On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Alex Zepeda wrote:
> I seriously doubt this will make porting any easier.
You think so? I experience a lot of this when I try to recompile stuff for
FreeBSD (most of it are due to lack of a real getopt routine).
> c.) dependencies on bugs in glibc.
What bugs have you found
Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 18 Jul 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > Hmm, I ended up using a global variable which I increment at the
> > beginning of the signal handler, and decrement at the end.
> As long as you make sure the code won't have multiple access
> that would
Wes Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On the SPARC, FWIW, the return address is in %i7. What is difficult to
> determine (programmatically) is if the function is a normal or leaf function;
> different return sequences are used for each.
It doesn't matter; all I need it for is to find the cal
On Sun, 18 Jul 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Please read the documentation.
> >
> > This is hard since the actual machines and switches are almost
> > 6000 miles away from me and the last time I checked, it didn't come with
> > manuals. I know my way around the Cisco routers but the s
On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Per Lundberg wrote:
> I need a libc 100% compatible with glibc to make porting (from Linux)
> easier. And, as a side note, I think both FreeBSD and Linux would benefit
> of having compatible libc:s.
I seriously doubt this will make porting any easier. 99% of the porting
iss
On Sun, 18 Jul 1999, Alex Zepeda wrote:
> Perhaps if you explain what it is you're trying to accomplish, there might
> be an easier option than porting *shudder* glibc?
I need a libc 100% compatible with glibc to make porting (from Linux)
easier. And, as a side note, I think both FreeBSD and Lin
At 11:40 AM 18/07/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Tim Baird wrote:
>
>> I hope everyone is benefitting by these simple facts
>
> *chuckle* "Simple facts.." You sound like my physics professor. I for one
>am benefitting very much from the discussion. I got hired at my current job
>as a software per
On Saturday, 17th July 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
>:Is there any way to force softupdate on on a mounted system, or do I have to
>:either move the / to another machine, or move a floppydrive to this machine?
>
>If you boot single-user, root will be mounted read-only and you should
>be ab
:
:Portal FS did give me a couple of starting points.. It looks interesting.
:Just for my own clarification... how would this be different than NFS
:(specifically local NFS)?
:
:--
:David Cross | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:Systems Administrator/Research Programmer | W
> :
> :Look into the portal filesystem. This is what you want :)
> :
> : Brian Fundakowski Feldman _ __ ___ ___ ___ ___
> : gr...@freebsd.org _ __ ___ | _ ) __| \
>
> Actually, it isn't quite. All the portal filesystem will allow you
> to do is pass back
Jaye Mathisen writes:
> The man page says the tee option on ipfw is not yet supported.
>
> I'm wondering if that is still the case as of 3.2-stable, or if the doc is
> just out of date.
You are correct, it's still not implemented..
-Archie
__
> :
> :Look into the portal filesystem. This is what you want :)
> :
> : Brian Fundakowski Feldman _ __ ___ ___ ___ ___
> : [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ __ ___ | _ ) __| \
>
> Actually, it isn't quite. All the portal filesystem will allow you
> to do is pass back
Jaye Mathisen writes:
> The man page says the tee option on ipfw is not yet supported.
>
> I'm wondering if that is still the case as of 3.2-stable, or if the doc is
> just out of date.
You are correct, it's still not implemented..
-Archie
_
On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Per Lundberg wrote:
> Has anybody done a port of glibc to FreeBSD? (I'm not interested in
> opinions about how poor it is or how evil the FSF are; I'm only asking to
> avoid duplicate work. Thanks.)
Perhaps if you explain what it is you're trying to accomplish, there might
be
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> On 17 Jul 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
>
> > Is there any (evidently non-portable) way of determining a function
> > instance's return address? I have an idea or two that involves the
> > return address and dladdr(). The code I currently use looks like this:
>
> T
> >
> > I have a test driver that returns these values from the poll() function.
> > However, the application
> > that called the select() is not getting an error. Instead, the select
> > is returning that the particular file descriptor is, in this case,
> > 'readable' !
