* From: Nik Clayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I really wish you would stop spreading FUD. Don't open your mouth if
you don't know what you are talking about.
* I was under the impression that if you were CVSup'ing the ports tree then
* any changes to the ports subsystem (for example, new command l
:
:That said, it should be fairly simple to change Matt's new in-line
:assembler versions to insert LOCK prefixes when building an SMP
:kernel. (Although I don't know that this is necessary yet, given
:the `Big Giant Lock').
:
:There remains the problem of locating all the operations in the kerne
Why was the FTP_PASS_MODE logic changed? This forces everyone who uses active
connections to alter their environment...
-Adam Wight
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
I've just updated my laptop from 3.2-RELEASE to 4.0-CURRENT, and I
find that PCMCIA modems (sio) are no longer supported. I'm playing
around with it to get it to work, but so far I've just managed to get
panics out of sioprobe. Before I continue with this: is anybody else
working on it? If so,
On Saturday, 10th July 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
>I'm trying to simulate your 486 setup. You must love pain! A make -j5
>buildworld on a 16MB-limited machine pages like hell (200-400 pageins/sec
>AND 200-400 pageouts/sec simultaniously, almost continuously).
Maximal pain, maximal
On 12-Jul-99 Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
>
>> > Q: I want to use this cool piece of software that's in the FreeBSD
>> > ports system. But I can't build it on my 3.x-stable system.
>> >
>> > Why not?
>>
>> A. Likely because someone running onl
On Mon, 12 Jul 1999, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
>
> > > Q: I want to use this cool piece of software that's in the FreeBSD
> > > ports system. But I can't build it on my 3.x-stable system.
> > >
> > > Why not?
> >
> > A. Likely because someo
On Mon, Jul 12, 1999 at 12:46:12AM +0100, Nik Clayton wrote:
>
> I was under the impression that if you were CVSup'ing the ports tree then
> any changes to the ports subsystem (for example, new command line
> parameters to fetch(1)) would be utilised by the ports system *before*
> they had been
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> > Q: I want to use this cool piece of software that's in the FreeBSD
> > ports system. But I can't build it on my 3.x-stable system.
> >
> > Why not?
>
> A. Likely because someone running only on a -current box last committed
>a cha
On Mon, Jul 12, 1999 at 03:54:40PM -0700, Chris Piazza wrote:
> Um..er... I hope you were really just being sarcastic. All ports
> should work on -stable as well as -current. In fact, more build
> on -stable than -current according to http://bento.freebsd.org/.
> If any ports work on one but not
> Q: I want to use this cool piece of software that's in the FreeBSD
> ports system. But I can't build it on my 3.x-stable system. Why not?
>
> A: Ah, sorry. The ports system only targets -current, trying to get it to
> work with -stable is too much work. If you want to be sure of
Mike Haertel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Um. FYI on x86, even if the compiler generates the RMW
>form "addl $1, foo", it's not atomic. If you want it to
>be atomic you have to precede the opcode with a LOCK
>prefix 0xF0.
I'd noticed that point as well. The top of sys/i386/include/atomic.h
_doe
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Nik Clayton wrote:
> Q: I want to use this cool piece of software that's in the FreeBSD
> ports system. But I can't build it on my 3.x-stable system.
>
> Why not?
>
> A: Ah, sorry. The ports system only targets -current, trying to get
> it to work with -sta
> Q: I want to use this cool piece of software that's in the FreeBSD
> ports system. But I can't build it on my 3.x-stable system.
>
> Why not?
A. Likely because someone running only on a -current box last committed
a change to the port which broke it with 3.x. Please submit a bug
On Sun, Jul 11, 1999 at 10:00:50PM +0100, Nik Clayton wrote:
>
hmm...
> >
> > Any other question?
>
> Q: I want to use this cool piece of software that's in the FreeBSD
> ports system. But I can't build it on my 3.x-stable system.
>
> Why not?
>
> A: Ah, sorry. The ports syst
>On Sat, 10 Jul 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
>>
>> The supposedly atomic functions in i386/include/atomic.h are not
>> as atomic as was previously thought :-):
>>
>> #define atomic_add_short(P, V) (*(u_short*)(P) += (V))
>[...]
>
>Before I fixed this stuff for the alpha, the += e
On Sun, Jul 11, 1999 at 08:13:37PM +0900, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
[snip]
> "Q: Why shouldn't I just go ahead and run -current? That's got
> all the latest stuff, right?
[snip]
> If you can live with that, and think you have any compelling reason
> to run -current, read the handbook for fur
> Why do we store the utmp/wtmp and last logs in different data
> structures?
>
> What seems strange is that they use the different data types to
> store the same information (the time):
>
> struct lastlog {
> time_t ll_time;
> charll_line[UT_LINES
Nicolas Blais wrote:
>
> Hi. I've finally installed FreeBSD 4.0 and to tell you the truth, I'm
> not
> very impressed. I was expecting some bugs but not like that...
Well, maybe this FAQ entry candidate will help clarify things for
you:
"Q: Why shouldn't I just go ahead and run -current? Tha
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 11, 1999 at 08:12:52AM +0100, Doug Rabson wrote:
> >
> > What a nightmare. This must be due to egcs compiling things differently
> > from gcc 2.7.1. ...
>
> Yes, at least for the one case in vm_pageout_flush. (I checked
> the analogous code on
Actually, I should have said swap_pager_getpages and not
vm_pageout_flush.
Alan
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
21 matches
Mail list logo
