Hi all,
I'm trying getting FreeBSD 5.4 installed from CD on my laptop Compaq
Presario R3117EA (Intel Celeron and ATI 9000 IGP) without any success.
CD installation starts well and the menu is well displayed. But whatever
I choose, the kernel message is displayed and ... my PC is shut off :(
Hi, all!
I have relied on the COMPAT* switches in /etc/make.conf for
years to allow binary software like some of the stuff we
distribute to work out of the box on 5.X servers.
Now, while setting up our first RELENG_6 system I found
that they are actually no ops?
OK, I searched a little bit. Ther
Hi Patrick,
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 10:38:24AM +0100, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> I have relied on the COMPAT* switches in /etc/make.conf for
> years to allow binary software like some of the stuff we
> distribute to work out of the box on 5.X servers.
>
> Now, while setting up our first RELENG_6
Hello !!!
we send out donation links now a days! pluss send old computers for Africa. we
register importent books/articles/science ALL from prosessors of all kinds
pluss much much more to translate print free etc.
we do more importent stuff but red cross still out
On Wed, 02 Nov 2005 23:27:15 +0100
Philippe PEGON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ken Menzel wrote:
> >> options INVARIANT_SUPPORT
> >>
> >> nooptions WITNESS
> >> nooptions WITNESS_SKIP_SPIN
> >
> >
> > If I include GENERIC can I comment out the following?
> > #cpuI486_CPU
> > #
On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, dick hoogendijk wrote:
Sure, but I think it's the *syntax* that matters here? options ->
nooptions / i486_cpu -> no??? It's OK to leave GENERIC alone, but HOW
are things switched off?
It appears to be an ommission in the file format. I've e-mailed Ruslan,
who implemente
Hello,
Recently I have upgraded a FBSD laptop from 5-STABLE to 6.0RC1,
all seems works except the usb-rs232 adapter which is detected
by the umct and ucom modules as:
ucom0: USB-RS232 Interface Converter USB Ver1.2 Device, rev 1.10/1.03,
addr 3
however no /dev entry is created for this adapte
José M. Fandiño wrote:
Hello,
Recently I have upgraded a FBSD laptop from 5-STABLE to 6.0RC1,
all seems works except the usb-rs232 adapter which is detected
by the umct and ucom modules as:
ucom0: USB-RS232 Interface Converter USB Ver1.2 Device, rev 1.10/1.03,
addr 3
however no /dev entry is
At 07:39 AM 03/11/2005, José M. Fandiño wrote:
Hello,
Recently I have upgraded a FBSD laptop from 5-STABLE to 6.0RC1,
all seems works except the usb-rs232 adapter which is detected
by the umct and ucom modules as:
ucom0: USB-RS232 Interface Converter USB Ver1.2 Device, rev 1.10/1.03, addr 3
ho
My SATA HDD with UFS2 crashed. While checking HDD fsck said, that alternate
super block at block 32 is not present. In 'man fsck' I saw, that in UFS2
(my file system) alternate super block is usually located in block 160 (For
UFS1 - in 32). So the question is: why fsck trying to find alternate
supe
dick hoogendijk wrote:
On Wed, 02 Nov 2005 23:27:15 +0100
Philippe PEGON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ken Menzel wrote:
options INVARIANT_SUPPORT
nooptions WITNESS
nooptions WITNESS_SKIP_SPIN
If I include GENERIC can I comment out the following?
#cpuI486_CPU
#cpu
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 12:27:21PM +, Robert Watson wrote:
>
> On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, dick hoogendijk wrote:
>
> >Sure, but I think it's the *syntax* that matters here? options ->
> >nooptions / i486_cpu -> no??? It's OK to leave GENERIC alone, but HOW
> >are things switched off?
>
> It appea
On Thursday 03 November 2005 09:03 am, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 12:27:21PM +, Robert Watson wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, dick hoogendijk wrote:
> > >Sure, but I think it's the *syntax* that matters here? options ->
> > >nooptions / i486_cpu -> no??? It's OK to leave GEN
--On 02 November 2005 15:19 -0800, Jeffrey Williams wrote:
I have recently purchased a number HP DX5150 SFF desktops with idea
of using them as basic infrastructure servers (e.g. DNS, DHCP, and
firewall). I prefer to use -stable versions of FreeBSD and OpenBSD.
