hax0rs,
In sys/conf/param.c (in -STABLE), both maxfiles and maxfilesperproc are
set equal to MAXFILES. This doesn't make much sense to me. It seems that
maxfiles should be set to be greater than maxfilesperproc by default, so
that one process can't consume all of the file descriptors.
I noticed
On Tue, Jul 27, 1999 at 01:37:35PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> Jamie Howard (howar...@wam.umd.edu), with a little help from yours
> truly, has written a BSD-licensed version of grep(1) which has all the
> functionality of our current (GPLed) implementation, plus a little
> more, in one seve
On Tue, Aug 03, 1999 at 10:17:05AM -0600, Wes Peters wrote:
>
> Try Free B S D. Tricks like that used to work well with the simple ones
> available for "home" computers decades ago. (Anyone else here ever use
> SAM "the Software Automated Mouth" for the Atari 800 or Commodore 64?)
No, but I use
On Mon, Aug 09, 1999 at 04:50:51AM -0400, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, Doug wrote:
>
> > Matthew Dillon wrote:
> > >
> > > : So, the big question is whether there is anything we can tune to
> > > speed up
> > > :the writes. The freebsd machines are NFS clients to the sun s
What is the (default) maximum number of simultanous NFS mounts in
FreeBSD 2.2.8 and 3.2?
I was looking at 3.2 and it appears that 63 is the max, and this is
tunable with kernel config option NFS_MUIDHASHSIZ. Is this correct?
What is the maximum possible setting?
Last, where could I have found
On Thu, Aug 12, 1999 at 11:16:23PM -0700, Gregory Sutter wrote:
> What is the (default) maximum number of simultanous NFS mounts in
> FreeBSD 2.2.8 and 3.2?
>
> I was looking at 3.2 and it appears that 63 is the max, and this is
> tunable with kernel config option NFS_MUIDHA
On Tue, Aug 24, 1999 at 03:44:32PM -0700, John Plevyak wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 24, 1999 at 02:33:48PM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> > :I am experiencing reproducible crashes with FreeBSD (3.2-STABLE) on
> > :a K6/3-450 running on an ASUS P5S-VM motherboard. The problem is highly
> > :repeatable (ha
On Sun, Aug 29, 1999 at 09:16:57PM +0200, Martin Blapp wrote:
>
> As I notized, a FreeBSD NFS-client does not unmount it's
> NFS-mounts during reboot. This can cause problems on the
>
> One could just made a quick and dirty solution as Linux has, like one line
> in rc.shutdown:
>
> umount -Avt n
What is the maximum number that MAXUSERS can currently be set to,
in the following environments:
3.2-STABLE
4.0-CURRENT
Also, what is the limiting factor for this setting? MAXFILES?
maxproc?
Regards,
Greg
--
Gregory S. Sutter"Very funny, Scotty.
mailto:gsut...@pobox.com
On Wed, Jul 14, 1999 at 05:43:21PM +0930, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>
> You know, it occurred to me that with all the time wasted typing up messages
> in this thread someone (e.g. Matt) could have instead coded up a simple
> non-overcommit model, given it to the nay-sayers and said "Run this and see
> w
On Wed, Jul 14, 1999 at 10:56:05PM -0700, Mike Smith wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Mike Smith wrote:
> >
> > > 'siobi' is someone trying to open the serial console, for whatever
> > > reason. Without knowing who it was that was stuck there, it's hard to
> > > guess what is going on.
> >
> >
On 2001-03-10 21:56 -0600, Peter Seebach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Out of idle curiousity, has the NIH syndrome died down enough that
> it might hypothetically be possible for the three major *BSD camps
> to cooperate on this kind of thing? Form an organization the purpose
> of which is to ge
On 2001-03-10 13:36 -0500, Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Mar 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>
> > A few of us were talking on IRC tonight about how cool it would be to
> > have an httpfs filesystem -- then it occurred to me we almost have
> > this already, in the form of the (
Yokota-san,
I am experiencing a problem with syscons and init when I have a
certain line in my kernel configuration file, and am hoping that
you can fix the bug. My system is a recent 4-STABLE, although
the problem also showed up in an April 24 4-STABLE. I do not
have a -CURRENT box.
FreeB
I'm setting up a network that looks like this:
--InternetRouter---Firewall
|
| /--- host
SwitchNAT-<- host
| \- host
|
On 2000-10-15 13:40 -0600, Wes Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thierry Herbelot wrote:
> > Gregory Sutter wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm setting up a network that looks like this:
>
On 2000-11-02 20:56 -0800, Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Daniel C. Sobral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001102 19:26] wrote:
> > >
> > > 1) please wrap lines at 70 characters when posting to the list.
> >
> > Furthermore, DO NOT send html-formatted messages. I, for one, delete
> > witho
On 2000-12-17 22:12 -0700, Wes Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sergey Babkin wrote:
> > David Preece wrote:
> > > At 13:02 17/12/00 +, you wrote:
> > > >Does anyone have any good tips to get started / HowTo's, or some simple
> > > >examples
> > > >that will give me knowledge like the PC Sp
Call for Participation--USENIX Annual Technical Conference, UseBSD
and Freenix Tracks
Daily Daemon News
complete story and comments:
http://daily.daemonnews.org/view_story.php3?story_id=4273
Submitted By : Alex Walker, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
=
UseBSD Submission Deadline: January 5, 2004
On 2003-12-27 19:59 -0800, Wes Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 26 December 2003 05:41 pm, Martin Cracauer wrote:
> >
> > I found that the requirment to run Mozilla Firebird outpaces this
> > CPU. It's really too bad, if it wasn't for that thing I could happily
> > run my old hardware
On 2002-01-07 13:28 -0800, Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oh my god. I don't even *remember* writing this one! This was when
> I was 18. Google's archive isn't complete but they've done an incredible
> job getting as much as they have.
