Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 15:30:52 -0400 Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But he old libraries are still on the system than, aren't they? Or will they not be used and if not, why? Use libchk and pkg_which..see their manpages. After looking into the manual(s) this seems to be a dangerous or at least not an easy operation. Can someone be a little more specific about how to remove old 4.x / 5.x libraries from a FreeBSD system? -- dick -- http://nagual.st/ -- PGP/GnuPG key: F86289CE ++ Running FreeBSD 4.11-stable ++ FreeBSD 5.4 + Nai tiruvantel ar vayuvantel i Valar tielyanna nu vilja ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Sat, October 22, 2005 9:41 am, dick hoogendijk wrote: On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 15:30:52 -0400 Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But he old libraries are still on the system than, aren't they? Or will they not be used and if not, why? Use libchk and pkg_which..see their manpages. After looking into the manual(s) this seems to be a dangerous or at least not an easy operation. Can someone be a little more specific about how to remove old 4.x / 5.x libraries from a FreeBSD system? You can run make check-old in /usr/src. # check-old - Print a list of old files/directories in the system. # delete-old - Delete obsolete files and directories interactively. # delete-old-libs - Delete obsolete libraries interactively. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Sat, October 22, 2005 12:25 pm, Mike Jakubik wrote: You can run make check-old in /usr/src. # check-old - Print a list of old files/directories in the system. # delete-old - Delete obsolete files and directories interactively. # delete-old-libs - Delete obsolete libraries interactively. Oops, it seems this feature is in 7-CURRENT only. If the appropiate person is reading this, why isnt something like that available in 6? I think it would be a very useful feature. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On 22 Oct Mike Jakubik wrote: On Sat, October 22, 2005 12:25 pm, Mike Jakubik wrote: You can run make check-old in /usr/src. Oops, it seems this feature is in 7-CURRENT only. If the appropiate person is reading this, why isnt something like that available in 6? I think it would be a very useful feature. What a shame. You made me glad for a very short time. This seemed to be the option I was looking for. Straight forward and understandable. It's not in 6 though .. so, any tips on another easy way? -- dick -- http://nagual.st/ -- PGP/GnuPG key: F86289CE ++ Running FreeBSD 4.11-stable ++ FreeBSD 5.4 + Nai tiruvantel ar vayuvantel i Valar tielyanna nu vilja ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Sat, Oct 22, 2005 at 03:41:33PM +0200, dick hoogendijk wrote: On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 15:30:52 -0400 Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But he old libraries are still on the system than, aren't they? Or will they not be used and if not, why? Use libchk and pkg_which..see their manpages. After looking into the manual(s) this seems to be a dangerous or at least not an easy operation. Can someone be a little more specific about how to remove old 4.x / 5.x libraries from a FreeBSD system? That's the best there is for 6.0 (so run a full backup first). 7.0 has a 'make delete-old' target that removes known old files from your base system. I don't know if netchild has plans to backport it, but you could ask him. Kris pgp4z9CeJLBCz.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
Dick Hoogendijk wrote: Oops, it seems this feature is in 7-CURRENT only. If the appropiate person is reading this, why isnt something like that available in 6? I think it would be a very useful feature. What a shame. You made me glad for a very short time. This seemed to be the option I was looking for. Straight forward and understandable. It's not in 6 though .. so, any tips on another easy way? What about installing one of the compat ports and then removing it? Would it take the old libraries with it? ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Sat, Oct 22, 2005 at 07:24:35PM -0700, Brandon Fosdick wrote: Dick Hoogendijk wrote: Oops, it seems this feature is in 7-CURRENT only. If the appropiate person is reading this, why isnt something like that available in 6? I think it would be a very useful feature. What a shame. You made me glad for a very short time. This seemed to be the option I was looking for. Straight forward and understandable. It's not in 6 though .. so, any tips on another easy way? What about installing one of the compat ports and then removing it? Would it take the old libraries with it? No, ports install in a different place. As I mentioned, libchk will tell you about unused libraries though. Kris pgpnhfxWDMdeW.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Oct 20, 2005, at 4:16 PM, Michael Nottebrock wrote: On Thursday, 20. October 2005 21:20, Vivek Khera wrote: personally, I don't see the point of doing that. just let your ports naturally get replaced as they are upgraded due to version bumps and such. That is dangerous, see other replies in this thread for the reasons why. I stand corrected; you need to update any provider of shared object libs at the minimum. Probably also any consumer of those shared objects too. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 18:53:51 -0400 Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 11:36:35PM +0200, Ronald Klop wrote: COMPAT_FREEBSD5 is meant for running FreeBSD-5 binary applications. If you have them it's ok. If you recompile everything you don't need the COMPAT_FREEBSD5 stuff. If you don't have the source of some of your FreeBSD-5 applications you have to run with COMPAT_FREEBSD5. And the switch to 6 is easier because your 5-applications keep running. Yes. As long as you only use your old 5.x applications, you're fine with just the compat. The problem is when you start to link *new* 6.0 applications with *old* 5.x libraries (e.g. by installing a new port, e.g. a new X application, without rebuilding your 5.x X installation first). Thus, unless you upgrade all your 5.x ports (well, actually many, i.e. only those that provide libraries or shared object modules, but it's easier to just do all) you'll end up with 6.0 binaries that are linked to e.g. two versions of libc at once (the 5.x libc and the 6.0 libc), which is a recipe for disaster. I learn much from these kind of answers. Thanks Kris. What I don't get is how I can /get rid/ of these old 4.x / 5.x libraries on my new updated 6.0 system. I guess teh way to go is: cvsup to the latest 6.0 source; do the well-known buildworld thing; rebuild the kernel without compat_freebsd4/5 option (???) and rebuild every port with portupgrade -fa But he old libraries are still on the system than, aren't they? Or will they not be used and if not, why? -- dick -- http://nagual.st/ -- PGP/GnuPG key: F86289CE ++ Running FreeBSD 4.11-stable ++ FreeBSD 5.4 + Nai tiruvantel ar vayuvantel i Valar tielyanna nu vilja ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 08:21:27PM +0200, dick hoogendijk wrote: On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 18:53:51 -0400 Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 11:36:35PM +0200, Ronald Klop wrote: COMPAT_FREEBSD5 is meant for running FreeBSD-5 binary applications. If you have them it's ok. If you recompile everything you don't need the COMPAT_FREEBSD5 stuff. If you don't have the source of some of your FreeBSD-5 applications you have to run with COMPAT_FREEBSD5. And the switch to 6 is easier because your 5-applications keep running. Yes. As long as you only use your old 5.x applications, you're fine with just the compat. The problem is when you start to link *new* 6.0 applications with *old* 5.x libraries (e.g. by installing a new port, e.g. a new X application, without rebuilding your 5.x X installation first). Thus, unless you upgrade all your 5.x ports (well, actually many, i.e. only those that provide libraries or shared object modules, but it's easier to just do all) you'll end up with 6.0 binaries that are linked to e.g. two versions of libc at once (the 5.x libc and the 6.0 libc), which is a recipe for disaster. I learn much from these kind of answers. Thanks Kris. What I don't get is how I can /get rid/ of these old 4.x / 5.x libraries on my new updated 6.0 system. I guess teh way to go is: cvsup to the latest 6.0 source; do the well-known buildworld thing; rebuild the kernel without compat_freebsd4/5 option (???) and rebuild every port with portupgrade -fa But he old libraries are still on the system than, aren't they? Or will they not be used and if not, why? Use libchk and pkg_which..see their manpages. Kris pgpIsHqejJYqA.