Re: Kernel Debugging over the Ethernet?

2002-02-19 Thread Julian Elischer
On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, Julian Elischer wrote: > Hi George. > > There was someone recently that posted that they had some sort of > remote debuging working over an ethernet (or at least that they ALMOST > had it working.). I remember thinking "Cool". I have however had good > success with the se

Work From Home Free Information

2002-02-19 Thread faststep_3
Work From Home Free Information   WHo DO YOU KNOW IN .INDIA - CHAINA?USA-Europe-Africa-Asia:-Taiwan-HongkongKorea-Japan-Malasia-Pakistan-BangdeshMultibillion Dollar International CompanyExpanding Rapidly, needs your help   EARN US$ 500-$1500 A MONTH PART TIME$1,000-$5,000 A MONTH FULL - T

Re: Kernel Debugging over the Ethernet?

2002-02-19 Thread George V. Neville-Neil
> Hi George. > > There was someone recently that posted that they had some sort of > remote debuging working over an ethernet (or at least that they ALMOST > had it working.). I remember thinking "Cool". I have however had good > success with the serial crossover cables needed for the curren ser

Re: usb header not c++ friendly.

2002-02-19 Thread M. Warner Losh
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: : the #ifdef __cplusplus only kicks in when we're compiling c++ sources, : sooo i think it's ok, gross but ok. I'm not sure that I like it, but it certainly is precedented. X11R3 or R4 did something simi

Re: usb header not c++ friendly.

2002-02-19 Thread M. Warner Losh
In message: Kip Macy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: : http://web.netapp.com/engineering/projects/raidv2/testing/global/ : : > : > uh, yeah it's not my header. : Oh duh, sorry... : If you do that then you have to modify all the fi

Re: Kernel Debugging over the Ethernet?

2002-02-19 Thread Julian Elischer
Hi George. There was someone recently that posted that they had some sort of remote debuging working over an ethernet (or at least that they ALMOST had it working.). I remember thinking "Cool". I have however had good success with the serial crossover cables needed for the curren serial debugger

Re: Task activation delays: FreeBSD versus Linux?

2002-02-19 Thread Julian Elischer
define a "task activation delay" and maybe we can discuss it.. it's a rather broad definition. and is that RTlinux? (which is a completly differnt kettle of fish..) On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Eugene Panchenko wrote: > gretings. > > As seen on kerneltrap.org: > --- > Andrew Morton: Ingo Molnar broke

Task activation delays: FreeBSD versus Linux?

2002-02-19 Thread Eugene Panchenko
gretings. As seen on kerneltrap.org: --- Andrew Morton: Ingo Molnar broke the ground here with his 2.2.12 patch which demonstrated that Linux could fairly easily yield task activation delays which are one to two orders of magnitude better than any competing operating system. --- is this a truth

Kernel Debugging over the Ethernet?

2002-02-19 Thread George V. Neville-Neil
Hi Folks, Now that Luigi has put in polling support for some ethernet drivers I was wondering how much work it would be to make the remote kernel debugging run over the ethernet. I have worked on systems like this before (it's the reason I did polling network device drivers in Wind Rive

SMS Message from 0122622648

2002-02-19 Thread 0122622648
SMS Message From: 0122622648, 20 Feb, 2002 13:07:36 subscribe This service was brought to you by Maxis Net and Hotlink. To find out more about

Re: In-Kernel HTTP Server (name preference)

2002-02-19 Thread Tony Finch
Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On SVR4, an attempt to access a non-resident page via a > non-blocking fd will result in a fault for that page > being scheduled, while the call returns to the user > process with an "EWOULDBLOCK". > > A subsequent attempt to read it gets the paged in d

Re: In-Kernel HTTP Server (name preference)

2002-02-19 Thread Tony Finch
Dominic Marks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > http://www.acme.com/software/thttpd/notes.html on the section > regarding non-blocking I/O: > > "The fourth generation. One process only. No non-portable threads/LWPs. > Sends multiple files concurrently using non-blocking I/O, calling > select()/poll()/kqueue

Re: In-Kernel HTTP Server (name preference)

2002-02-19 Thread Tony Finch
Julian Elischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I can suggest using a netgraph module for the work as it can be connected > to a netgraph ksocket node to receive the requests (jdp made all the > changes needed to allow this to be done). Another way would be to implement it as an accept filter whic

USB structure rename

2002-02-19 Thread Alfred Perlstein
I plan on committing the following delta to FreeBSD: http://www.mu.org/~bright/usb.diff The idea is to rename the structure fields within the USB ioctl range to match what's commonly used, basically the prefix is added as necessary. The main reason this came about is the 'class' field in one of

Re: Multicast problem with sis interface?

