Now that you mention it, Yes: ad2 is -0% busy.
Disks ad0 ad2 cd0 pass0 ofodintrn
KB/t 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 %slo-z30576 buf
tps 0 0 0 0 tfree23 dirtybuf
MB/s 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17867
Fact is, there is no CD/DVD-ROM in existence that should be capable of
making anything above 900MHz skip audio when running at full stink. My AMD
AthlonXP 1600+ cpu can burn a CD at 40X from the network, while playing
Wolfenstein at 1024x768 in WinXP. The fact that FreeBSD can't even burn at
4-6X w
If you have a 1.0GHz Durn processor, theoretically you should be able to
burn that CD at 32X (burner permitting), have 10+ Mozilla windows open, all
without a skip in the playback, or boggage. I have an AMD K6-2 450, and I
currently can't do 1/4 the stuff simultaneously without music skipping as I
Actually, on my box, all I/O devices are in DMA mode, and I'm seeing this no
matter what device is doing the heavy I/O. I think this should be fixed by
5.1 because it is very annoying. A Pentium 133 in Windows 95 doesnt even do
it this bad.
-Craig
From: "Don" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Should a PR b
I see this too: when I listen to tunes and untar a file, the music plays at
about .7x the speed, and sounds kind of "robotic", even with xmms niced
to -20, and tar/gzip at +20. I am running 5.0-CURRENT-20030320-JPSNAP, so I
doubt an 'upgrade' is really going to do anything for you at this time.
-C
I have a client machine behind my FreeBSD box, which connects to the
internet via NAT and Squid. I notice when downloading a file from the
internet that squid cpu% goes up, which is cool and all, but natd's does
as well. Is there a method using firewall rules in a specific order, or
any method for
> | My gigabit link between my Windows XP box and my FreeBSD box is
always
> | really slow after booting FreeBSD, until I go like this:
> |
> | ifconfig em0 down ; ifconfig em0 up
> |
> | ..and then I get top speed again. Ping goes from 9ms+ to 0.2ms-.
This
> | happens regardless of whether the Fr
My gigabit link between my Windows XP box and my FreeBSD box is always
really slow after booting FreeBSD, until I go like this:
ifconfig em0 down ; ifconfig em0 up
..and then I get top speed again. Ping goes from 9ms+ to 0.2ms-. This
happens regardless of whether the FreeBSD box is booted first,
'cc1' is _not_ a system process. How is this normal?
-Craig
- Original Message -
From: "Andre Guibert de Bruet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Craig Reyenga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2003 19:52
Sub
Check these out:
http://chat.carleton.ca/~creyenga/1sttime.JPG
http://chat.carleton.ca/~creyenga/again.JPG
Pretty strange, my normally-aspirated computer is somehow using 168% of cpu.
boss# uname -a
FreeBSD boss.sewer.org 5.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT #0: Fri Mar 7
01:49:18 EST 2003
[EMAIL P
I got 5.0-RC3 working great on my box today, but when I went to make a
custom kernel and read NOTES i noticed that it makes no mention of
IPFIREWALL and friends. Is this intentional?
craig@boss:~$ grep IPFIREWALL /sys/i386/conf/NOTES
craig@boss:~$
Nothing shows up. What's the scoop?
-Craig
To
>No matter what, disc#1 has a finite amount of space and it's going to be
>impossible to come up with a combination of packages that keeps everyone
>happy. Sooner or later, "popular" comes down to somebody's judgement.
>
>To see what's currently in the package split, look at
>src/release/scripts/p
These mentioned licensing issues make sense, however I still think that
there should be some sort of system to ensure big and/or popular packages to
make it to CD #1.
-Craig
> > One thing I noticed in previous releases is that the choice of
> > packages is a
> > little odd. Many small packages an
I haven't actually tried 5.0RC3 yet, so what I'm about to say may be
irrelevant, but here goes:
One thing I noticed in previous releases is that the choice of packages is a
little odd. Many small packages and ones that are not popular seem to make
it on the first CD, while bigger and/or more popul
A couple days ago, I tried to send a PR with send-pr(1), and it said "PR
sent" although it said it quite rapidly, which made it look like that wasn't
true, and sure enough the PR certainly didn't make it. Anyways, here's the
PR in question:
SEND-PR: BE ADVISED THAT FREEBSD PROBLEM REPORTS ARE PUBL
I can't believe this thread is still polluting the email system. 386's are
old, slow, and virtually useless. I think that the time wasted on supporting
junk hardware would be better spent on utilising the features and
capabilities of new hardware. As someone mentioned, if you want to use crap
hardw
Yes, and then make 5.0-useless-Tandy1000.iso for the other 8 guys that could
use it.