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Oct 19, 2005, at 5:10 PM, dick hoogendijk wrote: Wat is the best way to get the cleanest FreeBSD-6.x system without installing from scratch? Recompile each port? Or use the COMPAT_FREEBSD5 layer? this is a different question than you asked before... the COMPAT_FREEBSD5 will allow your existing binaries to continue to run. you can leave this on while you run portupgrade -f -a to recompile all your ports, then you can take it out... and remove all the compat libraries sitting around if you care to do so. personally, I don't see the point of doing that. just let your ports naturally get replaced as they are upgraded due to version bumps and such. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Thursday, 20. October 2005 21:20, Vivek Khera wrote: personally, I don't see the point of doing that. just let your ports naturally get replaced as they are upgraded due to version bumps and such. That is dangerous, see other replies in this thread for the reasons why. -- ,_, | Michael Nottebrock | [EMAIL PROTECTED] (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve | http://www.freebsd.org \u/ | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org pgpZBBO7Qwq9a.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 03:20:52PM -0400, Vivek Khera wrote: On Oct 19, 2005, at 5:10 PM, dick hoogendijk wrote: Wat is the best way to get the cleanest FreeBSD-6.x system without installing from scratch? Recompile each port? Or use the COMPAT_FREEBSD5 layer? this is a different question than you asked before... the COMPAT_FREEBSD5 will allow your existing binaries to continue to run. you can leave this on while you run portupgrade -f -a to recompile all your ports, then you can take it out... and remove all the compat libraries sitting around if you care to do so. personally, I don't see the point of doing that. just let your ports naturally get replaced as they are upgraded due to version bumps and such. This isn't enough, because you'll still get new 6.0 ports compiled against old 5.x libraries and the situation I detailed in my previous email. If you want to use continue to ports after upgrading to a new major release, you *must* first recompile your old ports to avoid those problems. Kris pgp2GUVMDwsxp.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 15:52:00 -0400 Vivek Khera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 16, 2005, at 7:57 AM, dick hoogendijk wrote: The *ONLY* question is: will I need to *recompile* all installed ports if I go from 5.4 to 6.0 release? No, the kernel has COMPAT_FREEBSD5 and COMPAT_FREEBSD4 by default, so just keep those and your shared libs around and you're golden. Of course, ports like lsof which dependon the kernel version will have to be rebuilt, but that's true no matter the version change... I get contradicting advice. You tell me I'm golden 'cause of the compat_xx settings; others tell me it's way better to *recompile* all portsto get the cleanest system. Wat is the best way to get the cleanest FreeBSD-6.x system without installing from scratch? Recompile each port? Or use the COMPAT_FREEBSD5 layer? -- dick -- http://nagual.st/ -- PGP/GnuPG key: F86289CE ++ Running FreeBSD 4.11-stable ++ FreeBSD 5.4 + Nai tiruvantel ar vayuvantel i Valar tielyanna nu vilja ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 23:10:46 +0200, dick hoogendijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 15:52:00 -0400 Vivek Khera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 16, 2005, at 7:57 AM, dick hoogendijk wrote: The *ONLY* question is: will I need to *recompile* all installed ports if I go from 5.4 to 6.0 release? No, the kernel has COMPAT_FREEBSD5 and COMPAT_FREEBSD4 by default, so just keep those and your shared libs around and you're golden. Of course, ports like lsof which dependon the kernel version will have to be rebuilt, but that's true no matter the version change... I get contradicting advice. You tell me I'm golden 'cause of the compat_xx settings; others tell me it's way better to *recompile* all portsto get the cleanest system. Wat is the best way to get the cleanest FreeBSD-6.x system without installing from scratch? Recompile each port? Or