Re: [RFC, RFT] LDM support (aka Windows Dynamic Volumes)

2012-03-12 Thread Adrian Chadd
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

Re: [RFC, RFT] LDM support (aka Windows Dynamic Volumes)

2012-03-12 Thread Andrey V. Elsukov
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

Re: [RFC, RFT] LDM support (aka Windows Dynamic Volumes)

2012-03-12 Thread Oliver Pinter
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.

Re: sudo through ssh broken on -current?

2012-03-12 Thread Bjoern A. Zeeb
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

Re: [RFC, RFT] LDM support (aka Windows Dynamic Volumes)

2012-03-12 Thread Ivan Voras
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

Re: sudo through ssh broken on -current?

2012-03-12 Thread Dimitry Andric
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'

Double free() in libc or gdb ?

2012-03-12 Thread Alexandre Martins
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

Re: Double free() in libc or gdb ?

2012-03-12 Thread Konstantin Belousov
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

Improved Intel Turbo Boost status/control

2012-03-12 Thread Alexander Motin
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,

Re: Improved Intel Turbo Boost status/control

2012-03-12 Thread Ivan Klymenko
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

Re: Improved Intel Turbo Boost status/control

2012-03-12 Thread Alexander Motin
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

Re: Improved Intel Turbo Boost status/control

2012-03-12 Thread Ivan Klymenko
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

Re: Improved Intel Turbo Boost status/control

2012-03-12 Thread Alexander Motin
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

Re: Improved Intel Turbo Boost status/control

2012-03-12 Thread Ivan Klymenko
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

Re: Improved Intel Turbo Boost status/control

2012-03-12 Thread Ivan Klymenko
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

Re: Improved Intel Turbo Boost status/control

2012-03-12 Thread Alexander Motin
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

Re: Improved Intel Turbo Boost status/control

2012-03-12 Thread Ian Lepore
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)

Re: Improved Intel Turbo Boost status/control

2012-03-12 Thread Ivan Klymenko
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: > >>> >

Re: Improved Intel Turbo Boost status/control

2012-03-12 Thread Alexander Motin
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

[head tinderbox] failure on amd64/amd64

2012-03-12 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
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

[head tinderbox] failure on i386/i386

2012-03-12 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
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

Re: x220 notes

2012-03-12 Thread Kevin Oberman
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