> Two words: "forget it".
>
> > I read an article about Linux BIOS project on Slashdot.org. Is there
> > anybody working on FreeBSD BIOS?
> >
> > I really like to see something like 'boot net - install' or serial
> > console. It would be cool to have dignostics routine, too.
I haven't looked
> This is a message which appeared on the aussie-isp mailing list earlier
> today. I thought people here might like it :-) Ross is a reliable source,
> so I doubt we can chalk this one up to "urban legend".
Maybe I'll have my graphics guy whip up a picture of Tux with horns and
holding a pitc
John Baldwin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > The best people to determin if it is nessesary is Yahoo and Hotmail.
> > Since they have worked with these issues in the thousands of machines.
>
> Actually, Yahoo is basically who funded the PXE development as their
> employees did most of the developm
[Format recovered--see http://www.lemis.com/email/email-format.html]
On Wednesday, 14 June 2000 at 1:00:27 -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> So, if you are in the Singapore Changi international airport,
> the internet center in the transit area will loan you for FREE,
> a wavelan PC-CARD.
>
> So
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000, Stefan Molnar wrote:
> I have not built clusters over 200 nodes, but I almost never
> go into the BIOS for configurations. And the systems that
> I have used, include serial access within the BIOS. And
> adding PXE roms will make things nicer on the install front.
> But
Hi,
Thanks for that suggestions. I changed my character
driver a little bit to take care of the more than 4K
IOCTLs. My firmware download needs more than 4K size
of IOCTL since i have to download a file of around
1MB.
Regards
Nandan
--- Mike Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [moved to -hacke
Has anyone done anything with the Arlan 655?
There is GNU code at http://www.ylenurme.ee/~elmer/655/,
I bought some 630's and was wondering if anyone has tried
writing drivers for the ISA 655 card.
-piet
Sergey Babkin wrote:
>
> "Daniel C. Sobral" wrote:
> >
> > Warner Losh wrote:
> > >
> > > Tell them that it is a daemon, not a devil. A daemon isn't the devil,
> > > nor does it promote the worship of devilry.
> > >
> > > In Japan, the daemon is viewed as a nice, lovable creature. The
> >
> > O
"Daniel C. Sobral" wrote:
>
> Warner Losh wrote:
> >
> > Tell them that it is a daemon, not a devil. A daemon isn't the devil,
> > nor does it promote the worship of devilry.
> >
> > In Japan, the daemon is viewed as a nice, lovable creature. The
>
> Of course, they don't translate daemon as "
Parag Patel wrote:
>
> On Thu, 15 Jun 2000 19:29:53 PDT, Mike Smith wrote:
> >
> >By now, based on the timeframe I've watched you
> >through, I'd say that you should have a board that looks like a plain VGA
> >framebuffer and has a keyboard cable hung out the back, and software up
> >and running.
Ronald G Minnich wrote:
>
> here's what we can. Somebody send a kernel for an L440GX+ that has pretty
> minimal stuff. I'd prefer it to have IDE, no networking, no SCSI, i.e. a
> pretty small thing. I'll try to use it as the payload for linuxbios and
> see if it boots.
I'm cc'ing Mike here so he
Matthew Jacob wrote:
>
> > Of course, this brings to light the fact that I don't think we support
> > "soft" dependancies, ie. load-this-if-you-can-but-don't-fail-if-you-can't.
>
> Oh, err, uh, that's gotta be fixed. Let the caller/invoker of a load action
> decide what the policy for failure is
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000 19:24:28 PDT, Mike Smith wrote:
>
>Uh. You're kidding me, right?
Well, maybe a little. The L440GX+ board is well-documented with a nice
diagram documenting the IRQ swizzle. The SuperMicro board isn't, so I'm
probably screwed there.
I think it is possible to probe it by put
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000 19:29:53 PDT, Mike Smith wrote:
>
>By now, based on the timeframe I've watched you
>through, I'd say that you should have a board that looks like a plain VGA
>framebuffer and has a keyboard cable hung out the back, and software up
>and running. Build cost at 100 off would p
>
> Well, the main reason we're replacing the BIOS is that we've had several
> requests from people who want relatively sane firmware in their
> computers. :) One of our (potential) customers needs to completely
> manage their rack-mount systems remotely using the serial port without
> video an
Warner Losh wrote:
>
> Tell them that it is a daemon, not a devil. A daemon isn't the devil,
> nor does it promote the worship of devilry.
