>
> My immediate inclination it to add new format identifiers (maybe "LU"
> and "IU" for the unsigned versions of long and integer respectively) and
> update sysctl to understand the new formats. But the source tells me that
> get-the-oid_fmt code should be axed. So the question is, should I bo
As Vladimir N. Silyaev wrote ...
> On Fri, Dec 03, 1999 at 09:37:03PM +0100, Wilko Bulte wrote:
> > Anyway, I'm more concerned with the CDrom drive right now.
> >
> [skipped]
> > Tried that. No luck :-(
> Try to run vmware from xterm, did you see messages about
> 'ioctl xxx not implemented' ?
At 07:49 PM 11/21/99 -0500, you wrote:
>On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Dennis wrote:
>
>> The nightmare of instability of 3.x continues whilst the braintrust flogs
>> away at 4.x. Its really a damn shame. And why is 3.x so much slower than
>> 2.2.8? Will 4.0 be slower yet?
>
>Your vagueness and lack of e
At 11:20 PM 11/21/99 -0800, Mike Smith wrote:
>> > His point was not a claim about performance, rather he was bringing into
>> > question whether performance was improving with successive releases.
>>
>> Sounded very much to me like he was just vaguely griping about how slow
>> and unstable newer
Dennis wrote:
>
> At 07:49 PM 11/21/99 -0500, you wrote:
> >On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Dennis wrote:
> >
> >> The nightmare of instability of 3.x continues whilst the braintrust flogs
> >> away at 4.x. Its really a damn shame. And why is 3.x so much slower than
> >> 2.2.8? Will 4.0 be slower yet?
>
Dennis wrote:
>
> There was a time that when someone reported a problem there was interest in
> finding out what it might be. Now you mock the person reporting it. I guess
> thats why everyone in the world is using linux. Its disheartening to
> realize that things apparently wont be getting much
> Er, you should read the sio(4) manpage too. tty-level buffer overflows
> have nothing to do with interrupt latency/execution time.
You mean this:
sio%d: tty-level buffer overflow. Problem in the application. Input has
arrived faster than the given module could process it and som
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Matthew Jacob
writes:
: Normally I might agree with this, but I use a tty line on a 150Mhz i386 to
: be a serial console for another freebsd box. This is a NS16550A with a 16
: byte fifo. This systems is effectively idle except for this task. So, I'm
: running tip a
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Matthew Jacob
>writes:
> : Normally I might agree with this, but I use a tty line on a 150Mhz i386 to
> : be a serial console for another freebsd box. This is a NS16550A with a 16
> : byte fifo. This systems is effectively idle except for this task. So, I'm
> :
At 10:28 AM 12/4/99 -0700, Wes Peters wrote:
>Dennis wrote:
>>
>> There was a time that when someone reported a problem there was interest in
>> finding out what it might be. Now you mock the person reporting it. I guess
>> thats why everyone in the world is using linux. Its disheartening to
>> r
Garance A Drosihn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In the case of AFS, I think you'd want to expand the size of st_dev.
> All files in an AFS volume are "one device", I would think. If the
> "device" is gone (ie, the volume is not mounted), then all files in
> that "device" (volume) will not be avai
On 4 Dec 1999, Assar Westerlund wrote:
> Garance A Drosihn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > In the case of AFS, I think you'd want to expand the size of st_dev.
> > All files in an AFS volume are "one device", I would think. If the
> > "device" is gone (ie, the volume is not mounted), then all fi
:Has anyone toyed with the idea of implementing a swap-based filesystem
:similar to Sun's tmpfs?
:
:Chuck Youse
I did it a couple of months ago. You simply use the VN device and
tell it to use swap as backing store, then newfs up a UFS filesystem
on it. You have the option to have
On Sat, 4 Dec 1999, Dennis wrote:
> At 10:28 AM 12/4/99 -0700, Wes Peters wrote:
>
> > Unless they're running your drivers. I'm perfectly willing to accept YOUR
> DRIVERS might be less unstable on Linux than FreeBSD.
>
> "less unstable". Is that a technical term?
With a large number of the sy
Assar Westerlund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> we should start by creating an "fcompare()" routine, which you'd
>> pass two file descriptors to and it would say if they're the same
>> file. Initially that routine could just do two fstat()'s, and
>> compare st_dev and st_ino. We could then expan
> There was a time that when someone reported a problem there was interest in
> finding out what it might be.
Bah, this is a shameless attempt to inflame emotions as a substitute
for having an actual logical point and you know it. Save it for the
presidential debates!
There is ALWAYS interest i
> At 11:20 PM 11/21/99 -0800, Mike Smith wrote:
> >> > His point was not a claim about performance, rather he was bringing into
> >> > question whether performance was improving with successive releases.
> >>
> >> Sounded very much to me like he was just vaguely griping about how slow
> >> and un
:
:> There was a time that when someone reported a problem there was interest in
:> finding out what it might be.
:
:Bah, this is a shameless attempt to inflame emotions as a substitute
:for having an actual logical point and you know it. Save it for the
:presidential debates!
:
:There is ALWAYS
:Actually, you may recall that when you first brought this up this time
:around, I (and others) _did_ try to find out what you were actually
:unhappy about.
:
:Spectators will note that you haven't actually given us anything useful
:to work with; no PR numbers, no code fragments, in fact nothin
> :Actually, you may recall that when you first brought this up this time
> :around, I (and others) _did_ try to find out what you were actually
> :unhappy about.