use the COMPAT_FREEBSD5 layer? You are answering your own question I think. Does the term COMPAT_FREEBSD5 sound as the 'cleanest FreeBSD-6.x'? No. You get the cleanest system by recompiling all ports. (portupgrade -fa is your friend here.) COMPAT_FREEBSD5 is meant for running FreeBSD-5 binary applications. If you have them it's ok. If you recompile everything you don't need the COMPAT_FREEBSD5 stuff. If you don't have the source of some of your FreeBSD-5 applications you have to run with COMPAT_FREEBSD5. And the switch to 6 is easier because your 5-applications keep running. Ronald. -- Ronald Klop Amsterdam, The Netherlands ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 11:36:35PM +0200, Ronald Klop wrote: On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 23:10:46 +0200, dick hoogendijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 15:52:00 -0400 Vivek Khera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 16, 2005, at 7:57 AM, dick hoogendijk wrote: The *ONLY* question is: will I need to *recompile* all installed ports if I go from 5.4 to 6.0 release? No, the kernel has COMPAT_FREEBSD5 and COMPAT_FREEBSD4 by default, so just keep those and your shared libs around and you're golden. Of course, ports like lsof which dependon the kernel version will have to be rebuilt, but that's true no matter the version change... I get contradicting advice. You tell me I'm golden 'cause of the compat_xx settings; others tell me it's way better to *recompile* all portsto get the cleanest system. Wat is the best way to get the cleanest FreeBSD-6.x system without installing from scratch? Recompile each port? Or use the COMPAT_FREEBSD5 layer? You are answering your own question I think. Does the term COMPAT_FREEBSD5 sound as the 'cleanest FreeBSD-6.x'? No. You get the cleanest system by recompiling all ports. (portupgrade -fa is your friend here.) COMPAT_FREEBSD5 is meant for running FreeBSD-5 binary applications. If you have them it's ok. If you recompile everything you don't need the COMPAT_FREEBSD5 stuff. If you don't have the source of some of your FreeBSD-5 applications you have to run with COMPAT_FREEBSD5. And the switch to 6 is easier because your 5-applications keep running. Yes. As long as you only use your old 5.x applications, you're fine with just the compat. The problem is when you start to link *new* 6.0 applications with *old* 5.x libraries (e.g. by installing a new port, e.g. a new X application, without rebuilding your 5.x X installation first). Thus, unless you upgrade all your 5.x ports (well, actually many, i.e. only those that provide libraries or shared object modules, but it's easier to just do all) you'll end up with 6.0 binaries that are linked to e.g. two versions of libc at once (the 5.x libc and the 6.0 libc), which is a recipe for disaster. Kris pgpgvSsVLKo0G.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
At 11:56 PM 17/10/2005, Brett Glass wrote: At 08:13 PM 10/17/2005, Mike Tancsa wrote: One thing we're looking at doing is deploying some single-core AMD64s. Some of the motherboards use the NVidia NForce chipsets, so we need to know if the nve driver works I have seen lots of problem reports with the nve. A board that works well for us and fits nicely in a 2U (probably with the right heat sink a 1U) is the ECS 480M. (http://www.ecs.com.tw/ECSWeb/Products/ProductsDetail.aspx?DetailID=506MenuID=90LanID=0) It uses the ATI chipset. Disk and NIC are supported. Onboard NIC is a Realtek (rl driver) which is pretty bug / problem free. Realtek? (Gack... Wheeze) As I understand it, those are the chips with such a badly thought out DMA architecture that data has to be copied between buffers within the kernel even though the chipset does DMA. The NIC does just fine for most people in most applications. If you have the need for network intense apps, put the NIC in of choice. This is just what is built in on the MB. Timecounter i8254 frequency 1193182 Hz quality 0 CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 3800+ (1999.78-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = AuthenticAMD Id = 0x20fb1 Stepping = 1 Features=0x178bfbffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CLFLUSH,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,HTT Features2=0x1SSE3 AMD Features=0xe2500800SYSCALL,NX,MMX+,FFXSR,LM,3DNow+,3DNow