x ./lcdd2.tar
[2.0-BETA5][root@pfSense.localdomain]/var/tmp(7): ./install-embed.lcdd.sh
[2.0-BETA5][root@pfSense.localdomain]/var/tmp(8): cd /lib
[2.0-BETA5][root@pfSense.localdomain]/lib(9): /etc/rc.conf_mount_rw
[2.0-BETA5][root@pfSense.localdomain]/lib(10): ln -s libc.so.7 libc.so.6
ln: libc.so.6: Read-only file system -
not sure where the change is but i was not able to change to rw on 17 or 13 went back to dec 3rd and that seems to work fine although still stops at "Bootup complete"
hope this changes back before the real release :)
-
just tried testing the throughput with ftp.
-
Well this is strange. ???
I just tested on Jan 13th Beta5 and the simlinks are created just fine, no errors.
What type of install are you using? I'm assuming, perhaps wrongly, that you are using a nanobsd image on a CF card.
However it should still work on a full HD install you just don't need to remount the filesystem.91Mb/s looks good though. ;D
Steve
Edit: However what is a bit odd is that I can still create simlinks even after remounting read only.
-
Yes I'm using a 4g nanobsd image on cf card.
I should also mention for the dec 3rd build I also did an update from 1.2.3.And I'm not sure if it's happened to anyone else but some rrd graphs don't work.
Are you able to write to the file system before making it rw? (is the rw command working but not ro?)
-
just a thought… i did the 3rd build as an update and it allowed me to set rw, has anyone had it work on a fresh build? I will try it latter if i get a change but if most people are doing updates could the update be leaving access to rw? and fresh install not?
also could this be the case with the "Reboot complete" issue?
-
I'm running both Dec 18th Beta4 and Jan 13th Beta5.
I am using a 1GB image on a 4GB card though. Mostly because it's takes so long to write the card in my reader but there could be a difference. Image corrupted somehow? Some 4GB cards aren't actually big enough for the 4GB image.Steve
-
easy enough to test i'll try the 1 gig
-
I bought today an X700 firebox, flashed latest nightly on a 4GB CF, and inserted on Firebox.
Firebox booted correctly into pfSense, followed the setup and assigned two NICs, and then continue booting until "Bootup complete" message, and beeper play pfSense ring. And nothing …. serial terminal don't respond, no welcome string, no main menu, no Control+C response, nothing ....
Only way is switching off the Firefox.
What I'm doing wrong ?
Edit: I already tried with differents nightlies, with equal results. Tried different NIC configurations, with LAN cables pluged and unplugged ... Nothing. Already tried the "hint.acpi.0.disabled=1". Nothing.
(sorry for my bad english)
Thanks!
I have the same issue, but even tho the console was useless the webgui was up on the LAN port.
I have since taken a break from working on the Firebox, waiting on my 512 RAM, 1.4Gz Celeron and 4GB microdrive to arrive.
But, it's the first run. I have no chance to assign an IP address to the LAN port. So, how can I access the webgui without an IP address ?
Edit: pfSense 1.2.3 works perfectly. So, problem is with 2.0-BETA5.
Thanks.
Were there ANY bios changes?
Also, if it helps, I had to chose "revert to factory settings" in the pfSense console menu. I then restored certain parts of my config. A fresh install might be worth trying if this is not one.
-
I'm running both Dec 18th Beta4 and Jan 13th Beta5.
I am using a 1GB image on a 4GB card though. Mostly because it's takes so long to write the card in my reader but there could be a difference. Image corrupted somehow? Some 4GB cards aren't actually big enough for the 4GB image.Steve
no joy just tried pfSense-2.0-BETA5-1g-i386-20110113-0349-nanobsd.img fresh install
used dd to image to 4gig cf still get the "bootup compluete" halt in console
still get[2.0-BETA5][root@pfSense.localdomain]/lib(7): /etc/rc.conf_mount_rw
[2.0-BETA5][root@pfSense.localdomain]/lib(8): ln -s libc.so.7 libc.so.6
ln: libc.so.6: Read-only file system -
ok just to test i tried upgrading from 1.2.3 to todays 2.0 build to see if it was the act of upgrading vs fresh that caused it to work and i can confirm it's not still getting "Bootup Complete" and read-only error
-
So re seating the CPU got the firebox working!
Unfortunately, now when I try to run the laptop drive, it says boot error on the console. I tried connecting the laptop drive in both directions to the PATA cable. One way it says boot error, the other way i just get a blank screen on the lcd but nothing shows up in the terminal.
I am using a serial to USB adapter to try and connect to it on my laptop – do I need the special firebox console cable?
Thanks for your help.
No, it's a standard console cable.
The exact type is a DB9 Null Modem F/F Console Cable I believe.
Appreciate the info; turns out the serial to USB sold by radioshack is not a null modem cable; so i ended up having to buy the serial to usb cable, a gender converter, and a null modem adapter (i.e. about $70 in cables or the same price i paid for the firebox!) all from radioshack – the problem with impatience!
I did get it working; now time to upgrade the box with some new fans and get openvpn working with the crypto card!
I searched the thread for quiet fans, and the one link posted for overclockers UK does not work; does anyone have any model numbers for quiet fans? I'd rather not make holes in the box, so would prefer fans that fit the current formation
Thanks for all the help!
-
I searched the thread for quiet fans, and the one link posted for overclockers UK does not work; does anyone have any model numbers for quiet fans? I'd rather not make holes in the box, so would prefer fans that fit the current formation
For my each of my fireboxes I used three Scythe 40 mm Fan Mini Kaze fans (SY124010L) as replacements for the three fans in the back and a larger Papst 60 mm Fan (612FL) as the cpu cooler.
The Scythes have a different connector, so I had to reuse the original firebox cables.
The Papst really isn't meant to be used the way I'm using them, but I cut out a part in the side of the fan, in effect creating the same airflow as the original firebox cpu fan.
Also, the circumference of the Papst is 5 mm larger than the original fan, which actually helps circulation.Both my fireboxes have been functioning for about six months while being cooled in this fashion with no problems even under somewhat heavy load.
dB pressure per firebox has gone from ±71.3 to ±44.2 after replacing the fans.