Yes, Google is indeed great. Now
On 2002-05-11 10:49 +0800, Dinesh Nair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 10 May 2002, Doug White wrote:
>
> > usually have onboard everything, including dual fxp's nowadays. But they
> > have the ServerWorks curse.
> > . Tyan makes some interesting stuff, but as with all ServerWorks based
> >
On 2002-05-13 14:09 -0700, Doug White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 13 May 2002, David [ISO-8859-1] Siebörger wrote:
>
> > That's hardly the worst of it. The ServerWorks OSB4 ATA controller
> > has been known to cause data corruption with Seagate drives.
>
> Have you isolated it to Seagates o
On 2002-10-03 15:38 -0400, Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> July - August 2002 Status Report
>
> --
>
> FreeBSD Security Officer Team
>
>URL: http://www.freebsd.org/security/
>
>
On Wed, Jul 14, 1999 at 05:43:21PM +0930, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>
> You know, it occurred to me that with all the time wasted typing up messages
> in this thread someone (e.g. Matt) could have instead coded up a simple
> non-overcommit model, given it to the nay-sayers and said "Run this and see
>
On Wed, Jul 14, 1999 at 10:56:05PM -0700, Mike Smith wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Mike Smith wrote:
> >
> > > 'siobi' is someone trying to open the serial console, for whatever
> > > reason. Without knowing who it was that was stuck there, it's hard to
> > > guess what is going on.
> >
> >
hax0rs,
In sys/conf/param.c (in -STABLE), both maxfiles and maxfilesperproc are
set equal to MAXFILES. This doesn't make much sense to me. It seems that
maxfiles should be set to be greater than maxfilesperproc by default, so
that one process can't consume all of the file descriptors.
I noticed
On Tue, Jul 27, 1999 at 01:37:35PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> Jamie Howard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), with a little help from yours
> truly, has written a BSD-licensed version of grep(1) which has all the
> functionality of our current (GPLed) implementation, plus a little
> more, in one sevent
On Tue, Aug 03, 1999 at 10:17:05AM -0600, Wes Peters wrote:
>
> Try Free B S D. Tricks like that used to work well with the simple ones
> available for "home" computers decades ago. (Anyone else here ever use
> SAM "the Software Automated Mouth" for the Atari 800 or Commodore 64?)
No, but I us
On Mon, Aug 09, 1999 at 04:50:51AM -0400, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, Doug wrote:
>
> > Matthew Dillon wrote:
> > >
> > > : So, the big question is whether there is anything we can tune to speed up
> > > :the writes. The freebsd machines are NFS clients to the sun servers
What is the (default) maximum number of simultanous NFS mounts in
FreeBSD 2.2.8 and 3.2?
I was looking at 3.2 and it appears that 63 is the max, and this is
tunable with kernel config option NFS_MUIDHASHSIZ. Is this correct?
What is the maximum possible setting?
Last, where could I have found
On Thu, Aug 12, 1999 at 11:16:23PM -0700, Gregory Sutter wrote:
> What is the (default) maximum number of simultanous NFS mounts in
> FreeBSD 2.2.8 and 3.2?
>
> I was looking at 3.2 and it appears that 63 is the max, and this is
> tunable with kernel config option NFS_MUIDHA
On Tue, Aug 24, 1999 at 03:44:32PM -0700, John Plevyak wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 24, 1999 at 02:33:48PM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> > :I am experiencing reproducible crashes with FreeBSD (3.2-STABLE) on
> > :a K6/3-450 running on an ASUS P5S-VM motherboard. The problem is highly
> > :repeatable (h
On Sun, Aug 29, 1999 at 09:16:57PM +0200, Martin Blapp wrote:
>
> As I notized, a FreeBSD NFS-client does not unmount it's
> NFS-mounts during reboot. This can cause problems on the
>
> One could just made a quick and dirty solution as Linux has, like one line
> in rc.shutdown:
>
> umount -Avt
On 2000-03-03 09:24 -0800, Archie Cobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For anyone interested in reading about netgraph(4), including
> technical information about developing your own node types, etc.,
> here is an article that I wrote for this month's Daemon News
> 'blueprints' column..
>
> http:
On 2000-06-02 21:45 -0400, Sergey Babkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> By the way, is any FreeBSD event planned for Usenix ? I would
> be interested in meeting/looking at all the giants of FreeBSD thought :-)
Yes! We're having both a BSD BoF (with each BSD getting some time on
the stage) and a
On 2000-06-04 13:26 +1000, Andrew Kenneth Milton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> BSD in this context refers to Berkeley Systems Development and refers
> to a particularly stable variant of UNIX most stemming from a single
> common source called 4.4BSD
BSD is Berkeley Software Distribution, not Be
37 matches
Mail list logo
