On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 05:09:52PM +1000, Da Rock wrote:
> On 01/22/12 17:02, Chad Perrin wrote:
> >On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 03:43:13PM +, RW wrote:
> >>I was just wondering what would have happened if Apple hadn't backed
> >>clang/LLVM as BSD licensed projects. Was there a plan B (other than
>
On 01/22/12 17:02, Chad Perrin wrote:
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 03:43:13PM +, RW wrote:
I was just wondering what would have happened if Apple hadn't backed
clang/LLVM as BSD licensed projects. Was there a plan B (other than
gcc 4.2.1) or did Apple save the *BSD world?
The backup plan was pro
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 03:43:13PM +, RW wrote:
>
> I was just wondering what would have happened if Apple hadn't backed
> clang/LLVM as BSD licensed projects. Was there a plan B (other than
> gcc 4.2.1) or did Apple save the *BSD world?
The backup plan was probably PCC.
--
Chad Perrin [ o
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Ruben R. Shkhikyan wrote:
> Hi,
> why the MD5 and SHA256 of "FreeBSD-9.0-RELEASE-i386-memstick.img" are wrong?
>
> (MD5: FreeBSD-9.0-RELEASE-i386-memstick.img =
> 79ddd8f3422e209ae9bd11fee4e399eb) - Your Calculation
> (MD5: FreeBSD-9.0-RELEASE-i386-memstick.img =
>
Hi,
why the MD5 and SHA256 of "FreeBSD-9.0-RELEASE-i386-memstick.img" are wrong?
(MD5: FreeBSD-9.0-RELEASE-i386-memstick.img =
79ddd8f3422e209ae9bd11fee4e399eb) - Your Calculation
(MD5: FreeBSD-9.0-RELEASE-i386-memstick.img =
F9DDF26894FCF7EA5813D7D9099FF6A4) - My Calculation (with WinHex)
(S
> /usr/ports/multimedia/mplayer/work/mplayer-export-2011-12-18/ffmpeg/libavcodec/aacsbr.c:580:
> undefined reference to `log2f'
> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> gmake: *** [mplayer] Error 1
> *** Error code 1
>
> Stop in /usr/ports/multimedia/mplayer.
> *** Error code 1
>
> Stop in /usr/port
On 01/21/12 07:47, Tobias Pulm wrote:
Hi,
how can I display my network traffic (netstat output) human readable?
Is there a function of the netstat that can do this?
Rather than netstat, perhaps you want 'tcpdump' or 'nc'.
Regards,
Jason C. Wells
___
It's OK, You've already changed the
"FreeBSD-9.0-RELEASE-i386-memstick.im" on site, the checksums are the
same as I calculate.
Thanks.
Best regards,
Ruben
Original Message
Subject:wrong MD5 and SHA256 ?!?
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 02:29:08 +0400
From: Ruben R. Shk
On 01/22/12 02:39, David Jackson wrote:
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 7:11 AM, Da Rock<
freebsd-questi...@herveybayaustralia.com.au> wrote:
I've been seeing a lot of hoorays and pats on the back and a general
feeling satisfaction in being able to use clang to compile FreeBSD and
ports. The only reas
From: Antonio Olivares
To: FreeBSD Questions
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 9:07 PM
Subject: mplayer fails to compile on amd64 machine
Dear kind folks,
Running Amd64 FreeBSD 8.0 updated
l/live/groupsock/libgroupsock.a -lm
-rpath=/usr/lib:/usr/local/lib -Wl,-rpath=/u
On 21/01/2012 17:47, Raimund Steger wrote:
> On 01/21/12 14:35, RW wrote:
>> [...]
>> It is that. I don't know the details, but GPLv3 is sufficiently more
>> viral that recent gcc versions can't be used as the base system
>> compiler. We're currently stuck with a version from 2007.
>
> Sorry if th
--As of January 17, 2012 5:19:15 AM +0100, Fritz Wuehler is alleged to have
said:
zfs is famous for fucking itself like this. the only totally safe way is
to dd the drive since nailing the label doesn't clear out stuff at the
far end of the filesystem that can really ruin your day. don't ask me
On 01/21/12 14:35, RW wrote:
[...]
It is that. I don't know the details, but GPLv3 is sufficiently more
viral that recent gcc versions can't be used as the base system
compiler. We're currently stuck with a version from 2007.
Sorry if this has been asked before, but it makes me wonder, what are
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 11:13 PM, Chad Perrin wrote:
> ... On the other hand, bsdinstall does get the job done, at least for my
> purposes. It just does so in a way that feels a bit more
> straightjacketed, and it rubs me personally a bit the wrong way. ...
>From my perspective, it replaces so
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 7:11 AM, Da Rock <
freebsd-questi...@herveybayaustralia.com.au> wrote:
> I've been seeing a lot of hoorays and pats on the back and a general
> feeling satisfaction in being able to use clang to compile FreeBSD and
> ports. The only reason I can see from searching is a need
2012/1/21 Tobias Pulm
> Hi,
>
> how can I display my network traffic (netstat output) human readable?
> Is there a function of the netstat that can do this?
>
> Thanks...
>
>
> Is this what you need : netstat -i
And then filter out the interfaces you need (netstat -i | grep )
--
Beni Brinckman.
Hi,
how can I display my network traffic (netstat output) human readable?
Is there a function of the netstat that can do this?
