In reply to my own post (which nobody has replied to, perhaps
because I never actually phrased a question :-) )... I have found
that if the kernel config file is named GENERIC, it will boot
just fine; otherwise, I loose the console. I have done a
cvsup tonight as well as a make world and many di
Thank god other people are having trouble with XFree86 4.0.2 and the
i810 chipset, I was beginning to think I was going crazy. Even the guys
in #freebsd (irc.openprojects.net) think I'm an idiot because I can't
get it working =)
The problem is actually worse than a simple lockup. The server crash
Greg Lehey wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, 30 January 2001 at 8:37:56 +0600, Boris Popov wrote:
> > On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Greg Lehey wrote:
> >
> >>> You can create symlinks in /dev, you cannot mknod there.
> >>
> >> What is the reason for this? How does a program or script know
> >> whether the system i
Boris Popov wrote:
>
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Greg Lehey wrote:
>
> > > You can create symlinks in /dev, you cannot mknod there.
> >
> > What is the reason for this? How does a program or script know
> > whether the system is running DEVFS or not?
>
> I don't see any good reason why this
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Boris Popov
writes:
>On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Greg Lehey wrote:
>
>> > You can create symlinks in /dev, you cannot mknod there.
>>
>> What is the reason for this? How does a program or script know
>> whether the system is running DEVFS or not?
>
> I don't see a
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Greg Lehey writes:
>> You can create symlinks in /dev, you cannot mknod there.
>
>What is the reason for this? How does a program or script know
>whether the system is running DEVFS or not?
The reson for not creating device nodes is that you don't have
all the in
Hi...
Forgive me if I'm being such a nuisance. I wish I can help but I don't have
the strength to :(
I have seen many responses that prove that there is something WRONG with agp
support both in -CURRENT and -STABLE if used against XFree86 4.0.2. Here is
another one:
- Forwarded message from
Mike Meyer stated:
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] types:
: > At 29 Jan 2001 11:49:36 +0100,
: > Dag-Erling Smorgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > > No. Mergemaster doesn't care about the contents of the file, only
: > > about its $FreeBSD$ tag. As long as this stays the same, it'll leave
: > > the file alon
[EMAIL PROTECTED] types:
> At 29 Jan 2001 11:49:36 +0100,
> Dag-Erling Smorgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No. Mergemaster doesn't care about the contents of the file, only
> > about its $FreeBSD$ tag. As long as this stays the same, it'll leave
> > the file alone. If you remove the $FreeBSD$
On Tuesday, 30 January 2001 at 8:37:56 +0600, Boris Popov wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Greg Lehey wrote:
>
>>> You can create symlinks in /dev, you cannot mknod there.
>>
>> What is the reason for this? How does a program or script know
>> whether the system is running DEVFS or not?
>
> I
At 29 Jan 2001 11:49:36 +0100,
Dag-Erling Smorgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No. Mergemaster doesn't care about the contents of the file, only
> about its $FreeBSD$ tag. As long as this stays the same, it'll leave
> the file alone. If you remove the $FreeBSD$ tag in the installed file
> or some
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Greg Lehey wrote:
> > You can create symlinks in /dev, you cannot mknod there.
>
> What is the reason for this? How does a program or script know
> whether the system is running DEVFS or not?
I don't see any good reason why this can't be supported. We may
talk abou
On Monday, 29 January 2001 at 16:10:24 +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Steve Ames writes:
>> On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 10:19:34PM -0800, John Baldwin wrote:
>>>
>>> On 29-Jan-01 John Indra wrote:
2. If something change to the source tree's MAKEDEV, what should
How can I use Ctm_rmail on mail downloaded using netscape, i f it is not
possible how can I retrive sources from mail?
Please answer on mi personal mail to.
Rasa
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
At 02:02 PM 1/29/2001 -0500, Daniel Eischen wrote:
>On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Manfred Antar wrote:
>> libc_r won't compile since changes made last night.
>> (libc_r)504}make
>> cc -O -pipe -DLIBC_RCS -DSYSLIBC_RCS -I/usr/src/lib/libc_r/../libc/include
>-DPTHREAD_KERNEL -D_THREAD_SAFE -I/usr/src/lib/li
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 11:31:32 -0500 (EST)
Garrett Wollman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
GW> I would rather have a single file, located in a directory intended for
GW> configuration files. Perhaps we could call it ``/etc/shells'' which
GW> seems to be popular.
As you wish. I have no axe to g
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Manfred Antar wrote:
> libc_r won't compile since changes made last night.
