Hello!
I wonder if there are any plans or work in progress to
port sendmail 8.11.1 from -current to -stable ?
Both, 3-stable and 4- stable have 8.9.3.1
The sendmail that is present in the -current tree seems to compile
smoothly on 4.x (even on 4.0-RELEASE box), while
breaks on 3.5.1-RELEASE due
I may have missed the all clear... also, do I need to do anything out of
the ordinary in order to account for the changes, or can I just uncomment
the cron job I had commented out when I saw the heads up?
I apologize if this isn't the right list, but I figured you guys would be
on top of this..
> >BIOS don't has such options.
> >But whith today's kernel (second channel (ahc2) without devices)
> >3940 seems to work:
>
> Yes, my commit last night was meant to protect the timeout handler
> from just such a problem. Unfortunately, the second channel is still
> not getting interrupts, but a
Dont know how many different revisions there are, but I picked up a used
PERC/2 which seems to correspond to the 466.
---Mike
At 04:10 PM 10/12/00 +0100, Mark Powell wrote:
> > There are two entirely different RAID controller families that are
> > relabelled as "PERC 2". See
> > ht
>> Original Message <<
On 10/12/00, 4:05:05 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote regarding
how to upgrade from 4.0 to 4.1 (not 4.1.1) with cvsup?:
> What tag should I use to upgrade from 4.0 to 4.1 (not 4.1.1, because I
> also run KAME)? I have tried RELENG_4_1_0, but th
On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, Matt Heckaman wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I thought I would through this into the mix:
>
> Server, NOT in production yet: 4.1.1-RELEASE:
>
> matt[beta]:~> uptime;netstat -m
> 10:40AM up 16 days, 1:42, 2 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.00, 0
> There are two entirely different RAID controller families that are
> relabelled as "PERC 2". See
> http://people.freebsd.org/~msmith/RAID/index.html#ami
> and
> http://people.freebsd.org/~msmith/RAID/index.html#adaptec
>
> for more details.
Do you know which AMI controllers the two compa
What tag should I use to upgrade from 4.0 to 4.1 (not 4.1.1, because I
also run KAME)? I have tried RELENG_4_1_0, but that gives a partial
source tree. 4_1_0_RELEASE only gives a file in /usr/sup/src-all.
rvdp
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-sta
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I thought I would through this into the mix:
Server, NOT in production yet: 4.1.1-RELEASE:
matt[beta]:~> uptime;netstat -m
10:40AM up 16 days, 1:42, 2 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
132/352/131072 mbufs in use (current/peak/max):
1
Chris,
Your email prompted me to look at mbuf utilization on a 4.1.1-STABLE box
that is currently not in production.
outside# netstat -m
130/160/7168 mbufs in use (current/peak/max):
129 mbufs allocated to data
1 mbufs allocated to packet headers
128/136/1792 mbuf clusters in use
At 04:18 PM 10/12/00 +0200, Michal Mertl wrote:
>For testing purposed I was sometimes using 'telnet -s'.
>
>In recent versions (4.1.1 and stable) it stopped working
>
>Environment:
>host# ifconfig fxp0
>fxp0: flags=8843 mtu 1500
> inet 192.168.0.2 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.0.255
On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 04:18:55PM +0200, Michal Mertl wrote:
> For testing purposed I was sometimes using 'telnet -s'.
>
> In recent versions (4.1.1 and stable) it stopped working
>
> Environment:
> host# ifconfig fxp0
> fxp0: flags=8843 mtu 1500
> inet 192.168.0.2 netmask 0xff00 br
> "TP" == Tomasz Paszkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TP> I have 4.1.1-STABLE from 20001007, before the upgrade evrything works
TP> fine. Now I'am reciving a hundreds of information:
TP> nfs server not responding
TP> nfs server is alive again
I started getting these recently as well.
For testing purposed I was sometimes using 'telnet -s'.
In recent versions (4.1.1 and stable) it stopped working
Environment:
host# ifconfig fxp0
fxp0: flags=8843 mtu 1500
inet 192.168.0.2 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.0.255
ether 00:08:c7:49:16:4c
media: autosele
14 matches
Mail list logo