>
> Take a look at "se
On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Per Lundberg wrote:
> Has anybody done a port of glibc to FreeBSD? (I'm not interested in
> opinions about how poor it is or how evil the FSF are; I'm only asking to
> avoid duplicate work. Thanks.)
Perhaps if you explain what it is you're trying to accomplish, there might
b
On Saturday, 17 July 1999 at 15:07:12 -0500, Craig Johnston wrote:
> Well, I'm looking into doing striping and mirroring on a new webserver
> I am bringing up (3.2-stable) and I have to say, vinum looks very cool.
> It took me like half an hour to get it going from first contact.
>
> Nice job Greg
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> On 17 Jul 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
>
> > Is there any (evidently non-portable) way of determining a function
> > instance's return address? I have an idea or two that involves the
> > return address and dladdr(). The code I currently use looks like this:
>
>
On Saturday, 17 July 1999 at 22:51:17 +0400, Alex Povolotsky wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Is it possible to have a root partition on vinum'ed disk and benefit from
> mirroring? If yes, how do I do it?
Not yet. It's on the drawing board.
Greg
--
See complete headers for address, home page and phone number
> >
> > I have a test driver that returns these values from the poll() function.
> > However, the application
> > that called the select() is not getting an error. Instead, the select
> > is returning that the particular file descriptor is, in this case,
> > 'readable' !
>
> Take a look at "s
On Sun, Jul 18, 1999, Per Lundberg wrote:
> Has anybody done a port of glibc to FreeBSD? (I'm not interested in
> opinions about how poor it is or how evil the FSF are; I'm only asking to
> avoid duplicate work. Thanks.)
Not that I know of, but what's the point?
--
|Chris Costello
|Programmi
On Saturday, 17 July 1999 at 15:07:12 -0500, Craig Johnston wrote:
> Well, I'm looking into doing striping and mirroring on a new webserver
> I am bringing up (3.2-stable) and I have to say, vinum looks very cool.
> It took me like half an hour to get it going from first contact.
>
> Nice job Greg
[trimming CC list]
Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
>
> Greg Lehey writes:
> > mdoc.samples(7). Now tell me that that's not intuitive.
>
> It would seem mdoc.samples(7) does not teach by example :)
>
> d...@des ~% man -t mdoc.samples | lpr -Plex
> Usage: .Rv -std sections 2 and 3 only
This is a bu
On Saturday, 17 July 1999 at 22:51:17 +0400, Alex Povolotsky wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Is it possible to have a root partition on vinum'ed disk and benefit from
> mirroring? If yes, how do I do it?
Not yet. It's on the drawing board.
Greg
--
See complete headers for address, home page and phone numbe
On Sun, Jul 18, 1999, Per Lundberg wrote:
> Has anybody done a port of glibc to FreeBSD? (I'm not interested in
> opinions about how poor it is or how evil the FSF are; I'm only asking to
> avoid duplicate work. Thanks.)
Not that I know of, but what's the point?
--
|Chris Costello <[EMAIL PR
On Sun, Jul 18, 1999 at 05:44:39PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> True, but since some of what I'm doing is making sure that there are
> no security implications to some of the paths, doing that would be
> useless, since that wouldn't be what is checked into the system. We
> really don't need the
[trimming CC list]
Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
>
> Greg Lehey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > mdoc.samples(7). Now tell me that that's not intuitive.
>
> It would seem mdoc.samples(7) does not teach by example :)
>
> des@des ~% man -t mdoc.samples | lpr -Plex
> Usage: .Rv -std sections 2 and 3
On Sun, Jul 18, 1999 at 05:44:39PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> True, but since some of what I'm doing is making sure that there are
> no security implications to some of the paths, doing that would be
> useless, since that wouldn't be what is checked into the system. We
> really don't need the
On Sun, 18 Jul 1999, Mike Smith wrote:
> > Mike Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > The loader will, at some stage in the future, grow a persistent data
> > > store in which items like this can be saved.
> >
> > Doesn't /boot/[defaults/]loader.conf[.local] qualify as persistent
> > data storage?
>
> There
On Sun, 18 Jul 1999, Mike Smith wrote:
> > Mike Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > The loader will, at some stage in the future, grow a persistent data
> > > store in which items like this can be saved.