> (libc_r)504}make
> cc -O -pipe -DLIBC_RCS -DSYSLIBC_RCS -I/usr/src/lib/libc_r/../libc/include
>-DPTHREAD_KERNEL -D_THREAD_SAFE -I/usr/src/lib/libc_r/uthread
>-I/usr/src/lib/libc_r/../../include -D_L
Just reporting
farrago.feral.com > root vinum
mkdir: /dev/vinum: Operation not supported
mkdir: /dev/vinum: Operation not supported
mkdir: /dev/vinum: Operation not supported
mkdir: /dev/vinum: Operation not supported
an't create /dev/vinum/Control: No such file or directory
Can't create /
Matthew Jacob wrote:
>
> *groan* I'm having trouble believing that *config* of all things is now
> dependent on time to avoid bugs... This is *one* for the books
Yep. That's why I disabled it and will replace it with something more
robust. In hindsight it was Not A Good Thing.
> On Mon, 29
libc_r won't compile since changes made last night.
(libc_r)504}make
cc -O -pipe -DLIBC_RCS -DSYSLIBC_RCS -I/usr/src/lib/libc_r/../libc/include
-DPTHREAD_KERNEL -D_THREAD_SAFE -I/usr/src/lib/libc_r/uthread
-I/usr/src/lib/libc_r/../../include -D_LOCK_DEBUG -D_PTHREADS_INVARIANTS -c
/usr/src/lib/
Title: 8
You are invited to become a VIP member
of www.eVIPlist.com, the "Robb
Report" of urban events. Where membership certainly has it's
privileges. This exclusive list is "opt-in" only and you
will n
*groan* I'm having trouble believing that *config* of all things is now
dependent on time to avoid bugs... This is *one* for the books
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Peter Wemm wrote:
> Bruce Evans wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Peter Wemm wrote:
> >
> > > Bruce Evans wrote:
> > > > Config now rem
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 11:31:32AM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> < said:
> > I would rather that a separate configuration file be read, for example,
> > with a list of shells(5) format files to consult.
>
> I would rather have a single file, located in a directory intended for
> configuration f
< said:
> I would rather that a separate configuration file be read, for example,
> with a list of shells(5) format files to consult.
I would rather have a single file, located in a directory intended for
configuration files. Perhaps we could call it ``/etc/shells'' which
seems to be popular.
Bruce Evans wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Peter Wemm wrote:
>
> > Bruce Evans wrote:
> > > Config now removes almost all headers:
> > > ...
> > > This is starting from compile directory populated by a previous version
> > > of config. Starting from scratch, config seems to work for the first
> >
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Peter Wemm wrote:
> Bruce Evans wrote:
> > Config now removes almost all headers:
> > ...
> > This is starting from compile directory populated by a previous version
> > of config. Starting from scratch, config seems to work for the first
> > run. The second run complains a
Bruce Evans wrote:
> Config now removes almost all headers:
>
> Removing stale header: apm.h
> Removing stale header: opt_userconfig.h
> Removing stale header: opt_syscons.h
> Removing stale header: opt_cpu.h
> Removing stale header: opt_clock.h
> ...
> make: don't know how to make opt_global.h(c
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Steve Ames writes:
>On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 10:19:34PM -0800, John Baldwin wrote:
>>
>> On 29-Jan-01 John Indra wrote:
>> > 2. If something change to the source tree's MAKEDEV, what should I do?
>>
>> Nothing. With DEVFS, each driver in the kernel creates its own
On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 10:19:34PM -0800, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> On 29-Jan-01 John Indra wrote:
> > 2. If something change to the source tree's MAKEDEV, what should I do?
>
> Nothing. With DEVFS, each driver in the kernel creates its own
> entries automatically, so MAKEDEV isn't used.
Hrm...
Alex Zepeda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
} On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 01:28:03PM -0600, Patrick Hartling wrote:
}
} > ldd was telling me that it had both libc.so.3 and libc.so.5 which seemed
} > very bad to me. When I recomipled LyX to see if that would fix things,
} > I noticed that ld was giving a
Config now removes almost all headers:
Removing stale header: apm.h
Removing stale header: opt_userconfig.h
Removing stale header: opt_syscons.h
Removing stale header: opt_cpu.h
Removing stale header: opt_clock.h
...
make: don't know how to make opt_global.h(continuing)
make: don't know how to ma
Vadim Belman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 11:53:50PM -0500, Louis A. Mamakos wrote:
> > It doesn't seem unreasonable to have a single file with a list of allowable
> > shells.
> It does if you think of mergemaster, for example. With any upgrade
> it consider /etc/she
On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 11:53:50PM -0500, Louis A. Mamakos wrote:
> Does this capability really need to exist (e.g., supporting many files)? It
> would seem like the additional complexity would be not what you want for what's
> essentially a security policy mechansim. Who gets to own these incl
33 matches
Mail list logo
