On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 07:04:53AM -0700, Sreenath Battalahalli wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Will you be submitting the patch upstream to support the new device revision?
>
Hi,
I committed in r287768 and will MFC it to stable/10 in a week or so.
Marius
___
free
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=202680
--- Comment #13 from Dmitry Afanasiev ---
(In reply to Dmitry Afanasiev from comment #12)
sys/dev/e1000 tree from head is not compatible with stable/10 :(
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=202680
--- Comment #12 from Dmitry Afanasiev ---
(In reply to Sean Bruno from comment #11)
sys/dev/e1000 in head have many differences from stable/10.
For example different lem's driver version:
< char lem_driver_version[] = "1.0.6";
---
> char le
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=202680
--- Comment #11 from Sean Bruno ---
(In reply to Dmitry Afanasiev from comment #10)
Can you see if this change in head helps with your issue.
https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=287330
--
You are receiving this mail be
Am Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:08:51 +1000 (EST)
Ian Smith schrieb:
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 09:47:57 +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 10:21:21 +0300
> > Kimmo Paasiala wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 10:06 AM, O. Hartmann
> > > wrote:
> > > > Hopefully, I'm right on this
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=150557
Sean Bruno changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |Feedback Timeout
Status|I
Hi,
Will you be submitting the patch upstream to support the new device revision?
rgds,
Sreenath
On Sat, 9/12/15, Gary Palmer wrote:
Subject: Re: realtek interface not working
To: "Sreenath Battalahalli"
Cc: "Marius Strobl" , freebsd-net@freebsd
On Tue, 15 Sep 2015, Ian Smith wrote:
> But that is an other issue and it is most likely
> due to the outdated documentation (that doc still uses port 37 for NTP
> purposes and referes to the outdated divert mechanism using natd, see the
> recent handbook). The internet is also full of ambigous
On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 09:47:57 +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 10:21:21 +0300
> Kimmo Paasiala wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 10:06 AM, O. Hartmann
> > wrote:
> > > Hopefully, I'm right on this list. if not, please forward.
> > >
> > > Running CURRENT as of FreeBSD 1
On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 12:59:15 +0300
Alexander V. Chernikov wrote:
>
>
> 15.09.2015, 10:48, "O. Hartmann" :
> > On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 10:21:21 +0300
> > Kimmo Paasiala wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 10:06 AM, O. Hartmann
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hopefully, I'm right on this list. if not, pl
15.09.2015, 10:48, "O. Hartmann" :
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 10:21:21 +0300
> Kimmo Paasiala wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 10:06 AM, O. Hartmann
>> wrote:
>> > Hopefully, I'm right on this list. if not, please forward.
>> >
>> > Running CURRENT as of FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #3 r287780: Mon
On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 10:21:21 +0300
Kimmo Paasiala wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 10:06 AM, O. Hartmann
> wrote:
> > Hopefully, I'm right on this list. if not, please forward.
> >
> > Running CURRENT as of FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #3 r287780: Mon Sep 14 13:34:16
> > CEST 2015 amd64, I check via nm
On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 00:13:33 -0700
Xin Li wrote:
>
>
> On 9/15/15 00:06, O. Hartmann wrote:
> > Hopefully, I'm right on this list. if not, please forward.
> >
> > Running CURRENT as of FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #3 r287780: Mon Sep 14 13:34:16
> > CEST 2015 amd64, I check via nmap for open sockets
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 10:06 AM, O. Hartmann
wrote:
> Hopefully, I'm right on this list. if not, please forward.
>
> Running CURRENT as of FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #3 r287780: Mon Sep 14 13:34:16
> CEST 2015 amd64, I check via nmap for open sockets since I had trouble
> protecting a server with IPFW
On 9/15/15 00:06, O. Hartmann wrote:
> Hopefully, I'm right on this list. if not, please forward.
>
> Running CURRENT as of FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #3 r287780: Mon Sep 14 13:34:16
> CEST 2015 amd64, I check via nmap for open sockets since I had trouble
> protecting a server with IPFW and NAT.
>
>
Hopefully, I'm right on this list. if not, please forward.
Running CURRENT as of FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #3 r287780: Mon Sep 14 13:34:16
CEST 2015 amd64, I check via nmap for open sockets since I had trouble
protecting a server with IPFW and NAT.
I see a service (nmap)
Host is up (0.041s latency).
16 matches
Mail list logo