O. Hartmann wrote:
> I'm just wondering what's wrong with FreeBSD 8.0/amd64 when I read the
> Benchmarks on Phoronix.org's website. Especially FreeBSD's threaded I/O
> shows in contrast to all claims that have been to be improoved the
> opposite.
>
> oh
This all reminds me of a few releases ago
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The "CLOCK-Pro" might be something we (perhaps myself) want to implement
and evaluate if it would be helpful for our performance?
http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/hpcs/WWW/HTML/publications/abs05-3.html
Cheers,
- --
Xin LI http://www.delphij.net/
Fr
Hi,
I recently upgraded from 7.2-STABLE to 8.0-STABLE, and I'm
encountering key-conflicts warnings whenever I attempt to ssh to a
host that I've previously ssh'd into. eg:
WARNING: DSA key found for host xx.yy.zz
in /home/jonc/.ssh/known_hosts:5
DSA key fingerprint 5e:cf:fe:9d:c2:1d:6
Michal wrote:
O. Hartmann wrote:
I'm just wondering what's wrong with FreeBSD 8.0/amd64 when I read the
Benchmarks on Phoronix.org's website. Especially FreeBSD's threaded I/O
shows in contrast to all claims that have been to be improoved the
opposite.
oh
This all reminds me of a few release
> FYI, since upgrading to 8.0-PRERELEASE on Oct 30, there have been no
> interrupt storms.
I was about to email exactly the same thing today :) This bug is
not present on 8.0 as far as I can make out. Nice work.
-pete.
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org ma
Hello all,
What d'you think about this ?
http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2009/Nov/371
Rgds,
--
~Lst
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 11:57:04PM +1300, Jonathan Chen wrote:
> I recently upgraded from 7.2-STABLE to 8.0-STABLE, and I'm
> encountering key-conflicts warnings whenever I attempt to ssh to a
> host that I've previously ssh'd into. eg:
>
> WARNING: DSA key found for host xx.yy.zz
> in /ho
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 06:04:05PM +0700, ~Lst wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> What d'you think about this ?
> http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2009/Nov/371
Are you actually asking for an opinions of a security hole, or are you
just trying to bring it to our attention? An official statement was
alread
> Usually the error you're seeing is indication that either the client or
> server changed from DSA to RSA, or vice-versa. I don't see anything in
> /etc/ssh/ssh_config or /etc/ssh/sshd_config between 7.2-STABLE and
> 8.0-STABLE which would indicate this changed.
There is, however, a not on /usr/
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 11:43:23AM +, Pete French wrote:
> > Usually the error you're seeing is indication that either the client or
> > server changed from DSA to RSA, or vice-versa. I don't see anything in
> > /etc/ssh/ssh_config or /etc/ssh/sshd_config between 7.2-STABLE and
> > 8.0-STABLE
> What d'you think about this ?
> http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2009/Nov/371
Already being discussed and patched on the FreeBSD security list ... subscribe
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freeb
> This would indicate the OP was running a 7.2-STABLE system which was
> built prior to 2008/08/01 (with some variance; sometimes the commit
> times do not match the timestamp in src/UPDATING), or a system which had
> not had mergemaster run on it to populate the changes into /etc/ssh.
Well, I adm
On 2009-12-01 12:55, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> This would indicate the OP was running a 7.2-STABLE system which was
> built prior to 2008/08/01 (with some variance; sometimes the commit
> times do not match the timestamp in src/UPDATING), or a system which had
> not had mergemaster run on it to popu
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 09:43:25PM -0600, Karl Denninger wrote:
>
>> Karl Denninger wrote:
>>
>>> Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
>>>
>>>
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 12:54:17PM -0600, Karl Denninger wrote:
> For what its worth,
I think this is the affect of this:
20080801:
OpenSSH has been upgraded to 5.1p1.
For many years, FreeBSD's version of OpenSSH preferred DSA
over RSA for host and user authentication keys. With this
upgrade, we've switched to the vendor's default of RSA over
DSA. This may cause upgra
O. Hartmann wrote:
> I'm just wondering what's wrong with FreeBSD 8.0/amd64 when I read the
> Benchmarks on Phoronix.org's website. Especially FreeBSD's threaded I/O
> shows in contrast to all claims that have been to be improoved the
> opposite.
Instead of trying to compare something, I propose t
>O. Hartmann wrote:
>> I'm just wondering what's wrong with FreeBSD 8.0/amd64 when I read
the
>> Benchmarks on Phoronix.org's website. Especially FreeBSD's threaded
I/O
>> shows in contrast to all claims that have been to be improoved the
>> opposite.
>Instead of trying to compare something, I
Johan Hendriks wrote:
>> If somebody still have questions, after some UFS parameters tuning I've
>> got with the same tiotest tool:
>> - Random Write latency - 15us,
>> - Random Read latency - 7us.
>
> What kind of UFS parameter tunings.
To maximize write-back delay. I've mounted file system asyn
TB --- 2009-12-01 14:59:26 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca
TB --- 2009-12-01 14:59:26 - starting RELENG_7_2 tinderbox run for ia64/ia64
TB --- 2009-12-01 14:59:26 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2009-12-01 14:59:53 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2009-12-01 14:59:53 - /usr/
TB --- 2009-12-01 16:55:14 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca
TB --- 2009-12-01 16:55:14 - starting RELENG_7_2 tinderbox run for
sparc64/sparc64
TB --- 2009-12-01 16:55:14 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2009-12-01 16:55:38 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2009-12-01 16:55:38
Sorry for the noise, was just updating the build box
---Mike
At 11:55 AM 12/1/2009, FreeBSD Tinderbox wrote:
TB --- 2009-12-01 14:59:26 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca
TB --- 2009-12-01 14:59:26 - starting RELENG_7_2 tinderbox run for ia64/ia64
TB --- 2009-12-01 14
On 2009-11-30, Tom Judge wrote:
> kern/122380
> kern/133980
>
> Any ideas on a fix?
>
> panic: ffs_valloc: dup alloc
You may be hitting UFS2 32-bit inode limit bug. See this analysis by
Bruce Evans:
http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090508120355.S1497
--
Jaakko
Hi,
This may be a rare case, but I post this with the hope for ideas from
people here.
I have experienced a strange loader(8) error. After upgrading one of
my boxes from 7.1R to 7.2R, an error appeared on "boot" command of
loader(8) like this:
| FreeBSD/i386 bootstrap loader, Revision 1.1
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Hiroki Sato wrote:
> Jack Vogel wrote
> in <2a41acea0911301119j1449be58y183f2fe1d1112...@mail.gmail.com>:
>
> jf> I will look into this Hiroki, as time goes the older hardware does not
> jf> always
> jf> get test cycles like one might wish.
>
>
Here's some more
ping.
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jaakko Heinonen wrote:
> On 2009-11-30, Tom Judge wrote:
>> kern/122380
>> kern/133980
>>
>> Any ideas on a fix?
>>
>> panic: ffs_valloc: dup alloc
>
> You may be hitting UFS2 32-bit inode limit bug. See this analysis by
> Bruce Evans:
>
> http://doc
Hi,
I've been using the iwn(4) driver contributed by Bernhard Schmidt with
my Intel 5100 AGN card on 8-STABLE since he announced the
availability. It was committed to -CURRENT as of r198429. There is
no mention of MFC in the commit log. Are there plans to MFC this
driver to 8-STABLE for a wider
27 matches
Mail list logo