AMD Features2=0x3LAHF,CMP Multicore: 2 physical cores How come the kernel is reporting that an AMD chip has HTT? Is this a bug? Hyper Transport, not threading. ---Mike --Brett ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 07:56:34PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote: At 06:38 PM 10/17/2005, Mike Tancsa wrote: Two of our scanners in the cluster are SMP boxes-- dual core AMD running in 386 mode and an Intel D830. Both work really well, and take quite a load against them network / cpu wise. Lots of threads running. Also have FAST_IPSEC clients and a server running RELENG_6 from around Beta 1. How is AMD in AMD64 mode? One thing we're looking at doing is deploying some single-core AMD64s. Very stable since -BETA4 on a single core machine here (workstation and X11 terminal server). It had crashes under load with previous -BETA. Uptime went to 20+ days without trouble before I upgraded it to -RC1. The hardware is a MSI board with VIA chipset. -- Francois Tigeot ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On 平成 17/10/18, at 17:21, Pertti Kosunen wrote: Brett Glass wrote: How come the kernel is reporting that an AMD chip has HTT? Is this a bug? It is the AMD HyperTransport™ Technology, not Hyper Threading as Intels have. http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/DevelopWithAMD/ 0,,30_2252_2353,00.html Whew. That's a relief. Joel Rees [EMAIL PROTECTED] digitcom, inc. 株式会社デジコム Kobe, Japan +81-78-672-8800 ** http://www.ddcom.co.jp ** ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On 平成 17/10/18, at 13:05, Mike Jakubik wrote: On Mon, October 17, 2005 11:56 pm, Brett Glass wrote: Features=0x178bfbffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR ,PG E,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CLFLUSH,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,HTT Features2=0x1SSE3 AMD Features=0xe2500800SYSCALL,NX,MMX+,FFXSR,LM,3DNow+,3DNow AMD Features2=0x3LAHF,CMP Multicore: 2 physical cores How come the kernel is reporting that an AMD chip has HTT? Is this a bug? No, this is how dual core is reported. Huh? Don't scare me like that, Mike. Joel Rees [EMAIL PROTECTED] digitcom, inc. 株式会社デジコム Kobe, Japan +81-78-672-8800 ** http://www.ddcom.co.jp ** ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Tue, October 18, 2005 10:30 pm, Joel Rees wrote: How come the kernel is reporting that an AMD chip has HTT? Is this a bug? No, this is how dual core is reported. Huh? Don't scare me like that, Mike. I guess i got a little confused here. Before multicore detection code was commited, the processors were detected as hyperthreading. Sorry :) ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
Brett Glass [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The release schedule for FreeBSD 6.0, on the FreeBSD Web site, doesn't show a
projected date for the finished product. How close is it?
I can't speak for the RE team, but from watching the BETA
and RC progress and reports in the mailing lists ... my
guess is that 6.0-RELEASE will be out very soon. Maybe in
only a few days.
We are (believe it
or not) still running and building production servers with 4.11,
Same here.
We're running our own tests on RC1, but don't have a lot of spare servers to
try it on. So, it's worth asking: How stable is RC1 turning out to be on
uniprocessor platforms? On SMP platforms? How is network and disk
performance
relative to 4.11? (When we tested 5.x, both network and file system
performance were worse than that of 4.11.)
FWIW, I'm running RELENG_6 on two machines (a notebook and
a server) for several weeks, updating every few days, and
putting some workload and various testing on them. So far
I have not encountered any serious problems that were not
resolved. So, stability seems to be very good; my feeling
is that 6.0 will be a _lot_ better than 5.0. A _lot_.
About performance: It seems to be a little slower than
RELENG_4 on my test machines (which are UP). It's not much
slower, but noticeable. (Yes, I know about INVARIANTS,
WITNESS and malloc.conf, those are not the cause.)
Best regards
Oliver
--
Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing
Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd
Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author
and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way.
