On Monday 12 February 2007 10:21, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> > Software RAID won't help you if your primary disk gets an error in, say,
> > the second stage loader.
>
> I don't really buy this "booting" arguement. What's the failure scenario
> here? If the system is up and running, it will just kee
Hi,
I have a FreeBSD 6.1 PC as the server to a PXE boot
of another Compaq Deskpro EN PC.
The Compaq PC has the option of a "Network Service
Boot" with the F12-key during BIOS boot up. On the
server, tftpd, bootpd and dhcpd are all working well.
For the diskless kernel config I have used the
GEN
Hi All,
I am having intermittent network issues with our IBM X236 dual xeon server.
Server comes with two bge network cards. At random intervals internal lan
drops out. And then few minutes later it comes back online.
So far I can only find some interface errors on netstat -i. Can anyone help
me
Hi, all!
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 09:40:18AM +1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
> On Monday 12 February 2007 00:34, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> > One guy that I happen to know, who was responsible for the database
> > backend servers of Germany's biggest web mail provider at the time,
> > ran extensive b
On Monday 12 February 2007 00:34, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> One guy that I happen to know, who was responsible for the database
> backend servers of Germany's biggest web mail provider at the time,
> ran extensive benchmarks. Result: for RAID 1, RAID 0 and RAID 1+0
> there is no difference in "har
In mpc.lists.freebsd.stable, you wrote:
: For modern CPUs this extra work is measurably neglegible.
With all of the interrupt activity it seems counterintuitive that it
would be negligible in that the processor is incurring many extra
cache faults to service the controller.
I've upgraded my laptop from 6.2-prerelease to latest 6-stable and it
stuck at booting because mount can't recognize "force" option in the
fstab. The file system is ext2fs and this looks like a genuine regression.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
If memory serves me right, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:
>>> Confirmed. I've updated the machine on which I originally had this
>>> problem to -STABLE as of today, and the problem has disappeared.
>> I thought it was also planned to be incorporated to RELENG_6_2, right?
>
>
Hi list,
Last Friday I upgraded my 6.1 to 6.2. This box is Compaq DL320G1 with the all
latest firmwares running only cvsup-mirror service for other servers. No
customization, any extra setting, default setup whatsoever.
The upgrade went fine, no problems I encountered. It was not binary upg
JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:
>> Confirmed. I've updated the machine on which I originally had this
>> problem to -STABLE as of today, and the problem has disappeared.
>
> I thought it was also planned to be incorporated to RELENG_6_2, right?
I'm not sure if non-security related fixes are consider
On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 03:06 +0100, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
[ snip ]
> All that your "bug report" accomplishes is broadcasting your bad and
> uninformed attitude to an even bigger audience. It is in your own and the
> FreeBSD community's best interest to backtrack before anyone gets to form a
> On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 23:21:33 +0100,
> Dimitry Andric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Bruce A. Mah wrote:
>> I've convinced myself that this problem needs to be tested in isolation
>> (i.e. you have complete control over both ends of the tunnel) because
>> incoming packets over the tunnel ca
On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 03:04:44PM +0100, Patrick M. Hausen wrote..
> Hello!
>
> On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 06:15:53PM +0300, Artem Kuchin wrote:
>
> > Under gmirror OS must issue two commands to write to disks and some
> > commands to check/set mark that mirrored data is intact.
> > Under hardware
Hello!
On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 06:15:53PM +0300, Artem Kuchin wrote:
> Under gmirror OS must issue two commands to write to disks and some
> commands to check/set mark that mirrored data is intact.
> Under hardware RAID OS issue sonly one command to write and no
> checking command, since raid con
On Saturday 10 February 2007 23:31, Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm afraid I disagree with a few of the points you raise.
>
I think both views have points and none of them is wrong. I accept as it is
but I would prefer having it disabled by default. But perhaps this is valid
only for m
On Sunday, 11. February 2007 02:43, Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
> So far so good. The problem is that the BSD magicians and the KDE GUI
> magicians are not sharing their spell-books, and thus, their models of
> how the code operates; the communities have to intersect somehow. That
> could be you, y'kn
16 matches
Mail list logo
