On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 02:28:37PM +0800, Yi Wang wrote:
> Today I found the system time is incorrect. After changing it, about 5
> hours skipped.
>
> My question is: Will portsnap update the changes of ports in these 5 hours?
It shouldn't be a problem. If you want to be sure, just reboot the
box
Lev Serebryakov wrote:
Sometimes my FreeBSD 7 machine becomes semi-dead: all network sttack
is working (pingable, etc), all LIVE processes are live, but it is
impossible to create new (and, it seems, EXIT finished) process.
It is SCHED_ULE
It seems to be ATA/SATA or UFS2 problem: now I have
Martin Cracauer wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote on Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 10:22:26PM +0100:
Jakub Siroky wrote:
I've just confirmed the same situation on 6.2-RELEASE amd64/GENERIC. I
did not noticed it before because I started using ext2fs extensively
some months ago.
Regards,
Jakub
On Sat, 19 Jan 2
Stef Walter wrote:
> I've been trying to track down a deadlock on some newish production
> servers running FreeBSD 6.3-RELEASE-p2. The deadlock occurs on a
> specific (although mundane) hardware configuration, and each of several
> servers running this hardware deadlock about once per week.
>
> Al
Lev Serebryakov wrote:
It seems to be ATA/SATA or UFS2 problem: now I have computer in state,
when 4 iozone processes are hanged in "Disk wait" state, and I can not
"cd" to filesystem, which is tested by "iozone".
But I can create processes, work on system, etc., if I don't touch this
filesy
No, the hald is not running, I suppose it's the reason.
> hald not running? I had the same problem when using Gentoo.
>
> HTH,
> Sorin.
>
> Pallt wrote:
> > Hi!
> > The version of the freebsd is 7.0-stable(June 9 2008), and the gnome was
> > also updated to 2.22.2.
> > But, I can not lock the scr
Kris Kennaway wrote on Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 11:27:53AM +0200:
> Martin Cracauer wrote:
> >Kris Kennaway wrote on Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 10:22:26PM +0100:
> >>Jakub Siroky wrote:
> >>>I've just confirmed the same situation on 6.2-RELEASE amd64/GENERIC. I
> >>>did not noticed it before because I star
Martin Cracauer wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote on Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 11:27:53AM +0200:
Martin Cracauer wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote on Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 10:22:26PM +0100:
Jakub Siroky wrote:
I've just confirmed the same situation on 6.2-RELEASE amd64/GENERIC. I
did not noticed it before becaus
Hi folks;
I have acquired a rackmount Intel server with a RAID card in it that appears
to be compatable with the MFI driver.
To put it mildly, this thing SMOKES! It is SCREAMING fast. Insane, in
fact.
Ok, enough supurlatives.
Now the question is this - exactly what board(s) will this driver
On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 10:30:01AM +0100, Pete French wrote:
> > I assume SCSI is the best path forward (either SA/SCSI or traditional) but
> > have been out of the loop on the card(s) that work properly for a good long
> > while.
>
> HP P400 cards are PCI express and SAS - they work very well und
10 matches
Mail list logo