> >
> > Doesn't /boot/[defaults/]loader.conf[.local] qualify as persistent
> > data storage?
>
> Ther
> > Mike Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > The loader will, at some stage in the future, grow a persistent data
> > > store in which items like this can be saved.
> >
> > Doesn't /boot/[defaults/]loader.conf[.local] qualify as persistent
> > data storage?
>
> There is little or no chance that the loader
> Mike Smith wrote:
> >
> > The loader will, at some stage in the future, grow a persistent data
> > store in which items like this can be saved.
>
> Doesn't /boot/[defaults/]loader.conf[.local] qualify as persistent
> data storage?
There is little or no chance that the loader will gain the abil
>
> I guess I forgot about the overhead. I've tested between two
> FreeBSD machines using Intel Pro100+ NIC cards connected to a Cisco 2924XL
> Switch Full Duplex and never seen anything close to the speeds.
using netperfv2pl3 and FreeBSD 2.2.8 on 300MHz PII with fxp
cards (all fro
> > Mike Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > The loader will, at some stage in the future, grow a persistent data
> > > store in which items like this can be saved.
> >
> > Doesn't /boot/[defaults/]loader.conf[.local] qualify as persistent
> > data storage?
>
> There is little or no chance that the loader
> Mike Smith wrote:
> >
> > The loader will, at some stage in the future, grow a persistent data
> > store in which items like this can be saved.
>
> Doesn't /boot/[defaults/]loader.conf[.local] qualify as persistent
> data storage?
There is little or no chance that the loader will gain the abi
In message <99jul19.084214est.40...@border.alcanet.com.au> Peter Jeremy writes:
: There's nothing stopping you unifdefing telnetd on your system. I
: have no opinion as to the merits (or otherwise) of leaving the
: ifdef's in the main code tree.
True, but since some of what I'm doing is making su
Has anybody done a port of glibc to FreeBSD? (I'm not interested in
opinions about how poor it is or how evil the FSF are; I'm only asking to
avoid duplicate work. Thanks.)
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
>
> I guess I forgot about the overhead. I've tested between two
> FreeBSD machines using Intel Pro100+ NIC cards connected to a Cisco 2924XL
> Switch Full Duplex and never seen anything close to the speeds.
using netperfv2pl3 and FreeBSD 2.2.8 on 300MHz PII with fxp
cards (all fr
Warner Losh wrote:
>What purpose is served by the twisty maze of ifdefs in telnetd?
Probably for portability.
> I'd
>like to unifdef many of them. I'm trying to track down a bug and the
>twisty maze makes it very hard to follow. Comments?
There's nothing stopping you unifdefing telnetd on you
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Peter Jeremy writes:
: There's nothing stopping you unifdefing telnetd on your system. I
: have no opinion as to the merits (or otherwise) of leaving the
: ifdef's in the main code tree.
True, but since some of what I'm doing is making sure that there are
no securi
The man page says the tee option on ipfw is not yet supported.
I'm wondering if that is still the case as of 3.2-stable, or if the doc is
just out of date.
I would like to make a copy of incoming UDP packets to a specific port for
some testing. tee seems like an easy way to go.
To Unsubscri
Has anybody done a port of glibc to FreeBSD? (I'm not interested in
opinions about how poor it is or how evil the FSF are; I'm only asking to
avoid duplicate work. Thanks.)
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
The man page says the tee option on ipfw is not yet supported.
I'm wondering if that is still the case as of 3.2-stable, or if the doc is
just out of date.
I would like to make a copy of incoming UDP packets to a specific port for
some testing. tee seems like an easy way to go.
To Unsubscr
Warner Losh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What purpose is served by the twisty maze of ifdefs in telnetd?
Probably for portability.
> I'd
>like to unifdef many of them. I'm trying to track down a bug and the
>twisty maze makes it very hard to follow. Comments?
There's nothing stopping you unifd
Just to remind everyone where the actual logic is contained...
Check out swap_pager.c line 1135 (in version $Id: vm_pageout.c,v
1.129.2.6 1999/03/18 23:28:39 julian Exp $).