-Craig
- Original Message -
From: "Johnson David" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Terry Lambert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 12:55
Subject: Re: 80386 out of GENERI
Sorry for butting in, but my $.02 is that 386's are old enough that
FreeBSD, or any other OS for that matter, shouldn't wait up for them.
They've gotten to the point where they are basically useless except
for running older software, which was likely written for them anyways.
If I had a 386 that I
Actually, I then did that, and thats when it _actually_ pooched the disk
-Craig
- Original Message -
From: "Nate Lawson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Craig Reyenga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 15:39
I cvsup'ed today (dec 12, about 5pm est) from DP2, and it went all fine and
dandy until I went to boot into it, when it said that /usr had a bad
superblock. I then went on to fsck -y it, and it says that _every_ file is
an "unknown type" and goes on to ruin the fs. It was a UFS2 volume. I'm not
sur
I have tried a 3com 905 in place of the Realtek, and I can get speeds of
about 3.5Mb/sec (that's still no 7.9 like I used to get). It does, however,
give a few tx underrun errors at the beginning of large transfers:
xl0: transmission error: 90
xl0: tx underrun, increasing tx start threshold to 120
trying various versions of if_rl.c? Or is there something
else that I should be trying?
-Craig
- Original Message -
From: "Brad Knowles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Brad Knowles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Craig Reyenga"
&l
Sure, I'm not sure what to tell you though. If you can tell me what info you
need,
then I'll find it for you. I sense a small game of chicken meets egg forming
here.
-Craig
- Original Message -
From: "Cliff L. Biffle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Well...
> My Realtek card in my 5.0 workstation
Right on. I hope that you find something because right now it seems
so hopeless. I'd have to say that this is the strangest problem that I've
ever had with FreeBSD.
-Craig
- Original Message -
From: "Cliff L. Biffle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Craig Reyeng
'll try to
fetch it. I've already given a full dmesg and a few other things,
so I'm not sure what to say at this point.
Thanks in advance,
-Craig
- Original Message -
From: "Terry Lambert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Craig Reyenga wrote:
> > I just tr
this computer is where I keep all of my stuff,
and with exams, I just won't have the time. Yes I know that I "shouldn't be
using 5.0 then" but a problem is a problem and it should be fixed.
-Craig
- Original Message -
From: "Terry Lambert" <[EMAIL PROTE
It worked fine in 4.7 and all previous versions, just DP2 dunno about DP1.
-Craig
- Original Message -
From: "Terry Lambert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Craig Reyenga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 23:
In a recent thread started by me, named "Network is crazy slow in DP2"
I wrote that I'm getting substantially lower speeds than I should be
over my 100mbit link (realtek 8139 on both sides). I'm not going to
repeat everything that I have already said in the other thread, but I'm
going to re-ask
760 0K12K sleep0:42 0.05% 0.05% random
33008 craig 960 2148K 1180K RUN 0:00 0.00% 0.00% top
I have ttcp installed now, what shall I do with it?
-Craig
Maxime Henrion wrote:
>Craig Reyenga wrote:
>> Sure. The cards at both ends are realtek 8139B
DEVICE_POLLING
options IPFIREWALL
options IPFIREWALL_DEFAULT_TO_ACCEPT
options IPFIREWALL_FORWARD
options IPDIVERT
options IPSTEALTH
options ACCEPT_FILTER_DATA
options ACCEPT_FILTER_HTTP
options NETSMB
options NETSMBCRYPTO
options
I actually don't have those options in my kernel already, and would it
make _that_ much of a difference?
-Craig
Kris Kennaway wrote:
>On Fri, Nov 29, 2002 at 03:24:24PM -0500, Craig Reyenga wrote:
>> Yesterday I installed 5.0-DP2 without problems, however my 100mbit
link
>&g
Yesterday I installed 5.0-DP2 without problems, however my 100mbit link
to
my desktop computer goes extremely slowly using HTTP, FTP or SMB and
proabably others. I used to be able to tranfer files using FTP at over
7.9MB/sec in 4.7 but now the best that I can do is 800KB/sec. When I
look at 't
32 matches
Mail list logo
