Re: test11-pre2

On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 03:06:52PM -0500, Jan Harkes wrote: > On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 08:27:47PM +0100, Rafal Maszkowski wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 09, 2000 at 05:52:29PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > - pre2: > > > - David Miller: sparc64 updates, make sparc32 boot again > > Thanks for worki

Re: Where is it written?

Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> By author:Michael Meissner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > Generally with ABIs you don't want to mess with it (otherwise you can't be > guaranteed that a library built by somebody else will be compatible with your > code, without all so

Re: 2.2.17 wont compile on AMD k6@-550

Hi, On 10 Nov 2000, root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > cc: Internal compiler error: program cc1 got fatal signal 11 http://www.bitwizard.nl/sig11/ Have fun, Jochen. -- FAQ zur Newsgroup at.linux: PGP signature

Re: [Fwd: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue]

Jeff V. Merkey writes: > There was also an issue relative to how sendmail is interpreting load > average on a linux box. [EMAIL PROTECTED] pointed out that perhaps you > are not factoring sleeping processes, which Linux does -- a deviation > from BSD's interpretation of load average. At wors

Re: Wild thangs, was: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue

Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> By author:David Ford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > - Requires high load average allowance > Incorrect. Same machine barely spiked a tenth of a point for this load and >dropped > back to .05. Only time I adjusted the configured

Re: 2.2.17 wont compile on AMD k6@-550

On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 08:05:56PM -0500, root wrote: > Hello kernel hackers, > > I am having problems with compiling a kernel on an AMD K62-550. > I am running Red Hat 6.2, and am getting error messages like this: > > cc -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/linux/include -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2 >

Re: crash @ 64 day's of uptime

On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, Robbert Muller wrote: > Hi > some inspections of old log's on 2 other machines at home which both recently > crashed. Both up , you already guest it, 64 day's. [paulj@berkman paulj]$ uptime 1:25am up 202 days, 6:44, 12 users, load average: 0.75, 0.29, 0.20 [paulj@berk

Re: Where is it written?

On 10 Nov 2000 17:10:00 -0800, "H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >We can mess with the ABI, but it requires a wholescale rev of the >entire system. AFAICT, there is nothing stopping us from redoing the kernel ABI to pass the first few parameters between kernel functions in registers. A

Re: Where is it written?

Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> By author:Keith Owens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > On 10 Nov 2000 17:10:00 -0800, > "H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >We can mess with the ABI, but it requires a wholescale rev of the > >entire system. > > AFAICT, there

Re: PCMCIA versioning...

> Is there actually a way to work out what version of userspace > utilities you are using? Right now, no; the user space utilities grab the version number from the header files. I haven't figured out a sane way to straighten this out; this was the best I could come up with for now. In general,

Re: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue

On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 02:18:20PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Numerically high load averages aren't inherently a bad thing. There > isn't anything bad about a system with a loadavg of 20 if it does what > it should in the time you'd expect. However, if your daemons start > blocking because

Re: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue

Ralf Baechle wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 02:18:20PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > > Numerically high load averages aren't inherently a bad thing. There > > isn't anything bad about a system with a loadavg of 20 if it does what > > it should in the time you'd expect. However, if your

Re: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue

Jeff, On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 03:29:20PM -0700, Jeff V. Merkey wrote: > Well, here's what the sendmail folks **REAL** opinion of Linux is and > the way load average is calculated (senders name removed) > > [... sendmail person ...] > > Ok, here's my blunt answer: Linux sucks. Why does it hav

Re: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue

Ralf Baechle wrote: > > Jeff, > > On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 03:29:20PM -0700, Jeff V. Merkey wrote: > > > Well, here's what the sendmail folks **REAL** opinion of Linux is and > > the way load average is calculated (senders name removed) > > > > [... sendmail person ...] > > > > Ok, here's my bl