>
> In Japan, the daemon is viewed as a nice, lovable creature. The
Of course, they don't translate daemon as "akuma". :-)
--
Daniel C. Sobral
> On Thu, 15 Jun 2000 18:49:23 PDT, Mike Smith wrote:
> >
> >8) Actually, the things that really bother me are eg. interrupt routing
> >and the ACPI GPIO bits, since the former is board-specific and you *must*
> >know about it to set PCI up, and the latter is often necessary to do
> >important th
Well, the main reason we're replacing the BIOS is that we've had several
requests from people who want relatively sane firmware in their
computers. :) One of our (potential) customers needs to completely
manage their rack-mount systems remotely using the serial port without
video and without a
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000 18:49:23 PDT, Mike Smith wrote:
>
>8) Actually, the things that really bother me are eg. interrupt routing
>and the ACPI GPIO bits, since the former is board-specific and you *must*
>know about it to set PCI up, and the latter is often necessary to do
>important things like, e
> On Thu, 15 Jun 2000 18:37:51 PDT, Mike Smith wrote:
>
> >ie. "LinuxBIOS won't initialise the system correctly, so you'd better
> >clean up after it"?
>
> More like it ain't complete and is intended to boot Linux, so anything
> that Linux initializes but FBSD doesn't is probably SOL. :)
8) A
Ronald G Minnich wrote:
>
> On Thu, 15 Jun 2000, Sergey Babkin wrote:
>
> > Maybe I'm completely mistunderstanding the subject, but
> > what about EFI (Extendable Firmware Interface) ? It's the
>
> We're looking at it. Do you really believe in reference implementations? I
> don't. I sure hope they
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000 18:37:51 PDT, Mike Smith wrote:
>ie. "LinuxBIOS won't initialise the system correctly, so you'd better
>clean up after it"?
More like it ain't complete and is intended to boot Linux, so anything
that Linux initializes but FBSD doesn't is probably SOL. :)
I'm building a kern
> here's what we can. Somebody send a kernel for an L440GX+ that has pretty
> minimal stuff. I'd prefer it to have IDE, no networking, no SCSI, i.e. a
> pretty small thing. I'll try to use it as the payload for linuxbios and
> see if it boots.
GENERIC should work, presuming that the hardware's b
At Wed, 14 Jun 2000 10:19:36 -0600,
Warner Losh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Tatsumi Hosokawa writes:
> : At Wed, 14 Jun 2000 09:36:47 -0600,
> : Warner Losh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : >
> : > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Julian Elischer writes:
> : > : w
> Mike Smith wrote:
> >
> > > > I'd suggest you go talk to Parag Patel, who's just wasted about three
> > > > months of his life trying to make SmartFirmware run on _one_ supposedly
> > > > well-documented board. Parag is nobody's fool, and I consider his
> > > > results pretty representative of
Mike Smith wrote:
>
> > > I'd suggest you go talk to Parag Patel, who's just wasted about three
> > > months of his life trying to make SmartFirmware run on _one_ supposedly
> > > well-documented board. Parag is nobody's fool, and I consider his
> > > results pretty representative of the issue.
here's what we can. Somebody send a kernel for an L440GX+ that has pretty
minimal stuff. I'd prefer it to have IDE, no networking, no SCSI, i.e. a
pretty small thing. I'll try to use it as the payload for linuxbios and
see if it boots.
The key is that freebsd may need to change a few things to m
> The best people to determin if it is nessesary is Yahoo and Hotmail.
> Since they have worked with these issues in the thousands of machines.
Actually, Yahoo is basically who funded the PXE development as their
employees did most of the development and testing with PXE and now use
it in product
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:47:32 PDT, Mike Smith wrote:
>
>I'd suggest you go talk to Parag Patel, who's just wasted about three
>months of his life trying to make SmartFirmware run on _one_ supposedly
>well-documented board. Parag is nobody's fool, and I consider his
>results pretty representativ
> I'm new at this mailling list. Sorry for my english, I'm a brazilian.
>
> I'd like to know one thing about this disk. How the guys from Berkeley did
> that disk?
They didn't.
> This is because of the files at /stand directory of the disk. There are 54
> files of 1.1MB at the /stand and this f
Hi, guys...
I'm new at this mailling list. Sorry for my english, I'm a brazilian.
I'd like to know one thing about this disk. How the guys from Berkeley did
that disk?
This is because of the files at /stand directory of the disk. There are 54
files of 1.1MB at the /stand and this files fill onl
> So, I repeat: easily done, not acceptable to freebsd core.
And again I tell you, no. Quite acceptable, not easily done. If someone
does it, we'll happily play along. I don't understand why you don't
understand this.
--
\\ Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. \\ Mike Smith
\\
> > I'd suggest you go talk to Parag Patel, who's just wasted about three
> > months of his life trying to make SmartFirmware run on _one_ supposedly
> > well-documented board. Parag is nobody's fool, and I consider his
> > results pretty representative of the issue.
>
> Maybe I'm completely mis
I have not built clusters over 200 nodes, but I almost never
go into the BIOS for configurations. And the systems that
I have used, include serial access within the BIOS. And
adding PXE roms will make things nicer on the install front.
