TB --- 2012-03-29 06:07:26 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-03-29 06:07:26 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for powerpc/powerpc
TB --- 2012-03-29 06:07:26 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2012-03-29 06:08:53 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2012-03-29 06:08:53 - /usr
Am 03/27/12 15:20, schrieb Eduardo Morras:
> At 10:54 27/03/2012, you wrote:
>> Since the last PostgreSQL port update, server and client are version
>> 9.1.3 and a newly build of the FreeBSD OS (both 9.0-STABLE and
>> 10.0-CURRENT, amd64), clients like pgadmin3 or webinterfaces like those
>> from r
TB --- 2012-03-29 06:59:43 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-03-29 06:59:43 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for powerpc64/powerpc
TB --- 2012-03-29 06:59:43 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2012-03-29 07:01:26 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2012-03-29 07:01:26 - /u
TB --- 2012-03-29 12:23:01 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-03-29 12:23:01 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for ia64/ia64
TB --- 2012-03-29 12:23:01 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2012-03-29 12:23:01 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2012-03-29 12:23:01 - /usr/bin/c
TB --- 2012-03-29 13:15:11 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-03-29 13:15:11 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for mips/mips
TB --- 2012-03-29 13:15:11 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2012-03-29 13:16:16 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2012-03-29 13:16:16 - /usr/bin/c
TB --- 2012-03-29 13:15:34 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-03-29 13:15:34 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for powerpc/powerpc
TB --- 2012-03-29 13:15:34 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2012-03-29 13:17:57 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2012-03-29 13:17:57 - /usr
I was wondering if there are some objections using TMPFS for /tmp and
/var/run.
I figured out some problems with some rc.d scripts when using TMPFS for
/var/run, samba and OpenLDAP do store some informations like PID in a
subfolder of their own in /var/run, but the rc.d scripts are not
checking pro
Hi,
It appears that overlapping I/O regions can trigger a bug on display adapters,
which I've tried to fix here:
http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/233662
I'm not an expert in this area, though if anyone has any better suggestions, I
am willing to try that.
Sympthom: ACPI enabled i386 kern
TB --- 2012-03-29 14:06:55 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-03-29 14:06:55 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for powerpc64/powerpc
TB --- 2012-03-29 14:06:55 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2012-03-29 14:07:46 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2012-03-29 14:07:47 - /u
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 04:18:06PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
> I was wondering if there are some objections using TMPFS for /tmp and
> /var/run.
> ...
> My question is whether there are objections using TMPFS for bot /tmp/
> and /var/run/ at this stage on FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT/amd64?
>
I have
On 29 Mar 2012 16:49, "O. Hartmann"
wrote:
>
> I was wondering if there are some objections using TMPFS for /tmp and
> /var/run.
> I figured out some problems with some rc.d scripts when using TMPFS for
> /var/run, samba and OpenLDAP do store some informations like PID in a
> subfolder of their ow
Chris Rees wrote:
> Any rc script that complains about an empty /var/run is buggy- it should be
> assumed that it will be emptied on boot.
Then why are there entries for /var/run/{named,ppp,wpa_supplicant}
in /etc/mtree/BSD.var.dist? Should they be removed?
___
Am 03/29/12 18:14, schrieb David Wolfskill:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 04:18:06PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
>> I was wondering if there are some objections using TMPFS for /tmp and
>> /var/run.
>> ...
>> My question is whether there are objections using TMPFS for bot /tmp/
>> and /var/run/ at this s
On 03/29/12 09:18, O. Hartmann wrote:
I was wondering if there are some objections using TMPFS for /tmp and
/var/run.
For /tmp, what exactly do you mean?
If you want to use tmpfs instead of md/mdmfs when tmpmfs="YES" in
rc.conf, I have no opinion.
However, if you always want to use tmpfs in
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 02:50:00PM -0500, Eric van Gyzen wrote:
> ...
> However, if you always want to use tmpfs instead of stable storage,
> please do not. Some people expect /tmp to be persistent. This is why
> /etc/defaults/rc.conf has clear_tmp_enable="NO". Changing this would
> break the
Am 03/29/12 21:50, schrieb Eric van Gyzen:
> On 03/29/12 09:18, O. Hartmann wrote:
>> I was wondering if there are some objections using TMPFS for /tmp and
>> /var/run.
>
> For /tmp, what exactly do you mean?
>
> If you want to use tmpfs instead of md/mdmfs when tmpmfs="YES" in
> rc.conf, I have
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 10:07:01PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
> ...
> Aren't MDMFS backed filesystems of static size? And haven't they to be
> created first before they can be used? Using TMPFS seems toi be a more
> convenient way to me - dynamical (?), using a fstab entry for convenience.
One may
В Thu, 15 Dec 2011 01:02:03 +0100
"O. Hartmann" пишет:
> Just read this on
>
> phoronix.com
>
> Is this finally a chance to get GPGPU on FreeBSD natively supported?
>
> nVidia has a binary driver, supporting well their higher end graphics
> cards on FreeBSD 64bit natively.
>
> I do not unders
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 03/29/12 09:59, Vitaly Magerya wrote:
> Chris Rees wrote:
>> Any rc script that complains about an empty /var/run is buggy- it
>> should be assumed that it will be emptied on boot.
>
> Then why are there entries for /var/run/{named,ppp,wpa_suppl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 03/29/12 09:41, Chris Rees wrote:
> On 29 Mar 2012 16:49, "O. Hartmann"
> wrote:
>>
>> I was wondering if there are some objections using TMPFS for /tmp
>> and /var/run. I figured out some problems with some rc.d scripts
>> when using TMPFS for
On 03/29/2012 14:58, David Wolfskill wrote:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 02:50:00PM -0500, Eric van Gyzen wrote:
...
However, if you always want to use tmpfs instead of stable storage,
please do not. Some people expect /tmp to be persistent. This is why
/etc/defaults/rc.conf has clear_tmp_enable="N
TB --- 2012-03-29 20:22:47 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-03-29 20:22:47 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for mips/mips
TB --- 2012-03-29 20:22:47 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2012-03-29 20:23:56 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2012-03-29 20:23:56 - /usr/bin/c
TB --- 2012-03-30 04:37:00 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-03-30 04:37:00 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for mips/mips
TB --- 2012-03-30 04:37:00 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2012-03-30 04:37:42 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2012-03-30 04:37:42 - /usr/bin/c
23 matches
Mail list logo
