> On Saturday, 24 July 1999 at 20:51:37 -0500, Kevin Day wrote:
> >> On Sat, 24 Jul 1999, Kevin Day wrote:
> >>
> >>> For one, do another 'ps' with the 'l' option, so you can see what it's stuck
> >>> on.
> >>
> >> UID PID PPID CPU PRI NI VSZ RSS WCHAN STAT TT TIME COMMAND
> >> 10
On Saturday, 24 July 1999 at 20:51:37 -0500, Kevin Day wrote:
>> On Sat, 24 Jul 1999, Kevin Day wrote:
>>
>>> For one, do another 'ps' with the 'l' option, so you can see what it's stuck
>>> on.
>>
>> UID PID PPID CPU PRI NI VSZ RSS WCHAN STAT TT TIME COMMAND
>> 1000 1103 1086
On Sat, 24 Jul 1999, Kevin Day wrote:
> > > For one, do another 'ps' with the 'l' option, so you can see what it's stuck
> > > on.
> >
> > UID PID PPID CPU PRI NI VSZ RSS WCHAN STAT TT TIME COMMAND
> > 1000 1103 1086 29 75 20 5740 384 - TWN ??0:00.00 (kvt)
> >
> On Sat, 24 Jul 1999, Kevin Day wrote:
>
> > For one, do another 'ps' with the 'l' option, so you can see what it's stuck
> > on.
>
> UID PID PPID CPU PRI NI VSZ RSS WCHAN STAT TT TIME COMMAND
> 1000 1103 1086 29 75 20 5740 384 - TWN ??0:00.00 (kvt)
> 1000 11
On Sat, 24 Jul 1999, Kevin Day wrote:
> For one, do another 'ps' with the 'l' option, so you can see what it's stuck
> on.
UID PID PPID CPU PRI NI VSZ RSS WCHAN STAT TT TIME COMMAND
1000 1103 1086 29 75 20 5740 384 - TWN ??0:00.00 (kvt)
1000 1109 1103 0 4
> I've got myself two processes which can't be gotten rid of by SIGKILL:
>
> kkenn 92724 32.0 0.8 5736 356 ?? RN6:25PM 136:52.96 kvt -T Terminal -
> kkenn 1103 0.0 0.0 5740 388 ?? TWN - 0:00.00 (kvt)
>
> (kvt is the KDE 1.1.1 xterm)
>
> I am able to trigger this by at
I've got myself two processes which can't be gotten rid of by SIGKILL:
kkenn 92724 32.0 0.8 5736 356 ?? RN6:25PM 136:52.96 kvt -T Terminal -
kkenn 1103 0.0 0.0 5740 388 ?? TWN - 0:00.00 (kvt)
(kvt is the KDE 1.1.1 xterm)
I am able to trigger this by attempting to past
Tony Finch wrote:
>
> Doug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > *Nod* well, we do a lot of "unusual" things around here. :) Given
> >your explanation I think that the culprit is probably apache. The virtual
> >host file has approximately 16k hosts.
>
> *ouch*
Yeah, tell me about it.
Are there any tricks to getting Java in Netscape running with
FreeBSD --current.
I've suddenly noticed it's not working (tried 4.08 and 4.6 with
Fortify 1.4.4 applied and it's no-go even with the classpath
set correctly...)
Bill
---
[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Three things neve
Already done.. :)
> Hi,
>
> The permissions of new -current snapshots on
> current.freebsd.org are still broken. :-(
>
> If everything else fails, I'd suggest to set
> up a cronjob to fix the permissions, until the
> cause of the problem is found. Putting up
> snapshots without letting us dow
>>Possible quick fix (hack): change all the spltty()'s in lpt.c to
>>splnet()'s. lpt isn't a tty driver; it just abuses spltty(). Abusing
>>splnet() instead should work OK for lpt and fix if_plip.
>
>This seems good until the intr stuff handle dynamic update of a interrupt spl.
>Is there some wo
On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 07:37:02PM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote:
>
>>You misunderstood what Bruce wrote. PLIP has always been broken. It
>>used to be possible to hack around the brokenness by setting the
>>interrupt mask to net instead of tty. With newbus, this hack is no
>>longer possible (it was nev
On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 11:15:24AM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
>
>This is actually a deficiency in the ppbus stuff, there is no
>telling what SPL level the subdriver wants to use, so the interrupt
This is changing. I'm currently working on porting ppbus to newbus.