A few general thoughts (no know
I upgraded 9 of my systems to RELENG_5 on Oct 29 and 30. Now none of them
can do a dump to an NFS mounted directory.
the NFS connection is made, because the dump file is created on the NFS
directory, but it stays at 0 bytes.
The system that is doing the dump hangs after:
oregon root:#>dump -0au
- Original Message -
From: "Elliot Finley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I upgraded 9 of my systems to RELENG_5 on Oct 29 and 30. Now none of them
> can do a dump to an NFS mounted directory.
Oops I also changed some ipf rules and after opening everything up, the
dump works again.
Sorry fo
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Brad Knowles wrote:
Note that RAID-1 is the second worst-case for mail server performance
-- it accelerates reads (if you have mirror load-balancing), but all writes
are required to be held until complete on both disks. The only worse case
would be RAID-5, where you have
On Tue, 28 Jun 2005, Don Lewis wrote:
BTW, even with an UPS monitored by sysutils/nut, I've had a non-trival
number of ungraceful shutdowns caused by power problems (power cord
between UPS and computer falls out, sudden battery death, etc.). For
this reason, all of my machines (other than my PV
Francisco wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Brad Knowles wrote:
Note that RAID-1 is the second worst-case for mail server
performance -- it accelerates reads (if you have mirror
load-balancing), but all writes are required to be held until complete
on both disks. The only worse case would be RA
At 1:34 PM -0500 2005-11-03, Francisco wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Brad Knowles wrote:
Note that RAID-1 is the second worst-case for mail server performance --
it accelerates reads (if you have mirror load-balancing), but all writes
are required to be held until complete on both dis
On 11/3/05, Taras Savchuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My SATA HDD with UFS2 crashed. While checking HDD fsck said, that alternate
> super block at block 32 is not present. In 'man fsck' I saw, that in UFS2
> (my file system) alternate super block is usually located in block 160 (For
> UFS1 - in 32
> Going through an old thread and saw your comment...
> What is the sysctl parameter to use to turn off WCE?
camcontrol modepage
Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mai
On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, Chuck Swiger wrote:
If you're using maildir, that is one of the situations which works pretty
well with RAID-5, although RAID-10 is also (always? :-) a good choice.
How about for database? In particular postgresql.
How bad would RAID 5 be for it?
I still have some, limited
I found these messages on my computer, which is running a very recent
RELENG_5. Is this bad? Does it indicate that the disk is failing?
Nov 3 07:35:48 cauchy kernel: ad4: FAILURE - READ_DMA
status=51 error=40 LBA=145908831
Nov 3 07:35:51 cauchy kernel: ad4: FAILURE - READ_DMA
status=51 error
On 11/3/05, Xin LI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11/3/05, Taras Savchuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My SATA HDD with UFS2 crashed. While checking HDD fsck said, that alternate
> super block at block 32 is not present. In 'man fsck' I saw, that in UFS2
> (my file system) alternate super block
In the last episode (Nov 03), Francisco Reyes said:
> On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> How about for database? In particular postgresql.
> How bad would RAID 5 be for it?
>
> I still have some, limited, hopes I can convince the owner of the
> company to go with RAID 10 with 10K rpm drives
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
I found these messages on my computer, which is running a very recent
RELENG_5. Is this bad? Does it indicate that the disk is failing?
Nov 3 07:35:48 cauchy kernel: ad4: FAILURE - READ_DMA
status=51 error=40 LBA=145908831
Nov 3 07:35:51 cauchy kernel: ad4: FAIL
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 09:27:02AM -0500, John Nielsen wrote:
> On Thursday 03 November 2005 09:03 am, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 12:27:21PM +, Robert Watson wrote:
> > > On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, dick hoogendijk wrote:
> > > >Sure, but I think it's the *syntax* that matters he
The recent discussion regarding kernel configuration directives
and a file containing "defaults" reminds me of a poster I saw
in college long ago. The poster warned students who were headed
home for the Thanksgiving holiday to lock their rooms to avoid
theft, saying, "Don't be a turkey." The illust
At 2:35 PM -0500 2005-11-03, Francisco Reyes wrote:
If you're using maildir, that is one of the situations which works
pretty well with RAID-5, although RAID-10 is also (always? :-) a good
choice.
