On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 7:24 PM, matt wrote:
> On 03/08/12 01:28, Ganael LAPLANCHE wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 20:29:16 +0200, Vrachnis Ilias-Dimitrios wrote
>>
>> Hi,
>>
2. I've read bad reviews about webcam having poor quality on
GNU/Linux, so I would assume it will be the same on
TB --- 2012-03-12 16:20:00 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-03-12 16:20:00 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for i386/i386
TB --- 2012-03-12 16:20:00 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2012-03-12 16:20:00 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2012-03-12 16:20:00 - /usr/bin/c
TB --- 2012-03-12 16:20:00 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-03-12 16:20:00 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for amd64/amd64
TB --- 2012-03-12 16:20:00 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2012-03-12 16:20:00 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2012-03-12 16:20:00 - /usr/bin
On 03/12/12 22:45, Ian Lepore wrote:
On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 21:15 +0200, Alexander Motin wrote:
I'd like to note that recent r232793 change to cpufreq(4) in HEAD opened
simple access to the Intel Turbo Boost status/control. I've found that
at least two of my desktop systems (based Nehalem and Sa
В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 22:38:16 +0200
Alexander Motin пишет:
> On 03/12/12 22:22, Ivan Klymenko wrote:
> > В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 22:11:28 +0200
> > Alexander Motin пишет:
> >
> >> On 03/12/12 22:05, Ivan Klymenko wrote:
> >>> В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:55:21 +0200
> >>> Alexander Motin пишет:
> >>>
>
On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 21:15 +0200, Alexander Motin wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I'd like to note that recent r232793 change to cpufreq(4) in HEAD opened
> simple access to the Intel Turbo Boost status/control. I've found that
> at least two of my desktop systems (based Nehalem and SandyBridge Core
> i7s)
On 03/12/12 22:22, Ivan Klymenko wrote:
В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 22:11:28 +0200
Alexander Motin пишет:
On 03/12/12 22:05, Ivan Klymenko wrote:
В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:55:21 +0200
Alexander Motin пишет:
On 03/12/12 21:33, Ivan Klymenko wrote:
В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:15:35 +0200
Alexander Motinп
В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 22:11:28 +0200
Alexander Motin пишет:
> On 03/12/12 22:05, Ivan Klymenko wrote:
> > В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:55:21 +0200
> > Alexander Motin пишет:
> >
> >> On 03/12/12 21:33, Ivan Klymenko wrote:
> >>> В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:15:35 +0200
> >>> Alexander Motin пишет:
> I'd l
В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 22:11:28 +0200
Alexander Motin пишет:
> On 03/12/12 22:05, Ivan Klymenko wrote:
> > В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:55:21 +0200
> > Alexander Motin пишет:
> >
> >> On 03/12/12 21:33, Ivan Klymenko wrote:
> >>> В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:15:35 +0200
> >>> Alexander Motin пишет:
> I'd l
On 03/12/12 22:05, Ivan Klymenko wrote:
В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:55:21 +0200
Alexander Motin пишет:
On 03/12/12 21:33, Ivan Klymenko wrote:
В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:15:35 +0200
Alexander Motin пишет:
I'd like to note that recent r232793 change to cpufreq(4) in HEAD
opened simple access to the I
В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:55:21 +0200
Alexander Motin пишет:
> On 03/12/12 21:33, Ivan Klymenko wrote:
> > В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:15:35 +0200
> > Alexander Motin пишет:
> >> I'd like to note that recent r232793 change to cpufreq(4) in HEAD
> >> opened simple access to the Intel Turbo Boost status/co
On 03/12/12 21:33, Ivan Klymenko wrote:
В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:15:35 +0200
Alexander Motin пишет:
I'd like to note that recent r232793 change to cpufreq(4) in HEAD
opened simple access to the Intel Turbo Boost status/control. I've
found that at least two of my desktop systems (based Nehalem and
В Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:15:35 +0200
Alexander Motin пишет:
> Hi.
>
> I'd like to note that recent r232793 change to cpufreq(4) in HEAD
> opened simple access to the Intel Turbo Boost status/control. I've
> found that at least two of my desktop systems (based Nehalem and
> SandyBridge Core i7s) wi
Hi.
I'd like to note that recent r232793 change to cpufreq(4) in HEAD opened
simple access to the Intel Turbo Boost status/control. I've found that
at least two of my desktop systems (based Nehalem and SandyBridge Core
i7s) with enabled Intel Turbo Boost in BIOS it is not use it by default,
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 05:50:33PM +0100, Alexandre Martins wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I'm currently having some trouble with the dynamic loader.
>
> I have the libc compilled with "MALLOC_DEBUG" flag to detect double free.
> When i run this piece of code (attached file) thought GDB, i have this
> a
Dear all,
I'm currently having some trouble with the dynamic loader.
I have the libc compilled with "MALLOC_DEBUG" flag to detect double free.
When i run this piece of code (attached file) thought GDB, i have this
assertion :
Assertion failed: ((run->regs_mask[elm] & (1U << bit)) == 0), functio
On 2012-03-12 00:55, Michael Butler wrote:
> I noted some thing odd when executing the following ..
>
> /home/imb> ssh imb@ "sudo /sbin/ipfw list"
>
> sudo: (malloc) /usr/src/lib/libc/stdlib/malloc.c:2644: Failed assertion:
> "(run->regs_mask[elm] & (1U << bit)) == 0"
> Abort
>
> Adding '-t'
On 11/03/2012 10:35, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
> Hi, All
>
> i wrote GEOM_PART_LDM class. It provides basic support of Logical Disk Manager
> partitioning scheme [1]. Since LDM metadata is not documented i used several
> articles found in the web and linux implementation as reference [2].
Seems ok
On 11. Mar 2012, at 23:55 , Michael Butler wrote:
> I noted some thing odd when executing the following ..
>
> /home/imb> ssh imb@ "sudo /sbin/ipfw list"
>
> sudo: (malloc) /usr/src/lib/libc/stdlib/malloc.c:2644: Failed assertion:
> "(run->regs_mask[elm] & (1U << bit)) == 0"
> Abort
>
> Add
On 3/12/12, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> 2012/3/11 Andrey V. Elsukov :
>> On 11.03.2012 23:31, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>>> This is awesome!
>>>
>>> Is it just read-only, or does it allow creation/destruction of LDM
>>> volumes?
>>
>> It is read-only, but you can partially destroy LDM metadata on given disk.
On 12.03.2012 11:49, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> partitions. Actually, it is possible make better LDM support in conjunction
>> with GEOM_RAID, but i think we don't need it :)
>
> Hah, I wouldn't say no to being able to modify (correctly) LDM metadat.a
>
> i'd also love to see say, read/write Linux LV
2012/3/11 Andrey V. Elsukov :
> On 11.03.2012 23:31, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> This is awesome!
>>
>> Is it just read-only, or does it allow creation/destruction of LDM volumes?
>
> It is read-only, but you can partially destroy LDM metadata on given disk.
> LDM keeps information about all volumes on
22 matches
Mail list logo