But my current system is a single floppy, and that works
Ronald G Minnich wrote:
>
> So, I repeat: easily done, not acceptable to freebsd core.
If you can easily do it, why aren't you? I had thought someone was
actively working on this (because it is SO obviously useful to have fast
reboots in an HA environment).
> It's kind of a shame.
Sure is
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ronald G
Minnich writes:
>So, I repeat: easily done, not acceptable to freebsd core.
Uhm, Ron, I have not seen freebsd core take a stand on this,
and I'm a core team member, so I'm pretty sure they havn't.
I also doubt that they ever would do so.
Remember: Nob
I'm confused. Acceptable to freebsd core isn't really the issue here.
FreeBSD is a volunteer project. If you do the work and submit the code
then 'core' has the option of deciding not to include it but if its
useful people will use it anyway regardless if its 'Official' or not. If
enough people us
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000, Sergey Babkin wrote:
> Mike Smith wrote:
> > I'd suggest you go talk to Parag Patel, who's just wasted about three
> > months of his life trying to make SmartFirmware run on _one_ supposedly
> > well-documented board. Parag is nobody's fool, and I consider his
> > results
synergy micro sells power pc boards that boot linux today out of flash.
www.synergy.com
They get it too.
ron
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
So, I repeat: easily done, not acceptable to freebsd core.
I think this situation reflects on the freebsd community and not in a
positive way.
If you care, sometime this year you'll be able to buy motherboards that
boot Linux from flash. SiS is working hard on this and has committed
people and
Mike Smith wrote:
>
> > well linuxbios is what I started here, and I pinged some folks on this
> > list about supporting freebsd as well as linux, and got a 'no interest'
> > back from some folks.
> >
> > I'm still up for it. I think it's easy.
>
> I'd suggest you go talk to Parag Patel, who's j
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> :- and got a 'no interest' back from some folks.
The response was not "no interest", it was "you're totally nuts - this is
not a usefully solvable problem".
> I'm interested, since from reading the linixboot page it seems like
> you can get, essentially, and inst
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
:- and got a 'no interest' back from some folks.
I'm interested, since from reading the linixboot page it seems like
you can get, essentially, and instant-on rommable FreeBSD if this
were done, and I can think of lots of things to do with that!
Don't know how much help
> well linuxbios is what I started here, and I pinged some folks on this
> list about supporting freebsd as well as linux, and got a 'no interest'
> back from some folks.
>
> I'm still up for it. I think it's easy.
I'd suggest you go talk to Parag Patel, who's just wasted about three
months of
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000, Stefan Molnar wrote:
> Why? PXE will allow net installs, or diskless. And Serial Console
> is already supported. ( On some high end machines serial console works
> in the prom as well).
well, now you see why i'm not pushing linuxbios too hard in the freebsd
world. If y
well linuxbios is what I started here, and I pinged some folks on this
list about supporting freebsd as well as linux, and got a 'no interest'
back from some folks.
I'm still up for it. I think it's easy.
ron
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers"
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000, Marinos J . Yannikos wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2000 at 11:44:14AM -0600, Nick Rogness wrote:
> > > route_0="-net 195.58.161.96 -netmask 255.255.255.240 -iface vr0"
> > What IP is that network reachable through?
>
> vr0 has only one IP - 195.58.183.77
That's not
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000, Mike Smith wrote:
>
> Two words: "forget it".
That's uncalled for. I won't make any comment on the content, but the way
you said it, Mike, it's too rude to let pass. Take it a bit easier, will
you?
Don't get mad at me, Mike, I'm not the only one who's noticed, you getti
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000, Mike Smith wrote:
> > >My ISP claims that the configuration above works trivially under
> > >Linux and Windows NT,
> >
> > I would like to see that.
> >
> > Mr. Smith is correct. Why not set your gateway as the next-hop
> > address to your ISP upstream within t
> >My ISP claims that the configuration above works trivially under
> >Linux and Windows NT,
>
> I would like to see that.
>
> Mr. Smith is correct. Why not set your gateway as the next-hop
> address to your ISP upstream within the 195.58.183.77 network?
>
> Another opt
Two words: "forget it".
> I read an article about Linux BIOS project on Slashdot.org. Is there
> anybody working on FreeBSD BIOS?
>
> I really like to see something like 'boot net - install' or serial
> console. It would be cool to have dignostics routine, too.
>
> Jung-uk Kim
>
> --
HI!
Could you tell how to setup PPP over 2-wire LL with MOXA A50/51 interface convertor.
Thanks in advance.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000, Alexander Langer wrote:
> Thus spake Stefan Molnar ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > is already supported. ( On some high end machines serial console works
> > in the prom as well).
>
> Also on low-end machines...