PI:
int f[9814],b,c=9814,g,i;long a=1e4,d,e,h;
main(){for(;b=c,c-=14;i=printf(%04d,e+d/a),e=d%a)
while(g=--b*2)d=h*b+a*(i?f[b]:a/5),h=d/--g,f[b]=d%g;}
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 05:05:34PM +0200, Oliver Fromme wrote: Brett Glass [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The release schedule for FreeBSD 6.0, on the FreeBSD Web site, doesn't show a projected date for the finished product. How close is it? I can't speak for the RE team, but from watching the BETA and RC progress and reports in the mailing lists ... my guess is that 6.0-RELEASE will be out very soon. Maybe in only a few days. We are (believe it or not) still running and building production servers with 4.11, Same here. We're running our own tests on RC1, but don't have a lot of spare servers to try it on. So, it's worth asking: How stable is RC1 turning out to be on uniprocessor platforms? On SMP platforms? How is network and disk performance relative to 4.11? (When we tested 5.x, both network and file system performance were worse than that of 4.11.) FWIW, I'm running RELENG_6 on two machines (a notebook and a server) for several weeks, updating every few days, and putting some workload and various testing on them. So far I have not encountered any serious problems that were not resolved. So, stability seems to be very good; my feeling is that 6.0 will be a _lot_ better than 5.0. A _lot_. Don't let the .0 confuse you. 6.0 is nothing *AT ALL* like 5.0 in terms of development history and quality. Kris pgpdURrvqgkqj.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Oct 16, 2005, at 7:57 AM, dick hoogendijk wrote: The news I read about fFreeBSD-6.0 is quit good lately. I might even upgrade my 5.4 box. I'm told it will be a rather smooth proces. so far, I've upgraded from 5.4-RELEASE: a Dell PE1300 (pentium 3 750MHz) SCSI disks, a generic AMD Duron based system with IDE boot, SATA data disks, a Dell PE1750 with ahc SCSI, and a Dell 2650 dual Xeon with amr RAID to 6.0RC1 (some via 6.0 beta relaeases in between). All via buildworld. It was no more painful than any other upgrade like 5.3 - 5.4 other than so much in /etc/periodic changed and mergemaster took a long time. The *ONLY* question is: will I need to *recompile* all installed ports if I go from 5.4 to 6.0 release? No, the kernel has COMPAT_FREEBSD5 and COMPAT_FREEBSD4 by default, so just keep those and your shared libs around and you're golden. Of course, ports like lsof which dependon the kernel version will have to be rebuilt, but that's true no matter the version change... ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
At 07:46 PM 15/10/2005, Brett Glass wrote: The release schedule for FreeBSD 6.0, on the FreeBSD Web site, doesn't show a projected date for the finished product. How close is it? My guess, very soon. But for me, RELENG_6 has been small 's' stable for some time. Got with 6.0R when it comes out. We're running our own tests on RC1, but don't have a lot of spare servers to try it on. So, it's worth asking: How stable is RC1 turning out to be on uniprocessor platforms? Very. We have our inbound mail servers running RELENG_6 in UP boxes. Have several spamscanners running clamav and SpamAssassin processing millions of messages. Works as expected On SMP platforms? How is network and disk performance relative to 4.11? Two of our scanners in the cluster are SMP boxes-- dual core AMD running in 386 mode and an Intel D830. Both work really well, and take quite a load against them network / cpu wise. Lots of threads running. Also have FAST_IPSEC clients and a server running RELENG_6 from around Beta 1. performance were worse than that of 4.11.) With what known problems is 6.0 likely to ship, and of these which are likely to impact uniprocessor systems? Are any showstopper bugs merely being worked around for release? There are always bugs... Even RELENG_4 has them, but the question to ask is how common are they and will they impact the hardware you use. I have mostly Intel ICH5-7 boxes, an Intel 6300ESB, and one ATI based board (AMD64) running IDE drives, an ARECA Sata RAID card and numerous 3ware based cards. All work really well. There are some open PRs (some with patches / fixes even) that I have to work around, but most people wont run into them. ---Mike ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
