a linuxism.
On 10 March 2016 at 19:23, Trond Endrestøl <
trond.endres...@fagskolen.gjovik.no> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2016 18:38+0300, Andrey Fesenko wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 6:11 PM, krad wrote:
> > > As Eric said you cant have /boot on a separate dataset as th
property, symlinks and rootfs variables in the loader.conf. But why would
you want to do this? It's more work and non standard, and will break a lot?
On 10 March 2016 at 12:11, Andrey Fesenko wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 2:55 PM, krad wrote:
> > presumably it boots now?
>
presumably it boots now?
On 10 March 2016 at 11:01, Andrey Fesenko wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:49 PM, krad wrote:
> > Make sure you are running the latest snapshot of current or 10.3 as
> well, as
> > the MFC commits were in early February for 10-stable
> >
>
Make sure you are running the latest snapshot of current or 10.3 as well,
as the MFC commits were in early February for 10-stable
On 9 March 2016 at 16:01, Andrey Fesenko wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 6:48 PM, Eric van Gyzen wrote:
> > On 03/09/2016 09:40, Andrey Fesenko wrote:
> >> Hello,
>
Just a sanity check 1st.
Are you going to be using zfs or ufs?
If zfs you probably want the reflash the card the the relevant HBA firmware
rather the the raid firmware. This will expose the disks nativly which is
best for zfs.
Sorry if this isn't appropriate for you but I would thought I would c
Hi, I need to get one of my machines converted over from bios GPT zfsroot
boot to efi. I know you can boot freebsd under EFI with a ufs kernel but
this isnt the route i want. There are patches under test for EFI zfs root.
However when I read the thread it was unclear which version of these
patches
hmm, got it working by downgrading to v32 firmware. It seems the is a bug
in intels wonderful uefi code, which of course the blame freebsd for 8/
On 18 September 2014 13:05, krad wrote:
> Has anyone got freebsd booting on an intel NUC DN2820FYKH?
>
> It installs fine just wont boot (d
Has anyone got freebsd booting on an intel NUC DN2820FYKH?
It installs fine just wont boot (doesnt see boot loader). I'm doing legacy
not efi mode.
I'm starting to bang my head against the wall on this one. Time to leave it
for a bit i think
___
fre
I always found natting in ipfw rather awkward and harder than in pf.
Looking at the man page it doesnt seem to have changed. I should probably
give it another go though as it has been about 10 years now
On 31 July 2014 14:41, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 10:02:22PM +1000, Da R
ioned in this thread. It would be awesome if it ended up as a supported
linux thing as well, so the world could be rid of iptables. However i guess
thats just an unrealistic dream
On 19 July 2014 09:32, Stephen Hurd wrote:
> krad wrote:
> > that is true and I have not problem using man
the day we didn't have Google to ask the oracle for cut and paste
> answers. If the man page is accurate that should be good enough.
> On Jul 18, 2014 8:26 AM, "krad" wrote:
>
>> this is also another important point. If you go onto google and search on
>> how to d
this is also another important point. If you go onto google and search on
how to do this and that under pf, you get a mix of freebsd, and openbsd
stuff coming up. I havent analysed it but i think the majority of the stuff
is openbsd related. THerefore I find some nice solution to my problem, only
t
I would like to see an updated version of pf. I realize its a big job to
port it though
On 17 July 2014 00:12, Kristian K. Nielsen wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have been encouraged by people on the pf-mailinglist to move this
> discussion to the current mailinglist since this may be an area in the OS
On 22 November 2011 13:36, C. P. Ghost wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 11:30 AM, <"Thomas Mueller
> wrote:
> > But I don't see any advantage to putting /, /usr, and /var on separate
> partitions.
> >
> > Tom
>
> Regarding separate /usr and /var: the advantage is that you can
> keep /usr read-o
On 6 October 2011 02:27, Paul Mather wrote:
> On Oct 5, 2011, at 9:03 AM, krad wrote:
>
> > Have you dont the simple thing and checked to see if you have any weird
> whitespace in the dir names. Try using bash tab completion for the dir name.