Thanks...
--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Yours sincerely
Tobias Pulm
--
Tobias Pulm
Sperberweg 8
58644 Iserlohn
Germany
| http://www.facility5.org
| http:/
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 13:35:06 +
RW wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 22:11:18 +1000
> Da Rock wrote:
>
> > Even under GPL anything built using gcc can be licensed as you like,
> > so I doubt it could be that.
>
> It is that. I don't know the details, but GPLv3 is sufficiently more
> viral that re
where can I register a free shell account, which shell was able to make psybnc
and eggdrop?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-uns
Da Rock writes:
> The only reason I can see from searching is a need to get away
> from gcc (which is tried and tested since the beginning of time)
> which is now apparently GPLv3.
I believe the GPLv3 issue is correct.
Two other reasons I have heard mentioned in various
discus
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 22:11:18 +1000
Da Rock wrote:
> I've been seeing a lot of hoorays and pats on the back and a general
> feeling satisfaction in being able to use clang to compile FreeBSD
> and ports. The only reason I can see from searching is a need to get
> away from gcc (which is tried and
On 21/01/2012 12:11, Da Rock wrote:
> I've been seeing a lot of hoorays and pats on the back and a general
> feeling satisfaction in being able to use clang to compile FreeBSD and
> ports. The only reason I can see from searching is a need to get away
> from gcc (which is tried and tested since the
Здравствуйте, Frank.
Вы писали 21 января 2012 г., 11:24:59:
FS> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 11:24:21PM +0200, ??? ??? wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> # ps ax|grep rad
>> 45471 ?? T> 26473 1 S+ 0:00.00 grep rad
>> flux# date
>> Fri Jan 20 23:20:28 UTC 2012
>> flux# kill -KILL 45471
>> flux#
I've been seeing a lot of hoorays and pats on the back and a general
feeling satisfaction in being able to use clang to compile FreeBSD and
ports. The only reason I can see from searching is a need to get away
from gcc (which is tried and tested since the beginning of time) which
is now apparen
On 01/21/12 04:15, Christer Solskogen wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Colin Percival wrote:
>> We don't have suitable build hardware for other architectures, and there are
>> some problems with release cross-building which aren't fixed yet.
>
> I found out that building ppc with TARGET
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012, Damien Fleuriot wrote:
On 21 Jan 2012, at 05:47, Michael Sierchio wrote:
I've been using FreeBSD since 2.2.1, and IMHO, the 9.0 installer SUX!
It blow chunks. It's a POS. It's crap. It is a joke.
I hope I made myself clear. ;-)
- M
Just because you see thin
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Colin Percival wrote:
> We don't have suitable build hardware for other architectures, and there are
> some problems with release cross-building which aren't fixed yet.
>
I found out that building ppc with TARGET= worked nicely on 9.0-RELEASE.
Do you know what pr
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Matthew Seaman
wrote:
> On 21/01/2012 10:25, Christer Solskogen wrote:
>> I've just finished installing FreeBSD on my "new" Mac mini G4, and
>> when I ran freebsd-update on it I found out that freebsd-update only
>> supports i386 and amd64 architectures.
>> How co
On 01/21/12 02:25, Christer Solskogen wrote:
> I've just finished installing FreeBSD on my "new" Mac mini G4, and
> when I ran freebsd-update on it I found out that freebsd-update only
> supports i386 and amd64 architectures.
> How come?
We don't have suitable build hardware for other architecture
I just stumbled on these new ARM based chipsets. Apparently one the
FreeBSD folk was onboard with the company as a software engineer as well.
http://www.calxeda.com
Anyone know what the status would be of running our fav OS on these
quadcore, blade based server processors? Running a server at
On 21/01/2012 10:25, Christer Solskogen wrote:
> I've just finished installing FreeBSD on my "new" Mac mini G4, and
> when I ran freebsd-update on it I found out that freebsd-update only
> supports i386 and amd64 architectures.
> How come?
If that's not an Intel based Mac, then your definition of
Hi!
I've just finished installing FreeBSD on my "new" Mac mini G4, and
when I ran freebsd-update on it I found out that freebsd-update only
supports i386 and amd64 architectures.
How come?
--
chs,
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://l
On 01/20/2012 09:02 PM, Devin Teske wrote:
> Taking a GENERIC 9.0-RELEASE kernel and running kgzip(8) on it produces an
> unusable kernel which causes immediate BTX halt in loader(8).
>
> ...
>
> 4. Say: kgzip kernel
Curious, it doesn't even look like that binary is hooked into the build
process
On Saturday 21 January 2012 12:52:31 am Damien Fleuriot wrote:
> On 21 Jan 2012, at 05:47, Michael Sierchio wrote:
> > I've been using FreeBSD since 2.2.1, and IMHO, the 9.0
> > installer SUX! It blow chunks. It's a POS. It's crap. It is a
> > joke.
> >
> > I hope I made myself clear. ;-)
>
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 11:24:21PM +0200, ??? ??? wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> # ps ax|grep rad
> 45471 ?? T 26473 1 S+ 0:00.00 grep rad
> flux# date
> Fri Jan 20 23:20:28 UTC 2012
> flux# kill -KILL 45471
> flux# date
> Fri Jan 20 23:20:41 UTC 2012
> flux# kill -KILL 45471
> flux# date
>
35 matches
Mail list logo