How about for database? In particular postgresql.
How bad would RAID 5 be for it?
RAID-5
At 2:06 PM -0600 2005-11-03, Dan Nelson wrote:
The biggest reason for going RAID-5 is that you only get 50% useable
capacity out of RAID 10, and at least 75% out of a RAID 5 (with a 3+1
layout. With an 8+1 layout you get 88%). If you don't need fast
writes, or your controller has sufficien
--- Francisco Reyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, Chuck Swiger wrote:
>
> > If you're using maildir, that is one of the
> situations which works pretty
> > well with RAID-5, although RAID-10 is also
> (always? :-) a good choice.
>
> How about for database? In particular post
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 05:39:28PM -0700, Brett Glass wrote:
> My humble opinion, for what it's worth, is that the GENERIC kernel
> configuration should be very heavily commented and documented and
> that the DEFAULT file will then be completely unnecessary.
Thanks for your $0.02, but that doesn'
On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, michael meltzer wrote:
Controller:
http://www.3ware.com/products/serial_ata2-9000.asp
16 port muili-lane, with BU and 265meg, cheaper than
most SCSI controller
From what I gather, the ARECA controllers have significantly better
performance.
__
> > Kris said:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 05:39:28PM -0700, Brett Glass wrote:
>
> > My humble opinion, for what it's worth, is that the GENERIC kernel
> > configuration should be very heavily commented and documented and
> > that the DEFAULT file will then be completely unnecessary.
>
> Thanks for
Robert Watson wrote:
> My hope is that, increasingly, FreeBSD users will create kernel
> configuration files using the "include" directive to specify a set of
> changes relative to GENERIC. That will also help lower the rate of foot
> shooting involving kernel components becoming optional. Most
At 07:34 PM 11/3/2005, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>Thanks for your $0.02, but that doesn't work in reality, as discussed
>previously.
It has always worked perfectly in my reality.
Again, the problem is that when one slims down a kernel (which
is usually the reason one uses something other than GENERIC
Kris Kennaway wrote:
> You've clearly never spent much time on the
> FreeBSD support forums, where every few days
> someone posts for help
>
> 1) with an error caused by removing one of those
> "Do not remove this!" lines, and
>
> 2) for help on getting X working when they forgot
> to add /dev/i
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 09:42:45PM -0700, Brett Glass wrote:
> At 07:34 PM 11/3/2005, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>
> >Thanks for your $0.02, but that doesn't work in reality, as discussed
> >previously.
>
> It has always worked perfectly in my reality.
That's just wonderful, Brett!
Kris
pgpzNQzosXQ
--- Francisco Reyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, michael meltzer wrote:
>
> >
> > Controller:
> > http://www.3ware.com/products/serial_ata2-9000.asp
> > 16 port muili-lane, with BU and 265meg, cheaper
> than
> > most SCSI controller
>
> From what I gather, the ARECA control
On Thu, 2005-Nov-03 07:39:02 +, Jayton Garnett wrote:
>Just to confirm my suspicions, while compiling apache 2.0.55 on a fresh
>install of FreeBSD 5.4 with fresh cvsup'd ports tree I got an error, the
>error stated : Bus error.
>This is a hardware fault is it not? or is it some other error?
In the last episode (Nov 04), Brad Knowles said:
> At 2:35 PM -0500 2005-11-03, Francisco Reyes wrote:
> >> If you're using maildir, that is one of the situations which works
> >> pretty well with RAID-5, although RAID-10 is also (always? :-) a
> >> good choice.
> >
> > How about for database? In p
Peter Jeremy wrote:
On Thu, 2005-Nov-03 07:39:02 +, Jayton Garnett wrote:
Just to confirm my suspicions, while compiling apache 2.0.55 on a fresh
install of FreeBSD 5.4 with fresh cvsup'd ports tree I got an error, the
error stated : Bus error.
This is a hardware fault is it not? or is
On Fri, 2005-Nov-04 07:12:54 +, Jayton Garnett wrote:
>Yes it is reproducable, it just happened while compiling mysql41-server.
>While trying to compile apache20 a short while ago the computer rebooted
>itself, before that it had the same error so I tried compiling again and
>thats when it re
44 matches
Mail list logo