>should actually be relea
On Sat, 24 Jul 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Andrze
> j Bialecki writes:
> >On Sat, 24 Jul 1999, Mark Huizer wrote:
> >
> >> >
> >> > >MFS is badly broken when used in a diskless configuration. I am trying
> >> > >to track it all down but it is very, v
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Andrze
j Bialecki writes:
>On Sat, 24 Jul 1999, Mark Huizer wrote:
>
>> >
>> > >MFS is badly broken when used in a diskless configuration. I am trying
>> > >to track it all down but it is very, very frustrating.
>> > >
>> > >Also BOOTP seems to be br
On Sat, 24 Jul 1999, Mark Huizer wrote:
> >
> > >MFS is badly broken when used in a diskless configuration. I am trying
> > >to track it all down but it is very, very frustrating.
> > >
> > >Also BOOTP seems to be broken -- rootdev is not being setup any more
> > >and I can't
Doug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> *Nod* well, we do a lot of "unusual" things around here. :) Given
>your explanation I think that the culprit is probably apache. The virtual
>host file has approximately 16k hosts.
*ouch*
You should take a gander at http://www.apache.org/docs/vhosts/mass
It seems Thomas Schuerger wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I've set the option
>
> IDE_DELAY=1500
>
> and compiled and installed my kernel (I even did config -r
> before that), but when booting, the IDE driver still waits
> for about half a minute before continuing, instead for
> about 1.5 seconds. Has anyon
Try more then 2000, in my computer IDE_DELEY work fine
Hi!
I've set the option
IDE_DELAY=1500
and compiled and installed my kernel (I even did config -r
before that), but when booting, the IDE driver still waits
for about half a minute before continuing, instead for
about 1.5 seconds. Has an
Hi!
I've set the option
IDE_DELAY=1500
and compiled and installed my kernel (I even did config -r
before that), but when booting, the IDE driver still waits
for about half a minute before continuing, instead for
about 1.5 seconds. Has anyone succeeded in setting the
IDE delay? SCSI_DELAY work
: >
: > We 32 really ought to be enough. Looking at your PR I think
:
:It's not my PR. I am just asking for opinions on his proposal.
Oops, sorry! s/you/him/g
: > dealing with loops, I would hate to change it based on this particular
: > setup because I think this set
> :PR 12634 mentions the increase of MAXSYMLINKS (src/sys/sys/param.h) to
> :64.
> :
> :Any opinions?
> :
> :Nick
> :http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=12634
>
> We 32 really ought to be enough. Looking at your PR I think
It's not my PR. I am just asking for opinion
:PR 12634 mentions the increase of MAXSYMLINKS (src/sys/sys/param.h) to
:64.
:
:Any opinions?
:
:Nick
:http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=12634
We 32 really ought to be enough. Looking at your PR I think
you are decoupling your directories a little too much and should
PR 12634 mentions the increase of MAXSYMLINKS (src/sys/sys/param.h) to
64.
Any opinions?
Nick
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=12634
--
ISIS/STA, T.P.270, Joint Research Centre, 21020 Ispra, Italy
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" i
My boxes at work are -current from 7/16. They both use IDE disks since
other than system stuff the disk I/O for the real work is all NFS. In the
daily logs this morning I see this:
> wd0: interrupt timeout (status 58 error 0)
> wd0: wdtimeout() DMA status 4
Can anyone shed some l
>
> >MFS is badly broken when used in a diskless configuration. I am trying
> >to track it all down but it is very, very frustrating.
> >
> >Also BOOTP seems to be broken -- rootdev is not being setup any more
> >and I can't figure out which commit broke it.
>
> I'm sorry, I d
>> I am afraid this is not quite right.
>>
>> Bruce, Doug and I are currently in discussion to fix this.
>
>Hrm. Why does the AXP cons.c track udev_t while the x86 verson
>doesn't? As best as I can tell, the AXP doesn't seem to need it any
>more than the x86 does, unless I've missed something.
Kazutaka YOKOTA wrote in message ID
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >Does this look right? Without this patch, my AXP was memory faulting
> >every time it booted, in the dev2udev routine.
>
> I am afraid this is not quite right.
>
> Bruce, Doug and I are currently in discussion to fix this.
Hrm. Wh
Yes, looks right.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Gary Palmer" writes:
>
>Does this look right? Without this patch, my AXP was memory faulting
>every time it booted, in the dev2udev routine.
>
>Thanks
>
>
>Index: alpha/alpha/cons.c
>=
29 matches
Mail list logo