2002-02-19 Thread Doug Ambrisko
Bob Bishop writes: | Hi, | | At 21:01 -0800 18/2/02, Doug Ambrisko wrote: | >Bob Bishop writes: | >| Seems there might be some problem with multicast on sis interfaces. | >| Specifically, netatalk doesn't work right on this box through the sis | >| interface but it's fine through the RealTek. | >

Re: A question and a suggestion about loadable modules

2002-02-19 Thread Dan Nelson
In the last episode (Feb 19), Cliff Sarginson said: > Hello, > Someone suggested this may be the right list for this. > > - Has consideration in the loadable modules implementation been given > to a module dependency facility, in the manner of "depmod" in Linux ? > So that any module loaded w

Re: Multicast problem with sis interface?

2002-02-19 Thread Bob Bishop
Hi, At 21:01 -0800 18/2/02, Doug Ambrisko wrote: >Bob Bishop writes: >| Seems there might be some problem with multicast on sis interfaces. >| Specifically, netatalk doesn't work right on this box through the sis >| interface but it's fine through the RealTek. >| This is the onboard interface on

Re: In-Kernel HTTP Server (name preference)

2002-02-19 Thread Terry Lambert
Alfred Perlstein wrote: > Disk IO can't be done in a non-blocking manner. If the kernel doesn't > have the portion of the file you wish to read in the buffer cache > then the process will block waiting. There is simply nothing you > can do about this other than to offload that blocking into anot

Et si c'était vrai ...

2002-02-19 Thread Sept Pierres
Title: Nouvelle page 2 Un ancien repris de justice reçoit d'un des 10 hommes les plus riches du monde l'ancien manuscrit secret des 7 pierres des Andes qui ont plus de 6000 ans d'âge et

A question and a suggestion about loadable modules

2002-02-19 Thread Cliff Sarginson
Hello, Someone suggested this may be the right list for this. - Has consideration in the loadable modules implementation been given to a module dependency facility, in the manner of "depmod" in Linux ? So that any module loaded will automagically load modules it depends on to run ? - I have

Re: In-Kernel HTTP Server (name preference)

2002-02-19 Thread Dominic Marks
On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 10:00:04AM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * Dominic Marks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020219 09:53] wrote: > > Hey, > > > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 09:19:56AM -0800, Kip Macy wrote: > > > > Apache will switch to this method at some point. I really can't > > > > understand why t

Re: In-Kernel HTTP Server (name preference)

2002-02-19 Thread Alfred Perlstein
* Dominic Marks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020219 09:53] wrote: > Hey, > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 09:19:56AM -0800, Kip Macy wrote: > > > Apache will switch to this method at some point. I really can't > > > understand why they went with that complicated pre-forking stuff. > > > Using non-blockijng I/

Re: In-Kernel HTTP Server (name preference)

2002-02-19 Thread Dominic Marks
Hey, On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 09:19:56AM -0800, Kip Macy wrote: > > Apache will switch to this method at some point. I really can't > > understand why they went with that complicated pre-forking stuff. > > Using non-blockijng I/O is just not that hard." > > As mentioned previously, due to the blo

Once your customer

2002-02-19 Thread dolidom
Sponsoring This is for people who are ready for more of a challenge, a financially rewarding way of building your business onward and upward. Sponsoring simply means introducing other people into the Kleeneze business. You can use many methods to find interested people; talking to friends/fam

Re: In-Kernel HTTP Server (name preference)

2002-02-19 Thread Kip Macy
> Apache will switch to this method at some point. I really can't > understand why they went with that complicated pre-forking stuff. > Using non-blockijng I/O is just not that hard." As mentioned previously, due to the blocking semantics of file I/O on unix, single process servers will only prov

3.2 -> 4.5 ep driver oddity

2002-02-19 Thread Romain Kang
Yesterday, I upraded an old HP Vectra (83 MHz Pentium) from FreeBSD 3.2 to 4.5. The machine had no CD-ROM so I tried to use NFS. For a long time, the machine would simply wedge after I filled in the IP config screen. Then I noticed that the NIC probed differently under 4.5 vs. 3.2. The last ti