> :
> :Spectators will note that you haven't actually given us anything useful
> :to work with; no PR numbers, no code fragments, in
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, you wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I posted this on -questions about five days ago and haven't received
>any hints or suggestions. Does anyone here have any ideas?
>
>I use natd and a 56k phone connection to my ISP so that all my
>computers can share one line.
>
>This all works
Randell Jesup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sounds like what we'd want to build it upon. If the FS doesn't
> support it, use st_dev/st_ino.
Actually, since it's in the kernel, the default implementation of the
vnode operation might be:
int
vop_default_cmp (struct vnode *v1, struct vnode *
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>:Has anyone toyed with the idea of implementing a swap-based filesystem
>:similar to Sun's tmpfs?
>:
>:Chuck Youse
>
>I did it a couple of months ago. You simply use the VN device and
>tell it to use swap as b
Anyone particularly interested in kernel ipfw and/or divert, please review
this patch, which implements 'ipfw tee' and cleans up a few things:
ftp://ftp.whistle.com/pub/archie/misc/tee.patch
If there are no objections I'll commit this in a couple of days.
Thanks,
-Archie
Dennis wrote:
>
> At 10:28 AM 12/4/99 -0700, Wes Peters wrote:
> >
> >If you're insinuating that Linux is more stable and reliable than FreeBSD,
> >you're absolutely and unequivocally wrong.
>
> All Im saying is that more people use linux because its getting better and
> they are responsive to t
Matthew Dillon wrote:
>
> :
> :> There was a time that when someone reported a problem there was interest in
> :> finding out what it might be.
> :
> :There is ALWAYS interest in finding out what a problem is when it's
> :reported in such a way that the effort is worth the potential reward.
> :Ha
On Sat, 4 Dec 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> The later responses, mainly by existing FreeBSD people, was to
> essentially roast him over the coals. By the third message the thread
> turned into an emotional mush, and *NONE* of it was Dennis's doing.
Since I'm one of the existing Fr
On Sat, 4 Dec 1999, Archie Cobbs wrote:
> Anyone particularly interested in kernel ipfw and/or divert, please review
> this patch, which implements 'ipfw tee' and cleans up a few things:
>
> ftp://ftp.whistle.com/pub/archie/misc/tee.patch
>
> If there are no objections I'll commit this in a c
Assar Westerlund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Randell Jesup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Sounds like what we'd want to build it upon. If the FS doesn't
>> support it, use st_dev/st_ino.
>
>Actually, since it's in the kernel, the default implementation of the
>vnode operation might be:
>
>i
Randell Jesup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sure, depending on what's in a vnode (I haven't looked).
Note that I was comparing the `pointers' and not the contents. The
way the VFS works you only keep one vnode for every file.
> That's what I was thinking of, partially. It makes bin
:>deallocate swap, or you can force it to pre-reserve swap. See the
:>'vnconfig' man page and the -S option and the '-s reserve' option.
:>
:>This is for -CURRENT only.
:>
:>Generally speaking this isn't going to be as efficient as a real tmpfs
:
:Please excuse my ignorance, but
:> :There is ALWAYS interest in finding out what a problem is when it's
:> :reported in such a way that the effort is worth the potential reward.
:> :Having someone walk up and say, in effect, "Dudes, your system is
:> :broken. Fix it!" is a content-free statement and does not qualify as
:>
:>
:
:Since I'm one of the existing FreeBSD people you're probably referring to
:here, let me remind you of the actual content:
:
:Dennis said the following:
:
:> The nightmare of instability of 3.x continues whilst the braintrust
:> flogs away at 4.x. Its really a damn shame. And why is 3.x so much
:* one that is able to recover all swap space used to back processes
: and such, rather then just some of it. We can get close now,
processes? I meant files. Just SMP and filesystem code mixing in my
brain!
-Matt
To Unsubscribe: sen
: - Dennis is a principal in a company which manufactures communications
: peripherals and writes driver software for them. It's not
: unreasonable to expect him to have some sort of idea, or access to an
: in-house idea, about how to go about diagnosing a problem like this.
: It's al
Matthew Dillon wrote:
>
> :Matt, this thread is a LOT older than Nov 20th, it runs for YEARS. Dennis
> :said the same things about 2.2 vs. 2.1.5 at the very least. A few years
> :later when he finally got his driver sorted out for 2.2, it became the
> :best thing since sliced bread and now 3.x
Matthew Dillon wrote:
>
> :
> :Since I'm one of the existing FreeBSD people you're probably referring to
> :here, let me remind you of the actual content:
> :
> :Dennis said the following:
> :
> :> The nightmare of instability of 3.x continues whilst the braintrust
> :> flogs away at 4.x. Its rea
:Oh hell, how did I manage to fall into alt.philosophy.est? Wait a minute,
:this *is* freebsd-hackers. It's *you* who is off topic, and off base.
:
:As penance, you get to go read everything ever posted to a freebsd mailing
:list by JMJr.
:
:People do change, and I continually await improvemen
:>
:> He didn't say this until after the situation had started to degrade.
:>
:> Besides, he's right. 3.x has serious problems.
:
:All running software has serious problems, that's why it is never considered
:done. Taking the time to enumerate specific problems that are currently
:pl
39 matches
Mail list logo
