Re: FreeBSD 1.x Binaries Work Except under Chroot

2012-08-11 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message <201208102249.q7amn8gf066...@fire.js.berklix.net>, "Julian H. Stacey " writes: >I dont see 1.1.5: It is not in our VCS because of the USL-BSD lawsuit. You can find the bits here: http://phk.freebsd.dk/FreeBSD/ -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org

Re: system() using vfork() or posix_spawn() and libthr

2012-08-11 Thread Jilles Tjoelker
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 10:16:04AM +0800, David Xu wrote: > On 2012/08/09 18:56, Jilles Tjoelker wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 11:25:35AM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > >> On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 11:54:32PM +0200, Jilles Tjoelker wrote: > >>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 01:53:03PM +0300, Kons

Disabling ethernet link on an Intel nic?

2012-08-11 Thread David Duchscher
Greetings, I have a need to turn off the link of an ethernet port on a Intel nic. The issue is not a big deal but one we would like to solve. we have no way of signaling an upstream router that a path is down but via turning off the link of the ethernet port. This would only be used when so

Re: FreeBSD 1.x Binaries Work Except under Chroot

2012-08-11 Thread Konstantin Belousov
Why did you stripped the public list from the Cc: ? On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 05:05:09PM -0400, Dan Plassche wrote: > On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Konstantin Belousov > wrote: > > > Try to ktrace the binaries to see what is going on. I suspect that > > sources for 1.1.5 are not in our cvs/svn,

Re: port devel/doxygen failing to test on -CURRENT and -STABLE

2012-08-11 Thread Chris Rees
On 12 July 2012 18:52, Chris Rees wrote: > On 9 July 2012 02:49, David Xu wrote: >> On 2012/07/08 18:21, Chris Rees wrote: >>> >>> Hi all / David, >>> >>> doxygen has been failing for a while now on -CURRENT and apparently >>> -STABLE too. The current fix is disabling one of the tests in the >>>

Re: system() using vfork() or posix_spawn() and libthr

2012-08-11 Thread David Xu
On 2012/08/10 18:13, Konstantin Belousov wrote: On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 02:08:50PM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: Third alternative, which seems to be even better, is to restore single-threading of the parent for vfork(). single-threading is slow for large threaded process, don't know if it