Is it possible to forcibly kill process from DDB which are unkillable from
userland? My understanding is the 'kill' command is effectively the same as
the userland version, so perhaps a process could be terminated by invoking
an OOM handler or something?
I just had a VirtualBox instance crash and
On 2012-08-29 17:23, Kevin Oberman wrote:
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 1:59 PM, dweimer wrote:
On 2012-08-29 14:31, dweimer wrote:
On 2012-08-28 15:38, Kevin Oberman wrote:
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 8:46 AM, dweimer
wrote:
Anyone else not able to get cdrtools to install on a Stable
System?
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 1:59 PM, dweimer wrote:
> On 2012-08-29 14:31, dweimer wrote:
>>
>> On 2012-08-28 15:38, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 8:46 AM, dweimer wrote:
Anyone else not able to get cdrtools to install on a Stable System?
I have just recentl
on 29/08/2012 22:32 Anton Yuzhanionov said the following:
> On 29.08.2012 16:25, John Baldwin wrote:
>> Hmm. Can you try this:
>>
>> Index: kern/kern_clock.c
>> ===
>> --- kern/kern_clock.c(revision 239819)
>> +++ kern/kern_clock.
On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 3:32:41 pm Anton Yuzhanionov wrote:
> On 29.08.2012 16:25, John Baldwin wrote:
> > Hmm. Can you try this:
> >
> > Index: kern/kern_clock.c
> > ===
> > --- kern/kern_clock.c (revision 239819)
> > +++
On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 10:16:51 am Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 29/08/2012 16:54 Gustau Pérez i Querol said the following:
> > Al 29/08/2012 15:30, En/na Andriy Gapon ha escrit:
> >> I wonder where the discrepancy could come from.
> >> Why would VirtualBox emulate the bridge differently for diff
On 2012-08-29 14:31, dweimer wrote:
On 2012-08-28 15:38, Kevin Oberman wrote:
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 8:46 AM, dweimer
wrote:
Anyone else not able to get cdrtools to install on a Stable System?
I have just recently synced my source and rebuilt world, and
kernel, then
installed. Now while tr
On 08/28/2012 11:12 AM, Damien Fleuriot wrote:
Hi Giulio,
Just to clear things up:
igb0: 192.168.9.60/24
lagg0: 192.168.12.21/24
Yes.
Actually I notice now that the lagg0 address is different from what
I wrote below in my rc.conf (192.168.12.7). I've just made many test
with different confi
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 8:14 PM, Norbert Aschendorff
wrote:
> This confirms the FreeBSD IPv6 receive rate measured with Linux as
> sender (iperf client).
>
Hi,
Last time I've played with IPerf and IPV6 between my FreeBSD machines,
he didn't take care of the IPv6 Ethernet MTU (1480 and not 1500),
On 29.08.2012 16:25, John Baldwin wrote:
Hmm. Can you try this:
Index: kern/kern_clock.c
===
--- kern/kern_clock.c (revision 239819)
+++ kern/kern_clock.c (working copy)
@@ -382,7 +382,7 @@
int stathz;
int profhz;
int
On 2012-08-28 15:38, Kevin Oberman wrote:
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 8:46 AM, dweimer wrote:
Anyone else not able to get cdrtools to install on a Stable System?
I have just recently synced my source and rebuilt world, and kernel,
then
installed. Now while trying to install the livecd port, the
Norbert Aschendorff yahoo.de> writes:
> ...
> {Values in MBit/s}
>
> Configuration IPv6IPv4
> ---
> [1] -> [2]450 600
> [2] -> [1]401 855
> ...
Well done. Thanks.
jb
___
So, I got the results using the Live system.
Machine [1] is an older Thinkpad T61 (running the Live system), Machine
[2] the well-known "FreeBSD" machine from the previous benchmark. Both
machines run FreeBSD 9.1-RC1 GENERIC.
{Values in MBit/s}
Configuration IPv6IPv4
--
On 2012-08-28 22:51, Matt Smith wrote:
On 2012-08-27 21:35, Warren Block wrote:
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012, Matt Smith wrote:
Thank you for your help anyway, and your wonkity site, which I also
once used for converting my procmail to maildrop. And thanks also to
Erich and Stefan for your help. When I
Al 29/08/2012 16:16, En/na Andriy Gapon ha escrit:
on 29/08/2012 16:54 Gustau Pérez i Querol said the following:
Al 29/08/2012 15:30, En/na Andriy Gapon ha escrit:
I wonder where the discrepancy could come from.
Why would VirtualBox emulate the bridge differently for different OSes?
And I do no
Al 29/08/2012 14:13, En/na John Baldwin ha escrit:
On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 6:12:02 am Peter Jeremy wrote:
[Moving to -stable and adding jhb@ for his input]
On 2012-Aug-29 11:32:44 +0200, Gustau Pérez i Querol
wrote:
Al 29/08/2012 11:02, En/na Peter Jeremy ha escrit:
On 2012-Aug-28 11:
That's a bit difficult because I own only one FreeBSD machine - to
provide a result FreeBSD->FreeBSD I'd have to set up a completely new
system. On the other side, I could try it using the Live system. I'll
try it and tell you when I have results.
Norbert
__
on 29/08/2012 16:54 Gustau Pérez i Querol said the following:
> Al 29/08/2012 15:30, En/na Andriy Gapon ha escrit:
>> I wonder where the discrepancy could come from.
>> Why would VirtualBox emulate the bridge differently for different OSes?
