On Tue, 25 Aug 2009, Ivan Voras wrote:
> Hi,
>
> At least one on-line tutorial about parallel port hacking
> (http://www.excamera.com/articles/21/parallel.html) uses these header
> files:
>
> #include
> #include
>
> They are actually present in /sys, but not in the normal userland
> include paths
Here's additional information:
'netstat -m' output:
174/2931/3105 mbufs in use (current/cache/total)
68/1892/1960/25600 mbuf clusters in use (current/cache/total/max)
68/1114 mbuf+clusters out of packet secondary zone in use (current/cache)
0/1327/1327/12800 4k (page size) jumbo clusters in use
Hi,
At least one on-line tutorial about parallel port hacking
(http://www.excamera.com/articles/21/parallel.html) uses these header files:
#include
#include
They are actually present in /sys, but not in the normal userland
include paths. Is this intentional, or was it removed sometimes in the
Gary Jennejohn wrote:
You haven't really provided any useful information to allow further analysis
What would be "useful information"? 'netstat -m' is one. Anything else?
Yuri
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mai
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 02:11:23PM +0200, Christoph Weber-Fahr wrote:
> Hello,
>
> is there any chance to get HP blade servers (BL460, BL465) supported again?
>
> They used to be supported until G5, but the most recent generation
> doesn't work with FrreeBSD (no support for the network controller
is there any chance to get HP blade servers (BL460, BL465) supported
again?
They used to be supported until G5, but the most recent generation
doesn't work with FrreeBSD (no support for the network controllers).
Does anbody have more information on this?
(I asked on .hardware a few weeks ago,
Hello,
is there any chance to get HP blade servers (BL460, BL465) supported again?
They used to be supported until G5, but the most recent generation
doesn't work with FrreeBSD (no support for the network controllers).
Does anbody have more information on this?
(I asked on .hardware a few weeks
Quoting Antony Mawer (from Mon, 24 Aug 2009 10:34:46 +1000):
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 2:38 AM, Marc Balmer wrote:
Is there a summary (perhaps something suitable to go on the Project
Ideas page) that outlines:
- An outline of what such a system should provide
- What it should NOT provide (ie.
On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 01:54:39 -0700
Yuri wrote:
> Almost every time when I leave system to download a large file I get ral
> device inoperable after a while.
> Pinging the other peer causes these messages:
>
> > ping 192.168.0.1
> PING 192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1): 56 data bytes
> ping: sendto: No
Almost every time when I leave system to download a large file I get ral
device inoperable after a while.
Pinging the other peer causes these messages:
> ping 192.168.0.1
PING 192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1): 56 data bytes
ping: sendto: No buffer space available
ping: sendto: No buffer space available
* Ed Schouten wrote:
> Are there any (8.0-)users here who can test the attached patch for me?
No, there aren't. Well, I'll commit it to HEAD. If it turns out that it
breaks stuff, I'll give the person who reports it a glass of beer if we
ever meet in person. ;-)
--
Ed Schouten
WWW: http://80
Hi,
I would like to discuss the idea of partial kvm dumps -- the possibility of
creating dumps of some parts of the kernel memory from the live system, which
later could be read via KVM interface.
Why this could be useful. I suppose many people here happened to set up
scripts to run utilies like
12 matches
Mail list logo
