from Glen Barber :
> less(1) is expecting '+' to be followed by additional arguments.
> If you use 'less -- +DESC', for example, it should work fine. Same with
> vi(1).
Yes, that works, as does "less ./+DESC".
Somehow I thought I had successfully done "less +CONTENTS" successfully before,
but
on 13/07/2012 19:31 Sean Bruno said the following:
> Well this is new. I haven't a clue what Dell has done on this R620, but
> this popped up today after I did a boat load of BIOS updates and tried
> to install stable/9 from our yahoo tree. If anyone sees the obvious
> solution here, I'd love to
Hello,
using 8.2 the machine runs fine,
using 8.3 or higher, not so much.
In laymans terms,
if I do "too many" writes/time just once, the machine can't do any disk
access for a couple of hours.
As in: What's already running stays running, no crashes or anything,
but as soon as I need to read
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Ross"
To:
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 2:23 PM
Subject: 8.2 ->8.3 regression on disk writes
Hello,
using 8.2 the machine runs fine,
using 8.3 or higher, not so much.
In laymans terms,
if I do "too many" writes/time just once, the machine can't d
On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 14:50:13 +0200
Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 2012-07-10 15:41, Robert wrote:
> ...
> > Complete attempt at build (xorg-drivers.log) can be viewed at
> > pastebin.com/u/traveling08
>
> Aha, I hadn't realized this wasn't yet fixed for clang. Please try
> the attached patch.
If I
Hi,
I just installed FreeBSD 9-stable on a new desktop machine equipped with an
i3 2120 CPU (HD Graphics 2000). I compiled xorg with WITH_NEW_XORG=true and
WITH_KMS=true, following the instructions on
http://wiki.freebsd.org/Intel_GPU . Xorg seems to be running without
crashing and I have confirme
I've been seeing a panic on my FreeBSD/ZFS server (running 9-STABLE
built on 6/28), where the relevant line appears to be:
avl_find() succeeded inside avl_add()
I found a patch pjd committed to trunk (r230454), which apparently was
supposed to be MFC'd a week later, but it doesn't appear to be in
There are currently no automated MFC systems in place, correct? I.e. the
onus is completely on the developer that made the change to head to merge
back to stable? Do the RELENG team do anything in particular to check
that changes for MFC actually make it back to stable?
Reason for asking, I not
On 16 July 2012 19:33, Trent Nelson wrote:
>
> There are currently no automated MFC systems in place, correct? I.e. the
> onus is completely on the developer that made the change to head to merge
> back to stable?
Correct.
> Do the RELENG team do anything in particular to check
> that changes f
The first test build of the 9.1-RELEASE release cycle is now available
on the FTP servers for amd64, i386, powerpc64, and sparc64. The
MD5/SHA256 checksums are at the bottom of this message. The ISO images
and, for architectures, that support it, the memory stick images are
available here:
Have you tried switching your scheduler to 4BSD?
--
Change is hard.
___
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"
On 7/16/12 11:19 PM, "Eitan Adler" wrote:
>On 16 July 2012 19:33, Trent Nelson wrote:
>>
>> There are currently no automated MFC systems in place, correct? I.e.
>>the
>> onus is completely on the developer that made the change to head to
>>merge
>> back to stable?
>
>Correct.
>
>> Do the RELENG
On 16 July 2012 22:35, Trent Nelson wrote:
> On 7/16/12 11:19 PM, "Eitan Adler" wrote:
>
>>On 16 July 2012 19:33, Trent Nelson wrote:
>>>
>>> There are currently no automated MFC systems in place, correct? I.e.
>>>the
>>> onus is completely on the developer that made the change to head to
>>>me
13 matches
Mail list logo
