On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 12:43:38PM -0500, Erich Zigler wrote:
> It seems from FreeBSD version 4.5 on I am unable to alias IP addresses to a
> NIC card if the IP I am trying to alias has the same netmask as the
> previously bound IP.
>
> I get nothing but a file exists error from ifconfig.
>
>
I have apm disabled in the kernel already. I have the same ServerWorks chipset
you mentioned.
On Monday 06 May 2002 12:59 pm, Kendall Gifford wrote:
> I also have a Dell PowerEdge 1550 with 4.5-STABLE and had the same
> SCB timeout problem with the fxp driver. I never found much definitive
> i
It seems from FreeBSD version 4.5 on I am unable to alias IP addresses to a
NIC card if the IP I am trying to alias has the same netmask as the
previously bound IP.
I get nothing but a file exists error from ifconfig.
I have been doing this since 3.4 so Im wondering what has changed.
--
The
matusita> Anybody knows when 8.3.2 is out?
I've contacted ISC directly, and found that 8.3.2 will be released
real soon (yes, real soon). If it doesn't released before
May/11/2002, they'll release 8.3.1p1 for bugfix-release of 8.3.1.
Any committers import new BIND code when released?
-- -
Mak
I also have a Dell PowerEdge 1550 with 4.5-STABLE and had the same
SCB timeout problem with the fxp driver. I never found much definitive
info,
but I did hear one suggestion that this was somehow related to advanced
power management. I rebuilt a kernel without APM by removing the line:
device ap
I'm seeing these messages scroll past on the console quite rapidly:
fxp0: device timeout
fxp0: DMA timeout
fxp0: DMA timeout
fxp0: SCB timeout: 0x10 0x0 0x80 0x0
I searched the mailing list archive and came up with some people having the
same problem, but no definitive answers. The hardware is
Jens Rehsack([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2002.05.06 15:04:14 +:
> "Karsten W. Rohrbach" wrote:
> > pass in quick on isp0 proto tcp from any to any port = 80 flags S/SA keep state
> > # we want state added when establishing a
> > # session, not for every t
On Mon, 6 May 2002, Søren Schmidt wrote:
SS> > Well then it's another problem in -stable, and currently tagged ata is not
SS> > workable in all our -stable environments with IBM disks :( Machines do not
SS> > crash, but constantly reinitialising ATA subsystem just at trying to boot
SS> > first FS
It seems Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> SS> If you mean the patch that went into -current it doesn't apply to
> SS> the -stable branch at all, it fixed a problem introduced by the
> SS> busdma integration, not the problem that apparently hit some on -stable.
>
> Well then it's another problem in -sta
One of my 4.5-STABLE servers crashed today with this msg:
panic: ffs_vfree: freeing free inode
I have the kernel.debug and the dump. I don't know how to debug
ffs stuff but I I am happy if someone instructs me what to do.
Since the filesystems are mounted with softupdates it might be
a bug in th
Hi again,
On Mon, 6 May 2002, Søren Schmidt wrote:
SS> > any chances patch for ata subsystem at
SS> >
SS> > date: 2002/04/18 19:11:45;
SS> >
SS> > that fixes tagged support for ata(4) will be MFC'd before 4.6-R?
SS>
SS> If you mean the patch that went into -current it doesn't apply to
SS> the -s
On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 03:31:47PM -0400, Andy Sparrow wrote:
> Both of which are specifically stated to be incorrect (with an explanation
> why) by the maintainer of XFree86 xterm on his web page.
>
> XFree86's 'xterm' is a color xterm, and has been for years. We don't ship
> their termcap ent
It seems Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> Hello there Soren,
>
> any chances patch for ata subsystem at
>
> date: 2002/04/18 19:11:45;
>
> that fixes tagged support for ata(4) will be MFC'd before 4.6-R?
If you mean the patch that went into -current it doesn't apply to
the -stable branch at all, it
13 matches
Mail list logo
