Re: major bge(4) performance problem

2007-12-14 Thread Lenar Tukhvatullin
On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 05:47:19PM +0100, Laurent Frigault wrote: > Hi, > > We are experiencing a problem with BCM5721 bge interfaces, which seems to > be able to receive at almost 1Gbps but can only transmit at < 540Mbps. > > It is the exactly same problem describes at > http://lists.freebsd.org

Re: Linux executable picks up FreeBSD library over linux one and breaks

2007-12-14 Thread Alex Dupre
Alexander Leidinger ha scritto: To achieve this goal we have 2 possibilities, either we install everything into LINUXBASE and install a wrapper in LOCALBASE, or we install everything in a safe location in LOCALBASE. The first part requires that the maintainers of the linux program play some tri

Re: Linux executable picks up FreeBSD library over linux one and breaks

2007-12-14 Thread Alexander Leidinger
Quoting Alex Dupre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (from Fri, 14 Dec 2007 15:52:15 +0100): Alexander Leidinger ha scritto: To achieve this goal we have 2 possibilities, either we install everything into LINUXBASE and install a wrapper in LOCALBASE, or we install everything in a safe location in LOCALB

netcat trouble on timeout

2007-12-14 Thread sam
hi iam use nc on FreeBSD 8.0-CURRENT trouble in -t(timeout) option, absentia full break session (very need) examples: # time nc -w 1 -z 192.168.44.14 443 real1m15.002s user0m0.001s sys 0m0.003s # time nc -w 1 -z google.com 80 Connection to google.com 80 port [tcp/http] succeeded!

Re: Linux executable picks up FreeBSD library over linux one and breaks

2007-12-14 Thread Chuck Robey
Alex Dupre wrote: Alexander Leidinger ha scritto: To achieve this goal we have 2 possibilities, either we install everything into LINUXBASE and install a wrapper in LOCALBASE, or we install everything in a safe location in LOCALBASE. The first part requires that the maintainers of the linux pr

Re: Linux executable picks up FreeBSD library over linux one and breaks

2007-12-14 Thread Alex Dupre
Chuck Robey wrote: > I guess I might be wrong, but I have to say, wrapping everything really > does seem to me to be the hack. Call it a wrapper, call it a symlink, but it seems to me that you don't like linux libs in LOCALBASE *and* you don't like executable references in LOCALBASE (and these are