Re: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue

I have this exact argument at work every so often. People coming in from an NT environment have difficulty understanding what it is/means and that it's not neccessarily bad when load gets above 1, etc, etc, etc. Ralf Baechle wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 02:18:20PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wro

Re: [Fwd: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue]

> > With a handle like > > "Assmann", deviation is proably something you already understand quite > > well ... > > Don't be a moron. Claus is German, Assman really is his last name and > not some "handle", and it's pronounced "Oss-man". Claus is a well liked, knowledgable and well experienced

Re: bzImage ~ 900K with i386 test11-pre2

On 10 Nov 2000, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >Different compile options? > >Why is a 900K kernel unusable? > > -hpa My guess would be it not actually bzipping the kernel. Id run make bzImage again and making sure it is bzipping it. On x86 machines there is a size limitation on booting. Though

Re: [Fwd: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue]

On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 05:15:53PM -0800, Steve VanDevender wrote: > Jeff V. Merkey writes: > > There was also an issue relative to how sendmail is interpreting load > > average on a linux box. [EMAIL PROTECTED] pointed out that perhaps you > > are not factoring sleeping processes, which Linux

Re: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue

On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 05:46:29PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Ralf Baechle wrote: > > > > Jeff, > > > > On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 03:29:20PM -0700, Jeff V. Merkey wrote: > > > > > Well, here's what the sendmail folks **REAL** opinion of Linux is and > > > the way load average is calculated (s

Re: [Fwd: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue]

On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 06:02:28PM -0800, David Ford wrote: > > > With a handle like > > > "Assmann", deviation is proably something you already understand quite > > > well ... > > > > Don't be a moron. Claus is German, Assman really is his last name and > > not some "handle", and it's pronoun

Re: Wild thangs, was: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue

On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 04:46:53PM -0800, David Ford wrote: > To be honest Jeff, most of my sendmail systems have default load values > and large (read created by microsoft mua) emails make it through > constantly with no distinguishable delays. I just launched 45 "cat > core|mail [EMAIL PROTECTE

Re: Wild thangs, was: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue

> They're not modprobes, they're misnamed processes sleeping from NWFS. If they're sleeping, why are they in D state? That ups the load average. > I got the fix from someone so now they display their proper names. > top displays the names correctly, ps does not. Several people have > verified

Re: Wild thangs, was: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue

"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote: > > They're not modprobes, they're misnamed processes sleeping from NWFS. > I got the fix from someone so now they display their proper names. > top displays the names correctly, ps does not. Several people have > verified this problem, and all you are saying is that your

Re: bzImage ~ 900K with i386 test11-pre2

Max Inux wrote: > > On 10 Nov 2000, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > >Different compile options? > > > >Why is a 900K kernel unusable? > > > > -hpa > > My guess would be it not actually bzipping the kernel. Id run make > bzImage again and making sure it is bzipping it. > gzip, actually. I can

Re: Wild thangs, was: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue

Andrew Morton wrote: > > "Jeff V. Merkey" wrote: > > > > They're not modprobes, they're misnamed processes sleeping from NWFS. > > I got the fix from someone so now they display their proper names. > > top displays the names correctly, ps does not. Several people have > > verified this problem,

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Generalised Kernel Hooks Interface (GKHI)

"Theodore Y. Ts'o" wrote: > >Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 10:36:31 -0800 >From: "Matt D. Robinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >As soon as I finish writing raw write disk routines (not using kiobufs), >we can _maybe_ get LKCD accepted one of these days, especially now that we >don't have

newbie in kernel

Dear Sirs, May I have your help on re-build kernel? I wanna find /usr/src/linux/include/linux/tasks.h and change the NR_TASKS to increase the limitation of max processes. But It's not there under kernel 2.4.0-test10. where can I find it? All I wanna get, is to increate the max processes

Re: Patch generation

[Dan Aloni] > > Then you run this script (I got it when Riel pasted it on IRC) > > > > for i in `find ./ -name \*.orig` ; do diff -u $i `dirname $i`/`basename $i > > .orig` ; done That works, but see http://bugs.debian.org/64958 for my variant: a fairly trivial diff diff that adds a flag '-k'

