On Tue, 18 Mar 2008, Kevin Oberman wrote:
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 21:23:09 -0800 (AKDT)
From: peter stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This is an ugly way to have to deal with X. So this definitely means the
mga driver is broken?
I would appreciate a copy of your xorg.conf
Thanks for your suggestions.
Not sure why it keeps wedging, at first I thought it was something to
do with the LORs, now after adding some more debugging options I
think I might have found the answer!
KDB: stack backtrace:
db_trace_self_wrapper(c074b5ee,e70599ac,c05b6853,c4a9e000,e70599ac,...)
at db_trace_self_wrapper+0x26
k
Hello Mike,
Wednesday, March 19, 2008, 9:32:13 PM, you wrote:
>>Also, I believe there was a report from another user who saw similar
>>issues with em(4), and found that disabling MSI fixed the storm in
>>question. I believe you can disable MSI/MSIX by placing the following
>>in /boot/loader.conf
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 03:46:52PM -0400, Kevin K wrote:
> > That said: I do understand what you're saying, and yes, I can see why
> > you would want that. It does make sense, and it's reasonable. It's
> > just hard to achieve. I don't think other mainstream OSes (e.g. Linux)
> > offer this abil
At 02:06 PM 3/19/2008, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 06:53:36PM +0100, Oliver Fromme wrote:
> Charlie Root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# vmstat -i
> > interrupt total rate
> > irq1: atkbd0 12
Marko Lerota wrote:
> This thing should be solved. I liked the way that my OS have
> independance from ports.
Well, they are not really completely independent.
The ports still use libraries from the base OS,
e.g. libc, threading libraries etc. Please try
to understand the following simple examp
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Kevin K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > That said: I do understand what you're saying, and yes, I can see why
> > you would want that. It does make sense, and it's reasonable. It's
> > just hard to achieve. I don't think other mainstream OSes (e.g. Linux)
> > o
Hello Oliver,
Wednesday, March 19, 2008, 6:53:36 PM, you wrote:
> Charlie Root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> [...]
> It's preferable to send mail as a real user, not as root,
> for various reasons.
I know, I've just forgot to edit the headers, my apologies.
>> I have to report, that I have a
On Mar 19, 2008, at 11:43 AM, Marko Lerota wrote:
This thing should be solved. I liked the way that my OS have
independance
from ports. So no metter what I do with ports, my OS and his apps
will work.
And If I upgrade the OS I dont want to recompile ports for that.
The traditional mechanism
> That said: I do understand what you're saying, and yes, I can see why
> you would want that. It does make sense, and it's reasonable. It's
> just hard to achieve. I don't think other mainstream OSes (e.g. Linux)
> offer this ability either, though. Am I wrong?
Redhat's up2date/yum ? I'm not
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 07:43:25PM +0100, Marko Lerota wrote:
> If you use BSD system only for few apps like PHP/Apache/MySQL it would
> be easy. But if you have lots of stuff for desktop machine (gnome,xfce etc.)
> it's very painful, long, and waste of time. (I don't have x386 33MHz CPU)
>
> T
Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Are you connected via a modem or something? 2-3 days to download some
> packages cannot be right if you have a decent internet connection.
No I have 5Mbps link. It's not the link issue. It's the compilation
time from ports because there are only small
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 06:53:36PM +0100, Oliver Fromme wrote:
> Charlie Root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# vmstat -i
> > interrupt total rate
> > irq1: atkbd0 12 0
> > irq16: ohci0
Charlie Root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...]
It's preferable to send mail as a real user, not as root,
for various reasons.
> I have to report, that I have a very strange cpu usage by system (as
> the `top' reports).
You haven't mentioned what exactly you think is strange
in your top(1) ou
Le Wednesday 19 March 2008 17:41:21 Vivek Khera, vous avez écrit :
> On Mar 19, 2008, at 8:46 AM, Michael Grant wrote:
> > My server is live and serving customers. I can't afford to take the
> > box down for a whole day while I upgrade ports. Is there any
> > intelligent way to do this?
>
> Here'
On Wednesday 19 March 2008 14:28:28 John Baldwin wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 March 2008 06:09:46 pm Danny Pansters wrote:
> > On Monday 17 March 2008 20:55:01 Stefan Lambrev wrote:
> > > Greetings Dave,
> > >
> > > Dave Overton wrote:
> > > > I am new to the AMD64 stable branch, so forgive me if this ha
On Mar 19, 2008, at 8:46 AM, Michael Grant wrote:
My server is live and serving customers. I can't afford to take the
box down for a whole day while I upgrade ports. Is there any
intelligent way to do this?
Here's what you do:
1) take one server at a time down from the load balancer/worker
It's amazing -- I also did my recent 6.3->7.0 exactly this way. Running
it as a desktop, WindowMaker, some of gnu apps. kde is at hand mostly
for a couple of applications, but it works ok either.
My case is much simpler, but I feel that it's worth of considering
alternatives to portupgrade. I
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 01:46:07PM +0100, Michael Grant wrote:
> My server is live and serving customers. I can't afford to take the
> box down for a whole day while I upgrade ports. Is there any
> intelligent way to do this?
The ways people have given you are proper *and* intelligent. I think
On Tuesday 18 March 2008 06:09:46 pm Danny Pansters wrote:
> On Monday 17 March 2008 20:55:01 Stefan Lambrev wrote:
> > Greetings Dave,
> >
> > Dave Overton wrote:
> > > I am new to the AMD64 stable branch, so forgive me if this has been
> > > beat to death, but I can't find why this message keeps
My server is live and serving customers. I can't afford to take the
box down for a whole day while I upgrade ports. Is there any
intelligent way to do this?
For example, could I do everything on a second disk while running the
live system on the first disk? For example using a chroot so it
thin
Daniel Bond wrote:
|> /usr/local/etc/nss_ldap.conf -> openldap/ldap.conf
|> /usr/local/etc/ldap.conf -> openldap/ldap.conf
|
| I'm not sure is it correct.
| etc/ldap.conf and etc/openldap/ldap.conf -- different files for
| different purposes.
| etc/nss_ldap.conf -> etc/ldap.conf -- it's correct.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello!
Dmitriy Kirhlarov wrote:
| Hi!
|
| Daniel Bond wrote:
|
|> I'm pretty sure my ldap.conf and nsswitch.conf are OK, but here they are
|> anyway:
|>
|>
|> /usr/local/etc/nss_ldap.conf -> openldap/ldap.conf
|> /usr/local/etc/ldap.conf -> openldap
Hello Marko,
I'm very sorry that you have trouble updating your FreeBSD
installation, but there are very good technical reasons to
update your packages, as others have already explained in
detail (i.e. library conflicts).
When I updated my home workstation from FreeBSD 6 to 7,
I used the opportun
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Kevin Oberman wrote:
Or, is the system failing to retrieve the packages and failing over to
building the ports? This would take a long time!
I always tee the output of portupgrade to a file so, if it dies in the
middle, it's pretty easy to pick up where it left off and not
Hello,
I have to report, that I have a very strange cpu usage by system (as
the `top' reports). The given box does not currently run any threaded
applications (only lighttpd and php-fcgi with 80 children, maybe 100
reqs/s), but I can see the same behavior on almost identical machine
which is runn
26 matches
Mail list logo