Re: Default mail.local permission

2002-02-19 Thread Dmitry A. Bondareff
Waw! Many thanks ! - Original Message - From: "Maxim Konovalov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Dmitry A. Bondareff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 2:29 PM Subject: Re: Default mail.local permission > On 14:26+0500, Feb 19, 2002, Dmitry A. Bondaref

Re: make in freebsd

2002-02-19 Thread Peter Pentchev
On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 09:34:50AM +0100, Pankaj wrote: > On Tuesday 19 February 2002 13:23, Erik Trulsson wrote: > > > > > No, it is a feature of the makefiles. 'Make' itself doesn't know > > anything about fetching sources and so on. > > Most of the dirty work is done in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.

Re: Default mail.local permission

2002-02-19 Thread Crist J. Clark
On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 02:26:44PM +0500, Dmitry A. Bondareff wrote: > Hi hackers! > > Help me to understand next situation: > > # cd /usr/src > # make buildworld > # make installworld > # make kernel Ugh. That's a dangerous way to go, installing world before you've installed a new kernel. [sn

Re: Default mail.local permission

2002-02-19 Thread Maxim Konovalov
On 14:26+0500, Feb 19, 2002, Dmitry A. Bondareff wrote: > Hi hackers! > > Help me to understand next situation: > > # cd /usr/src > # make buildworld > # make installworld > # make kernel > > /etc/rc.conf: > sendmail_enable="YES" > > After successfully install I see the next problem: > > Feb 19 0

Default mail.local permission

2002-02-19 Thread Dmitry A. Bondareff
Hi hackers!   Help me to understand next situation:   # cd /usr/src # make buildworld # make installworld # make kernel   /etc/rc.conf: sendmail_enable="YES"   After successfully install I see the next problem:   Feb 19 00:00:01 xxx mail.local: lockmailbox /var/mail/other failed; error code 7

Re: Odd ipfw behaviour

2002-02-19 Thread Michael R. Wayne
On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 09:31:13AM -0800, Crist J. Clark wrote: > > Do these patches help? Unfortunately, I was called out of town and will not be able to get back to work with my test setup until next week. Will post update then. /\/\ \/\/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with

Re: In-Kernel HTTP Server (name preference)

2002-02-19 Thread Dominic Marks
On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 06:54:01PM -0800, Peter Wemm wrote: > Mike Silbersack wrote: > > > > On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Hiten Pandya wrote: > > > > > hi all, > > > > > > As to conclude this thread (for me.), I have come to the decision of > > > actually starting a project for making a BSD Licensed in-

Re: In-Kernel HTTP Server (name preference)

2002-02-19 Thread Samuel J . Greear
On Monday 18 February 2002 07:54 pm, Peter Wemm wrote: > Mike Silbersack wrote: > > On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Hiten Pandya wrote: > > > hi all, > > > > > > As to conclude this thread (for me.), I have come to the decision of > > > actually starting a project for making a BSD Licensed in-kernel HTTPd >

Re: make in freebsd

2002-02-19 Thread Alfred Perlstein
* Erik Trulsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020219 01:06] wrote: > > One potential problem is that 'make' on different platforms can differ > in many details. > Some of the features of BSD make that are used by the portmakefiles for > example are not supported by GNU make (which is used on Linux) GNU ma

Re: make in freebsd

2002-02-19 Thread Erik Trulsson
On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 09:34:50AM +0100, Pankaj wrote: > On Tuesday 19 February 2002 13:23, Erik Trulsson wrote: > > > > > No, it is a feature of the makefiles. 'Make' itself doesn't know > > anything about fetching sources and so on. > > Most of the dirty work is done in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.

Re: make in freebsd

2002-02-19 Thread Pankaj
On Tuesday 19 February 2002 13:23, Erik Trulsson wrote: > > No, it is a feature of the makefiles. 'Make' itself doesn't know > anything about fetching sources and so on. > Most of the dirty work is done in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk which is > included by the port makefiles. which means I can saf

Re: usb header not c++ friendly.

2002-02-19 Thread Alfred Perlstein
* Kip Macy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020219 00:12] wrote: > http://web.netapp.com/engineering/projects/raidv2/testing/global/ > > > > > uh, yeah it's not my header. > Oh duh, sorry... > If you do that then you have to modify all the files including it > correspondingly. Will putting an extern "C