Re: Oops with 2.4.0-test10 during ripping an audio cd with cdda2wav

On Fri, Nov 10 2000, Bernd Nottelmann wrote: > Hi, > > I am not sure, if this is a reiserfs related issue, so I send this Oops > report both to the kernel mailing list and to the reiserfs people > (kernel has been patched with reiserfs-3.6.18). > > During ripping the last song from a cd (a long

Intel's ANS Driver -vs- Bonding [was Re: Linux 2.2.18pre21]

I think it is great that there is continued valuable developement on the bonding driver. Have you guys taken a look at the source code for Intel's new ANS driver? For any Intel network card, it will do 8-way Fast EtherChannel. Supposedly, it also supports failover (though even "bonding" driver

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Generalised Kernel Hooks Interface (GKHI)

On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 19:29:26 -0800, "Matt D. Robinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >We're removing lcrash from >the kernel, putting it into its own RPM, and adding patches to the >kernel for LKCD that build in crash dump functionality and make a new >"Kernsyms" file so that we can dynamically read

Re: Where is it written?

On Sat, Nov 11, 2000 at 12:28:54PM +1100, Keith Owens wrote: > On 10 Nov 2000 17:10:00 -0800, > "H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >We can mess with the ABI, but it requires a wholescale rev of the > >entire system. > > AFAICT, there is nothing stopping us from redoing the kernel ABI

patch for pas16 configuration in 2.4

This patch allows someone to select only Pro Audio Spectrum configuration and get both PAS and SB emulation, as intended. Small changes were also made to documentation. It appears that it is too late for inclusion before 2.4 final, but is submitted now for comments. diff -urN linux.old/Document

Re: bzImage ~ 900K with i386 test11-pre2

"H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On x86 machines there is a size limitation on booting. Though I thought > > it was 1024K as the max, 900K should be fine. > No, there isn't. There used to be, but it has been fixed. the main problem is for us distribution if we want to fit this

Re: Patch generation

Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > (I prefer EMACS, which likes to unlink.) > No it doesn't, not always. Your choice: > (setq make-backup-files nil) > (setq backup-by-copying t) i would recommend to use the orig.el[1] from frederic.lepied with Emacs, it save any files before ed

Re: bzImage ~ 900K with i386 test11-pre2

[Robert Lynch] > I've been regularly building kernels in the testXX series, and > they have been coming out ~ 600K; test10-final and test11-pre1: > > -rw-r--r--1 root root 610503 Oct 31 18:39 vmlinuz-t10 > -rw-r--r--1 root root 610568 Nov 7 20:26 vmlinuz-t11p01 > >

Re: [BUG] /proc//stat access stalls badly for swapping process,2.4.0-test10

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Mansfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Linus Torvalds wrote: >... >> >> And it has everything to do with the fact that the way Linux semaphores >> are implemented, a non-blocking process has a HUGE advantage over a >> blocking one. Linux kernel semaphores are

Re: Patch generation

[Chmouel Boudjnah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] > i would recommend to use the orig.el[1] from frederic.lepied with > Emacs, it save any files before editing with a particuliar prefix I'll take a look, thanks. > and you can generate the patch with the gendiff script (included with > rpm). I did not kno

Re: Intel's ANS Driver -vs- Bonding [was Re: Linux 2.2.18pre21]

Dan Browning wrote: > > I think it is great that there is continued valuable developement on the > bonding driver. Have you guys taken a look at the source code for Intel's > new ANS driver? For any Intel network card, it will do 8-way Fast > EtherChannel. Supposedly, it also supports failover

Re: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue

H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > By author:Claus Assmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > > > Why does Linux report a LA of 10 if there are only two processes > > running? > > > > Load Average = runnable processes (R) + processes in disk wa

<    1   2   3