On 1/20/2011 3:37 PM, David Demelier wrote:
> Why does the installer use GPT partition by default? Do you know that
> GPT is not supported on every (even modern) computer ?
GPT is fully compatible with the universe of PC/AT BIOS-compatible
computers, which is essentially all "PCs" going back to th
On Jan 20, 2011, at 12:31 PM, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 21:17:40 +0100
> Ulrich Spörlein wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Currently our buildworld relies on groff(1) and vgrind(1) being
>> present in the host system. I have a patch ready that at least makes
>> sure these are built
On 01/20/11 17:21, Doug Barton wrote:
On 01/20/2011 14:47, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
On 01/20/11 16:44, Doug Barton wrote:
On 01/20/2011 14:15, Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Jan 20, 2011, at 1:37 PM, David Demelier wrote:
[ ... ]
Why does the installer use GPT partition by default? Do you know
that GP
On 01/20/11 17:44, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 1:37 PM, David Demelier
wrote:
On 14/01/2011 19:26, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
As those of you who have been reading freebsd-sysinstall and
freebsd-arch know, I have been working for a few weeks on a lightweight
new installer named
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 1:37 PM, David Demelier
wrote:
> On 14/01/2011 19:26, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
>>
>> As those of you who have been reading freebsd-sysinstall and
>> freebsd-arch know, I have been working for a few weeks on a lightweight
>> new installer named 'bsdinstall'. This is designed
On 01/20/2011 14:47, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
On 01/20/11 16:44, Doug Barton wrote:
On 01/20/2011 14:15, Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Jan 20, 2011, at 1:37 PM, David Demelier wrote:
[ ... ]
Why does the installer use GPT partition by default? Do you know
that GPT is not supported on every (even moder
On 01/20/11 16:44, Doug Barton wrote:
On 01/20/2011 14:15, Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Jan 20, 2011, at 1:37 PM, David Demelier wrote:
[ ... ]
Why does the installer use GPT partition by default? Do you know
that GPT is not supported on every (even modern) computer ?
Sure. Legacy PC/BIOS platform
On 01/20/2011 14:15, Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Jan 20, 2011, at 1:37 PM, David Demelier wrote:
[ ... ]
Why does the installer use GPT partition by default? Do you know that GPT is
not supported on every (even modern) computer ?
Sure. Legacy PC/BIOS platforms can work with a hybrid GPT which inc
2011/1/20 Chuck Swiger :
> On Jan 20, 2011, at 1:37 PM, David Demelier wrote:
> [ ... ]
>> Why does the installer use GPT partition by default? Do you know that GPT is
>> not supported on every (even modern) computer ?
>
> Sure. Legacy PC/BIOS platforms can work with a hybrid GPT which includes t
On Jan 20, 2011, at 1:37 PM, David Demelier wrote:
[ ... ]
> Why does the installer use GPT partition by default? Do you know that GPT is
> not supported on every (even modern) computer ?
Sure. Legacy PC/BIOS platforms can work with a hybrid GPT which includes the
legacy or "protective" MBR use
On Thu, 20.01.2011 at 15:31:03 -0500, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 21:17:40 +0100
> Ulrich Spörlein wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > Currently our buildworld relies on groff(1) and vgrind(1) being
> > present in the host system. I have a patch ready that at least makes
> > sure these
On 14/01/2011 19:26, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
As those of you who have been reading freebsd-sysinstall and
freebsd-arch know, I have been working for a few weeks on a lightweight
new installer named 'bsdinstall'. This is designed to replace sysinstall
for the 9.0 release.
After two weeks of testi
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 21:17:40 +0100
Ulrich Spörlein wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Currently our buildworld relies on groff(1) and vgrind(1) being
> present in the host system. I have a patch ready that at least makes
> sure these are built during bootstrap-tools and completes the
> WITHOUT_GROFF flag.
>
>
Hello,
Currently our buildworld relies on groff(1) and vgrind(1) being present
in the host system. I have a patch ready that at least makes sure these
are built during bootstrap-tools and completes the WITHOUT_GROFF flag.
vgrind(1) is only used for two papers under share/doc and we could
easily e
On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 12:58:33AM -0600, Ade Lovett wrote:
>
> On Jan 14, 2011, at 19:31 , Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> > On Jan 14, 2011, at 10:26 AM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
> >
> >> The final architecture on which we use sysinstall, ia64, is currently
> >> unsupported, because I don't know how
On 1/20/2011 9:30 AM, Matthew Fleming wrote:
> As far as I can tell this is another cvsup / tinderbox bug. Both
> sysctl.h and tsc.c were modified in r217616 but somehow tsc.c is
> seeing the old version of sysctl.h. This happened on another of my
> commits a few weeks ago.
Sometimes it takes a
As far as I can tell this is another cvsup / tinderbox bug. Both
sysctl.h and tsc.c were modified in r217616 but somehow tsc.c is
seeing the old version of sysctl.h. This happened on another of my
commits a few weeks ago.
Hmm, does bumping __FreeBSD_version have anything to do with this? I
bela
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:35:10 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:35:10 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for powerpc64/powerpc
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:35:10 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:35:24 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:35:24 - /u
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:22:12 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:22:12 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for powerpc/powerpc
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:22:12 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:22:25 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:22:25 - /usr
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:50:46 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:50:46 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for sparc64/sun4v
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:50:46 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:50:55 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:50:55 - /usr/b
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:38:04 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:38:04 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for sparc64/sparc64
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:38:04 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:38:15 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-01-20 11:38:15 - /usr
Dnia czwartek, 20 stycznia 2011 o 10:44:27 Max Khon napisał(a):
> Adrian,
>
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Adrian Chadd
> wrote:
>
> I'm in the process of merging in the non-intrusive changes to the
>
> > if_ath code into -HEAD.
> >
> > I'd appreciate some testing just to ensure I haven't
Adrian,
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
I'm in the process of merging in the non-intrusive changes to the
> if_ath code into -HEAD.
>
> I'd appreciate some testing just to ensure I haven't broken anything
> terribly obvious.
>
Any chances for proper support for Atheros 802.
On 20 January 2011 17:44, Max Khon wrote:
> Any chances for proper support for Atheros 802.11n cards?
> Should not we just port ath9k (Linux) or athn (OpenBSD) drivers?
*grin* I have the beginnings of functioning 802.11n support.
This stuff is just structural precursors to that. I'm just tidyin
24 matches
Mail list logo