According to pxeboot(8) from 5.0 snapshot:
pxeboot is a modified
On Thu, Jun 15, 2000 at 11:44:14AM -0600, Nick Rogness wrote:
> > route_0="-net 195.58.161.96 -netmask 255.255.255.240 -iface vr0"
> What IP is that network reachable through?
vr0 has only one IP - 195.58.183.77
> WHat does your routing table look like before this route gets
>
Thus spake Stefan Molnar ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> is already supported. ( On some high end machines serial console works
> in the prom as well).
Also on low-end machines...
Alex
--
cat: /home/alex/.sig: No such file or directory
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscrib
Why? PXE will allow net installs, or diskless. And Serial Console
is already supported. ( On some high end machines serial console works
in the prom as well).
Stefan
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I read an article about Linux BIOS project on Slashdot.org. Is there
>
The other day I was testing various exploits that I
have accumulated over time against my firewall. I had
always used these to test any new boxes I brought
online. All was fine, until I tried it from the
internet side of the firewall. I have found that
boink.c, the old exploit from 98, when used a
Hi! We are Russian girls - Natali, Alla, Vika. We would like to
correspond with you. Visit our site and see our photos.
http://www.russiangirls.narod.ru/
With interest, Natali,Alla, Vika.
P.S. (This is not spam. You can unsubscribe at any time by sending an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
with the su
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000, Marinos J . Yannikos wrote:
> route_0="-net 195.58.161.96 -netmask 255.255.255.240 -iface vr0"
What IP is that network reachable through?
WHat does your routing table look like before this route gets
added? after it gets added?
Nick Rogness
- Spea
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000, Mike Smith wrote:
[snip]
>I don't see why that should be necessary - my ISP doesn't either, since
>he'd have to part with another IP address.
No he wouldn't, he's already connected to you through your
vr0 interface network range: 195.58.183.77 netmask 255.255
Hi,
I read an article about Linux BIOS project on Slashdot.org. Is there
anybody working on FreeBSD BIOS?
I really like to see something like 'boot net - install' or serial
console. It would be cool to have dignostics routine, too.
Jung-uk Kim
--
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2000 at 07:33:36AM -0700, Mike Smith wrote:
> > [mjy]
> > > ifconfig_vr0="195.58.183.77 netmask 255.255.255.248"
> > > static_routes="0 1"
> > > route_0="-net 195.58.161.96 -netmask 255.255.255.240 -iface vr0"
> > > route_1="default 195.58.161.97"
> >
> > The above network confi
On Thu, Jun 15, 2000 at 07:33:36AM -0700, Mike Smith wrote:
> [mjy]
> > ifconfig_vr0="195.58.183.77 netmask 255.255.255.248"
> > static_routes="0 1"
> > route_0="-net 195.58.161.96 -netmask 255.255.255.240 -iface vr0"
> > route_1="default 195.58.161.97"
>
> The above network configuration is inco
> 3.4-STABLE still seems to contain the annoying routing bug that prevents
> the correct initialization of a default route with the gateway being in
> a non-local network, i.e. like this:
>
> ifconfig_vr0="195.58.183.77 netmask 255.255.255.248"
> static_routes="0 1"
> route_0="-net 195.58.161.96
On Thu 2000-06-15 (14:03), Marinos J . Yannikos wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2000 at 01:47:17PM +0200, Neil Blakey-Milner wrote:
> > The PR number might be useful, if you have it. If it's not in the PR
> > database, then you should submit it. That way we get to lay blame
> > *grin*.
>
> Sorry... It
On Thu, Jun 15, 2000 at 01:47:17PM +0200, Neil Blakey-Milner wrote:
> The PR number might be useful, if you have it. If it's not in the PR
> database, then you should submit it. That way we get to lay blame
> *grin*.
Sorry... It was in the subject: PR 16318. I must add that I'm not
altogether c
On Thu 2000-06-15 (13:50), Marinos J . Yannikos wrote:
> I have been using William Carrel's bugfix for several months without
> problems, but for some reason it isn't in the main source tree yet, so
> cvsup overwrites the patched net/route.c sometimes.
>
> Does the bugfix break something? If not,
3.4-STABLE still seems to contain the annoying routing bug that prevents
the correct initialization of a default route with the gateway being in
a non-local network, i.e. like this:
ifconfig_vr0="195.58.183.77 netmask 255.255.255.248"
static_routes="0 1"
route_0="-net 195.58.161.96 -netmask 255.2
Joy wrote:
> what does CPU0 in the STATE field of "top" mean. i am running a SMP
> kernel. a process utilizes 99% of cpu and shows CPU0 in its STATE field.
It states that the process in question is running on CPU0. If it were
running on the second processor, it would say CPU1, etc.
-
Kris Ki
69 matches
Mail list logo