> Also drop all non bash complet
On 4 October 2011 17:09, Olivier Smedts wrote:
> 2011/10/3 Paul Mather :
> > I know ZFS does not have a fsck utility ("because it doesn't need one":),
> but does anyone know of any way of fixing this corruption short of
> destroying the pool, creating a new one, and restoring from backup? Is
> t
>Those who still want active FTP (what on earth for?)
I have encountered hosting companies in the past that only have inbound port
21 access for security reasons. I think this a bit odd but it is was it is.
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
ht
On 27 September 2011 10:18, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:28:49AM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
> > On 09/27/11 08:35, h h wrote:
> > >Kevin Oberman writes:
> > >
> > >>On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovett wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>With the advent of the conversion of HEA
On 4 May 2011 04:13, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
>
> Edwin,
>
> >>> >> /dev/acd0 /cdrom cd9660 ro,noauto 0
> 0
> >>> >> /dev/acd1 /cdrom1 cd9660 ro,noauto 0
> 0
>
> As a side note. These are also now useless & can be sent to /dev/null
On 28 February 2011 08:47, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 04:03:01PM -0700, Shawn Webb wrote:
>> I'm so excited for your work. Thanks so much for bringing zpool v28 to
>> FreeBSD. Will v28 come to 8-stable?
>
> Yes, hopefully in 1-2 month(s).
>
> --
> Pawel Jakub Dawidek
On 14 January 2011 18:26, 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.
>
> Afte
On 25 September 2010 21:10, Darren Pilgrim wrote:
> M. Warner Losh wrote:
>
>> It would be very convenient to have this particular thing in the base, and
>> we shouldn't be too dogmatic about never having any new 3rd
>> party things in the base.
>>
>
> Please no, don't add optional servers to th
On 20 September 2010 14:37, John Hay wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 03:59:20PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> > on 20/09/2010 15:47 Pawel Jakub Dawidek said the following:
> > > No, it doesn't. ZFS works a bit differently. ZFS operate on pools, not
> > > really on partitions. One ZFS file system
On 19 September 2010 18:10, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 01:45:42 +0200 Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
>
> > My company was in need for functionality similar to nextboot(8), but on
> > boot loader level, so we can have two partitions we boot from where one
> > is known to be g
On 18 June 2010 10:08, oizs wrote:
> I've seen people with the same configuration doing 160MB/s writes and
> 250MB/s+ reads with raid5 so I still think something isn't right. And using
> raid10 with 4 disks is a rather large waste of capacity.
>
> -zsozso
>
>
> On 2010.06.18. 1:55, Chuck Swiger w
On 22 April 2010 08:33, Alex Keda wrote:
> 22.04.2010 11:29, Gordon Tetlow ?:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 12:17 AM, Alex Keda > ad...@lissyara.su>> wrote:
>>
>>It's need feature. I test patch - it work for me (CURRENT, amd64)
>>Can I use some as:
>> /path/to/dir/*.conf
>>?
>>
On 8 April 2010 17:47, Sam Fourman Jr. wrote:
> > ZFS is still currently in heavy development so it might happen. Having
> siad
> > that it looks like oracle have totally buggered it up for everyone with
> > their retroactive licenses. I hope the CDL was tight enough that stuff
> wont
> > have to
On 7 April 2010 18:33, Dan Nelson wrote:
> In the last episode (Apr 07), krad said:
> > On 7 April 2010 05:38, Freddie Cash wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 9:35 PM, lhmwzy wrote:
> > > > What's your mean??
> > >
> > > See the arc
On 7 April 2010 05:38, Freddie Cash wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 9:35 PM, lhmwzy wrote:
>
> > What's your mean??
> >
>
> See the archives for the freebsd-fs mailing list. There are two separate
> groups working on getting ZFSv22 added to FreeBSD 9-CURRENT. And there's
> work ongoing to get
On 18 March 2010 20:41, Freddie Cash wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 1:07 PM, Justin Hibbits >wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Anton Shterenlikht > >wrote:
> >
> > > I was in the single user mode doing 'make installworld'
> > > when the system froze and I had to cold reboot.
> > >
30 matches
Mail list logo
