On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 09:59, Chuck Robey wrote:
> > Now, I want to go for broke, and try for the one I've been after for
> > years, which is converting a region==2 dvd to a region==1 dvd (Britain
> > to US). I have a dvd taht you can't buy in the US, I've tried, and the
> > British won't sell it in
Mail screwup, so I'm re-sending. In fact, since it messed up going out
ot Multimedia, I'm resending to hackers instead.
Chuck Robey wrote:
I am really doing rather well here; I got dvd copying to work via 'k3b'.
Now, I want to go for broke, and try for the one I've been after for
years, which
Hi,
I don`t know is I write to right mail list, but my problem is with
FreeBSD 5.4 RC3 just updated, not relised yet. I wanted to try it to set
up jail. I followed instrucion in man and in
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc/2004-June/004463.html
but still I can ssh to jail.
My set
Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
--On 2005-4-22 3:02 PM -0700 David Leimbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
According to the man page, and plan 9 where rfork originated you can
use it to modify an extant process. In fact you have to set the
RFPROC flag to make a new process or all the changes apply to the
curr
On 4/22/05, Lyndon Nerenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --On 2005-4-22 3:02 PM -0700 David Leimbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > According to the man page, and plan 9 where rfork originated you can
> > use it to modify an extant process. In fact you have to set the
> > RFPROC flag to make a
--On 2005-4-22 3:02 PM -0700 David Leimbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
According to the man page, and plan 9 where rfork originated you can
use it to modify an extant process. In fact you have to set the
RFPROC flag to make a new process or all the changes apply to the
current one.
Unfortunately t
KSE and 1:1 threading are different things.
One creatres kernel threads on demand and the other keeps the kernel
threads all the time the user thread exists.
rfork is not the same.. it creates a new process context. that is
what Linux does.
it is also what we did before when running the the linux
From: Jeremie Le Hen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Jas arlerr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Configuration differences for jails
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 17:41:40 +0200
Hi,
> I am not very familar with mount_nullfs, but i think it is _one_ copy
with
>
Hi all,
First sorry for my poor writing engish! I don't know if it's right to post in
this mailist, but I think it's best place I can ask this kind of question.
I am using FreeBSD 5.4-RC3 now for testing purpose, I find that if I use
ifconfig_sis0="inet 10.10.1.148 netmask 255.255.255.0" in
< said:
> Can you find any evidence that it's acceptable to interleave multiple
> writers that are doing O_APPEND? At best, to do what you're asking,
> they could be kept from being interleaved from the context of one
> specific NFS client host...
As far as POSIX goes, the standard says that ap
On p, 2005-04-22 at 18:11 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Anyway one step further, my question is
> > How can I create a failover cluster with two machines
> > for a freebsd webserver with dynamic content
> > runing apache with php, and postgresql.
>
> why can't you have 2 separate machines a
Someone really needs to remove this guy from the list (or at least give
him an "official" warning of some kind). His repeated warnings on the
list has not done anything to his conduct nor has it caused him to stop
his childish antics. All he is doing is polluting the list archives.
In the 4 yea
12 matches
Mail list logo
