severity 772797 wishlist
user: debian-bsd@lists.debian.org
usertags 772797 + kfreebsd
thanks
Hi,
stephane Cottin wrote:
> Please consider merging the following patches for supporting new zfs pool
> features.
>
> https://github.com/dweeezil/grub/commit/112c80451d2997a5f0b5d89a0d76f07687676644
>
2010/12/6 Cyril Brulebois :
> No. That doesn't remove it *from the archive*.
> | $ rmadison partman-zfs -s unstable|grep kfreebsd
> | partman-zfs | 3 | sid/main/debian-installer | kfreebsd-i386
> | partman-zfs | 4 | sid/main/debian-installer | kfreebsd-amd64
>
> Old binaries stay around until ftp
Robert Millan (06/12/2010):
> It was removed from unstable on my last upload.
No. That doesn't remove it *from the archive*.
| $ rmadison partman-zfs -s unstable|grep kfreebsd
| partman-zfs | 3 | sid/main/debian-installer | kfreebsd-i386
| partman-zfs | 4 | sid/main/debian-installer | kfreebsd-
2010/12/5 Cyril Brulebois :
> To save you some seconds locating the appropriate statement:
> | The release team can remove source packages - and *all* binaries built
> | from them - from testing. Per-architecture removals from testing are
> | not handled by the Release Managers directly, but rather
Robert Millan (05/12/2010):
> Actually the request should be sent to -release […]
No. I wrote ftp.debian.org and I meant it.
To save you some seconds locating the appropriate statement:
| The release team can remove source packages - and *all* binaries built
| from them - from testing. Per-archi
2010/12/5 Cyril Brulebois :
> Robert Millan (05/12/2010):
>> Ok, I disabled partman-zfs on kfreebsd-i386.
>
> Need to get rid of it in the archive too, I guess? I don't see any bug
> against ftp.debian.org to that effect.
Actually the request should be sent to -release, b
Robert Millan (05/12/2010):
> Ok, I disabled partman-zfs on kfreebsd-i386.
Need to get rid of it in the archive too, I guess? I don't see any bug
against ftp.debian.org to that effect.
Mraw,
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Ok, I disabled partman-zfs on kfreebsd-i386.
--
Robert Millan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktimzezeulgneds0dryrfcd6j8k4
ate is about warning users for
> > potential problems.
>
> Alternative way: keep it available on kfreebsd-i386, but do not make
> use/propose it from d-i (for a while)?
Well, if partman-zfs is "Arch: kfreebsd-amd64", this is exactly what
will happen. It doesn
Christian PERRIER (04/12/2010):
> > I unmarked this for translation.
> >
> > My opinion, indeed, is that if ZFS is unsafe on kfreebsd-i386,
> > then partman-zfs should no tbe kfreebsd-any but only
> > kfreebsd-amd64
>
> As suggested by Robert, I bring this to -bsd as well.
>
> My main point was
> Quoting Robert Millan (r...@alioth.debian.org):
> > Author: rmh
> > Date: Tue Nov 30 18:34:05 2010
> > New Revision: 65817
> >
> > Log:
> > Add partman-zfs/i386 template to warn users who want to use ZFS on i386.
> >
> > Added:
> >trunk/packages/partman/partman-zfs/check.d/zfs_i386 (conte
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 03:21:03PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>
> True, but running out of memory is, in traditional Unix, an irrecove-
> rable error condition, and if it occurs in the kernel, its only option
> IS, in fact, to panic.
It can also return ENOMEM. Userland doesn't always cope wit
Rogério Brito dixit:
>> Personally, I find the following comment from the FreeBSD ZFS tuning
>> guide most scary:
Oh please. You don’t have to use it if you don’t want it. But this
doesn’t prevent it from being offered to these who do: “We sell rope
to hang yourself.”
(Someone here mentioned tha
Hi, David.
On Sep 24 2009, David Given wrote:
> Personally, I find the following comment from the FreeBSD ZFS tuning
> guide most scary:
>
> > To use ZFS, at least 1GB of memory is recommended (for all architectures)
> > but more is helpful as ZFS needs *lots* of memory. Depending on your
> > wo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Florian Weimer wrote:
[...]
> Is ZFS producton-ready? On Solaris, Sun recommends to reformat and
> restore from backup should your system panic on boot:
Personally, I find the following comment from the FreeBSD ZFS tuning
guide most scary:
> To use
* Florian Weimer:
> * Jerome Warnier:
>
>> While the current status of Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is interesting, I was
>> quite disappointed there is no ZFS support in it (at least any related
>> tools).
>> Any plans to enable this support?
>
> Is ZFS producton-ready? On Solaris, Sun recommends to refo
* Jerome Warnier:
> While the current status of Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is interesting, I was
> quite disappointed there is no ZFS support in it (at least any related
> tools).
> Any plans to enable this support?
Is ZFS producton-ready? On Solaris, Sun recommends to reformat and
restore from backup
Hannes a écrit :
> Am Montag, 21. September 2009 09:15:04 schrieb Petr Salinger:
>>> While the current status of Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is interesting, I
>>> was quite disappointed there is no ZFS support in it (at least any
>>> related tools).
>>> Any plans to enable this support?
>> End of http://li
Petr Salinger a écrit :
>> While the current status of Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is interesting, I was
>> quite disappointed there is no ZFS support in it (at least any related
>> tools).
>> Any plans to enable this support?
>
> End of http://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2009/08/msg00130.html:
>
> If we
Am Montag, 21. September 2009 09:15:04 schrieb Petr Salinger:
> > While the current status of Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is interesting, I
> > was quite disappointed there is no ZFS support in it (at least any
> > related tools).
> > Any plans to enable this support?
>
> End of http://lists.debian.org/deb
Hello,
Petr Salinger writes:
> Fou our specifics, take a look at our SVN repository
> http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/glibc-bsd/trunk/, namely
> freebsd-libs, freebsd-util. Start with target get-orig-source
> in debian/rules.
Out of curiosity, is there any plan to get the kFreeBSD port into
upstream
While the current status of Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is interesting, I was
quite disappointed there is no ZFS support in it (at least any related
tools).
Any plans to enable this support?
End of http://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2009/08/msg00130.html:
If we still have more time I think we should pr
Hi guys,
While the current status of Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is interesting, I was
quite disappointed there is no ZFS support in it (at least any related
tools).
Any plans to enable this support?
Or, what would it take to do it? I know pretty well the packaging in
Debian, but not the specifics of GNU
23 matches
Mail list logo