>> And I do not see any quirks related to bus numbers for
Al 29/08/2012 15:30, En/na Andriy Gapon ha escrit:
on 29/08/2012 15:13 John Baldwin said the following:
On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 6:12:02 am Peter Jeremy wrote:
[Moving to -stable and adding jhb@ for his input]
On 2012-Aug-29 11:32:44 +0200, Gustau Pérez i Querol
wrote:
[snip]
Ah.. ls
on 29/08/2012 15:13 John Baldwin said the following:
> On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 6:12:02 am Peter Jeremy wrote:
>> [Moving to -stable and adding jhb@ for his input]
>>
>> On 2012-Aug-29 11:32:44 +0200, Gustau Pérez i Querol
>> wrote:
[snip]
>> Ah.. lspci shows the 9th LANCE at 02:00.0. The
Al 29/08/2012 14:13, En/na John Baldwin ha escrit:
On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 6:12:02 am Peter Jeremy wrote:
[Moving to -stable and adding jhb@ for his input]
On 2012-Aug-29 11:32:44 +0200, Gustau Pérez i Querol
wrote:
Al 29/08/2012 11:02, En/na Peter Jeremy ha escrit:
On 2012-Aug-28 11:
Following http://wiki.freebsd.org/DTrace/userland on 9.1-RC1, the example
fails to work as demonstrated:
# dtrace -s pid.d -c test
dtrace: script 'pid.d' matched 2 probes
CPU IDFUNCTION:NAME
1 59284 main:entry
dtrace: pid 25479 exited with status 1
On Aug 29, 2012, at 1:18 PM, Harald Schmalzbauer
wrote:
> schrieb Pete French am 29.08.2012 11:38 (localtime):
>>> Link aggregation can never work with two separate switches! LACP and
>>> static trunking require both sides to bundle the same trunk. which is
>>> impossible for two separate switc
On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 5:36:43 am Anton Yuzhaninov wrote:
> We use servers witch motherboard Supermicro X8DTT-H and meet with such
> problem:
> when watchdogd started, server is rebooted by IPMI watchdog several times per
> week.
>
> After some debugging I've found, that sometimes IPMI dr
On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 6:12:02 am Peter Jeremy wrote:
> [Moving to -stable and adding jhb@ for his input]
>
> On 2012-Aug-29 11:32:44 +0200, Gustau Pérez i Querol
> wrote:
> >Al 29/08/2012 11:02, En/na Peter Jeremy ha escrit:
> >> On 2012-Aug-28 11:44:44 +0200, Gustau Pérez i Querol
> >>
Norbert Aschendorff yahoo.de> writes:
> ...
> Little table (values in Mbit/s):
>
> Configuration v6 v4
> ===
> Linux -> Linux925 935 # <= This could be v6's 40B header
># vs. v4's 20B
> Lin
Hi List,
Seems that rpcbind bind to all UDP interfaces (mind "udp4 *:940" at the
last command):
-
% uname -a
FreeBSD uni.wart.ru 9.1-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 9.1-PRERELEASE #7 r239793:
Wed Aug 29 04:07:03 SAMT 2012
b...@uni.wart.ru:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/UNI i386
% sockstat -4l | grep rpc
% gr
> Have you checked that Windows really did LACP in your case? Sounds like
> it was no real hardware stack, so probably Windos just activated RSTP.
> FreeBSD doesn't detect any LACP/RSTP configuration features, but windows
> does with some NIC verndor's drivers.
That is quite possible - I didnt set
On 28/08/2012 17:38, Norbert Aschendorff wrote:
> Configuration v6 v4
> ===
> Linux -> Linux925 935 # <= This could be v6's 40B header
># vs. v4's 20B
> Linux -> FreeBSD 450 700
> Fre
schrieb Harald Schmalzbauer am 29.08.2012 12:18 (localtime):
> schrieb Pete French am 29.08.2012 11:38 (localtime):
>>> Link aggregation can never work with two separate switches! LACP and
>>> static trunking require both sides to bundle the same trunk. which is
>>> impossible for two separate sw
schrieb Pete French am 29.08.2012 11:38 (localtime):
>> Link aggregation can never work with two separate switches! LACP and
>> static trunking require both sides to bundle the same trunk. which is
>> impossible for two separate switches.
> These switches had a port where you could connect them to
[Moving to -stable and adding jhb@ for his input]
On 2012-Aug-29 11:32:44 +0200, Gustau Pérez i Querol
wrote:
>Al 29/08/2012 11:02, En/na Peter Jeremy ha escrit:
>> On 2012-Aug-28 11:44:44 +0200, Gustau Pérez i Querol
>> wrote:
>>>I'm running FreeBSD 9.1 RC1/AMD64 with VirtualBox. The prob
> Link aggregation can never work with two separate switches! LACP and
> static trunking require both sides to bundle the same trunk. which is
> impossible for two separate switches.
These switches had a port where you could connect them together and
then configure each to know about the other swi
We use servers witch motherboard Supermicro X8DTT-H and meet with such problem:
when watchdogd started, server is rebooted by IPMI watchdog several times per
week.
After some debugging I've found, that sometimes IPMI driver entered endless
loop, and watchdogd have no chances to reset watchdog t
schrieb Pete French am 28.08.2012 11:48 (localtime):
>> No answer, so it seems that link aggregation doesn't really work in freebsd,
>> this may help others with the same problem...
> I used to use LCAP a lot - this was a few years ago, but the critical
> point was that it only worked if all the c
Hi,
I'm running FreeBSD 9.1 RC1/AMD64 with VirtualBox. The problem I'm
facing is that I can't use more than 8 network adapters plugged to the
virtual machine.
Recent VirtualBox releases (since the 4.2RC1) allow, with the ICH9
chipset, to plug more than 8 network adapters. It doesn't
36 matches
Mail list logo