FreeBSD is not 100% indiscriminant. It favors procs with PID > 48 as
targets. You could tune this to discriminate against
On 18 Jul 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> Alfred Perlstein writes:
> > On 18 Jul 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > > Alfred Perlstein writes:
> > > > I doubt this is
> > > > at all portable and may fail because of optimizations and ABI, such
Just to remind everyone where the actual logic is contained...
Check out swap_pager.c line 1135 (in version $Id: vm_pageout.c,v
1.129.2.6 1999/03/18 23:28:39 julian Exp $).
FreeBSD is not 100% indiscriminant. It favors procs with PID > 48 as
targets. You could tune this to discriminate against
Alfred Perlstein writes:
> On 18 Jul 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > Alfred Perlstein writes:
> > > I doubt this is
> > > at all portable and may fail because of optimizations and ABI, such
> > > as archs that store the return address in a reg
On 18 Jul 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On 18 Jul 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > > Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > I doubt this is
> > > > at all portable and may fail
On 18 Jul 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> Alfred Perlstein writes:
> > This looks like what you are doing is trying to grab the data on the
> > stack before "log" which is the return address.
>
> Yes. It actually works :)
>
> > I doubt this is
Assem Salama wrote:
>
> I am interested in helping in the development in FreeBSD. I'm not a
> hotshot programmer but I know how to program. Could someone please send
> me the available projects that I can work on and some info about them?
Step one, ignore all those responses to the poster
Tim Baird wrote:
> I hope everyone is benefitting by these simple facts
*chuckle* "Simple facts.." You sound like my physics professor. I for
one
am benefitting very much from the discussion. I got hired at my current job
as a software person, but I have a background in hardware so I
Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 18 Jul 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > I doubt this is
> > > at all portable and may fail because of optimizations and ABI, such
> > > as archs
On 18 Jul 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > This looks like what you are doing is trying to grab the data on the
> > stack before "log" which is the return address.
>
> Yes. It actually works :)
>
> >
Assem Salama wrote:
>
> I am interested in helping in the development in FreeBSD. I'm not a
> hotshot programmer but I know how to program. Could someone please send
> me the available projects that I can work on and some info about them?
Step one, ignore all those responses to the poste
Tim Baird wrote:
> I hope everyone is benefitting by these simple facts
*chuckle* "Simple facts.." You sound like my physics professor. I for one
am benefitting very much from the discussion. I got hired at my current job
as a software person, but I have a background in hardware so I
> On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Stephen Hocking-Senior Programmer PGS Tensor Perth wrote:
>
> > I was checking out the firewall setup in /etc/rc.firewall, and noticed that
> > the simple example relied on a fixed IP address for the external interface.
> > I
> > don't know ahead of time what IP address
Greg Lehey writes:
> mdoc.samples(7). Now tell me that that's not intuitive.
It would seem mdoc.samples(7) does not teach by example :)
d...@des ~% man -t mdoc.samples | lpr -Plex
Usage: .Rv -std sections 2 and 3 only
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - d...@flood.ping.uio.no
To Unsubscribe: send
> On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Stephen Hocking-Senior Programmer PGS Tensor Perth wrote:
>
> > I was checking out the firewall setup in /etc/rc.firewall, and noticed that
> > the simple example relied on a fixed IP address for the external interface. I
> > don't know ahead of time what IP address is g
Greg Lehey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> mdoc.samples(7). Now tell me that that's not intuitive.
It would seem mdoc.samples(7) does not teach by example :)
des@des ~% man -t mdoc.samples | lpr -Plex
Usage: .Rv -std sections 2 and 3 only
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsu
Alfred Perlstein writes:
> This looks like what you are doing is trying to grab the data on the
> stack before "log" which is the return address.
Yes. It actually works :)
> I doubt this is
> at all portable and may fail because of optimizations a
Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This looks like what you are doing is trying to grab the data on the
> stack before "log" which is the return address.
Yes. It actually works :)
> I doubt this is
> at all portable and may fail becaus
> > Please read the documentation.
>
> This is hard since the actual machines and switches are almost
> 6000 miles away from me and the last time I checked, it didn't come with
> manuals. I know my way around the Cisco routers but the switches is still
> a mystery...
All of the Cisco docum
On Sun, 18 Jul 1999 sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
> > I'm not sure if it shows the mac address of the cisco's port or
> > the actual device connected to it...
> >
> > FastEthernet0/1 is up, line protocol is up
> > Hardware is Fast Ethernet, address is 0090.abea.3bc1 (bia
> > 0090.abea.3bc1)
> >
> I'm not sure if it shows the mac address of the cisco's port or
> the actual device connected to it...
>
> FastEthernet0/1 is up, line protocol is up
> Hardware is Fast Ethernet, address is 0090.abea.3bc1 (bia
> 0090.abea.3bc1)
>
> FastEthernet0/2 is up, line protocol is up
> Hardwa
On Friday, 16 July 1999 at 19:15:31 -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> : Actually, I was referring to *digital* Audio cables like those
> :used for CD Transports to Digital/Analog convertors such as Kimber Kable
> :would be higher grade compared to Monster Cable. You're correct about the
> :bit er
> > Please read the documentation.
>
> This is hard since the actual machines and switches are almost
> 6000 miles away from me and the last time I checked, it didn't come with
> manuals. I know my way around the Cisco routers but the switches is still
> a mystery...
All of the Cisco docu
On Sun, 18 Jul 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I'm not sure if it shows the mac address of the cisco's port or
> > the actual device connected to it...
> >
> > FastEthernet0/1 is up, line protocol is up
> > Hardware is Fast Ethernet, address is 0090.abea.3bc1 (bia
> > 0090.abea.3bc1)
>
> I'm not sure if it shows the mac address of the cisco's port or
> the actual device connected to it...
>
> FastEthernet0/1 is up, line protocol is up
> Hardware is Fast Ethernet, address is 0090.abea.3bc1 (bia
> 0090.abea.3bc1)
>
> FastEthernet0/2 is up, line protocol is up
> Hardw
On Sun, 18 Jul 1999, Leif Neland wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jul 1999, Vincent Poy wrote:
>
> > Ah, you have a point there. The problem is we have so many wires,
> > we don't know which port goes to what on the Catalyst so we had it on
> > autodetect and FreeBSD does boot up with fxp0 showing 100Mbp
> > Ah, you have a point there. The problem is we have so many wires,
> > we don't know which port goes to what on the Catalyst so we had it on
> > autodetect and FreeBSD does boot up with fxp0 showing 100Mbps Full Duplex.
> >
> Cisco's can show you which mac-adresses are on which port. Proba
On Friday, 16 July 1999 at 19:15:31 -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> : Actually, I was referring to *digital* Audio cables like those
> :used for CD Transports to Digital/Analog convertors such as Kimber Kable
> :would be higher grade compared to Monster Cable. You're correct about the
> :bit e
On Sat, 17 Jul 1999, Vincent Poy wrote:
> Ah, you have a point there. The problem is we have so many wires,
> we don't know which port goes to what on the Catalyst so we had it on
> autodetect and FreeBSD does boot up with fxp0 showing 100Mbps Full Duplex.
>
Cisco's can show you which ma
On Sun, 18 Jul 1999, Leif Neland wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jul 1999, Vincent Poy wrote:
>
> > Ah, you have a point there. The problem is we have so many wires,
> > we don't know which port goes to what on the Catalyst so we had it on
> > autodetect and FreeBSD does boot up with fxp0 showing 100Mb
> > Ah, you have a point there. The problem is we have so many wires,
> > we don't know which port goes to what on the Catalyst so we had it on
> > autodetect and FreeBSD does boot up with fxp0 showing 100Mbps Full Duplex.
> >
> Cisco's can show you which mac-adresses are on which port. Prob
On Sat, 17 Jul 1999, Vincent Poy wrote:
> Ah, you have a point there. The problem is we have so many wires,
> we don't know which port goes to what on the Catalyst so we had it on
> autodetect and FreeBSD does boot up with fxp0 showing 100Mbps Full Duplex.
>
Cisco's can show you which m
77 matches
Mail list logo