At 06:38 PM 10/17/2005, Mike Tancsa wrote: Two of our scanners in the cluster are SMP boxes-- dual core AMD running in 386 mode and an Intel D830. Both work really well, and take quite a load against them network / cpu wise. Lots of threads running. Also have FAST_IPSEC clients and a server running RELENG_6 from around Beta 1. How is AMD in AMD64 mode? One thing we're looking at doing is deploying some single-core AMD64s. Some of the motherboards use the NVidia NForce chipsets, so we need to know if the nve driver works (I hear it requires a binary from NVidia) or if it pays to install PCI NICs for speed and stability. --Brett Glass ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
At 09:56 PM 17/10/2005, Brett Glass wrote: At 06:38 PM 10/17/2005, Mike Tancsa wrote: Two of our scanners in the cluster are SMP boxes-- dual core AMD running in 386 mode and an Intel D830. Both work really well, and take quite a load against them network / cpu wise. Lots of threads running. Also have FAST_IPSEC clients and a server running RELENG_6 from around Beta 1. How is AMD in AMD64 mode? Dont know. I only run it in i386 mode and its fast and runs VERY cool. The reaction to touching the Intel D830 heat sinks (CPU or MB) are typically Aeei It burns It burns, the reaction to touching the AMD is typical, Is this thing on ? Head to head, the 3800 X2 beats out the D830 for spam / virus scanning in our setup as well. One thing we're looking at doing is deploying some single-core AMD64s. Some of the motherboards use the NVidia NForce chipsets, so we need to know if the nve driver works I have seen lots of problem reports with the nve. A board that works well for us and fits nicely in a 2U (probably with the right heat sink a 1U) is the ECS 480M. (http://www.ecs.com.tw/ECSWeb/Products/ProductsDetail.aspx?DetailID=506MenuID=90LanID=0) It uses the ATI chipset. Disk and NIC are supported. Onboard NIC is a Realtek (rl driver) which is pretty bug / problem free. Timecounter i8254 frequency 1193182 Hz quality 0 CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 3800+ (1999.78-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = AuthenticAMD Id = 0x20fb1 Stepping = 1 Features=0x178bfbffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CLFLUSH,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,HTT Features2=0x1SSE3 AMD Features=0xe2500800SYSCALL,NX,MMX+,FFXSR,LM,3DNow+,3DNow AMD Features2=0x3LAHF,CMP Multicore: 2 physical cores pci0: serial bus, USB at device 19.2 (no driver attached) pci0: serial bus, SMBus at device 20.0 (no driver attached) atapci0: ATI IXP400 UDMA133 controller port 0x1f0-0x1f7,0x3f6,0x170-0x177,0x376,0xfd00-0xfd0f at device 20.1 on pci0 ata0: ATA channel 0 on atapci0 ata1: ATA channel 1 on atapci0 isab0: PCI-ISA bridge at device 20.3 on pci0 isa0: ISA bus on isab0 pcib2: ACPI PCI-PCI bridge at device 20.4 on pci0 pci2: ACPI PCI bus on pcib2 rl0: RealTek 8139 10/100BaseTX port 0xdf00-0xdfff mem 0xfddff000-0xfddff0ff irq 22 at device 5.0 on pci2 miibus0: MII bus on rl0 rlphy0: RealTek internal media interface on miibus0 rlphy0: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto rl0: Ethernet address: 00:14:2a:1a:49:f6 pumice6]# atacontrol mode ad0 current mode = UDMA100 [pumice6]# atacontrol info ata0 Master: ad0 ST340014A/3.06 ATA/ATAPI revision 6 Slave: no device present [pumice6]# ---Mike ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
At 08:13 PM 10/17/2005, Mike Tancsa wrote: One thing we're looking at doing is deploying some single-core AMD64s. Some of the motherboards use the NVidia NForce chipsets, so we need to know if the nve driver works I have seen lots of problem reports with the nve. A board that works well for us and fits nicely in a 2U (probably with the right heat sink a 1U) is the ECS 480M. (http://www.ecs.com.tw/ECSWeb/Products/ProductsDetail.aspx?DetailID=506MenuID=90LanID=0) It uses the ATI chipset. Disk and NIC are supported. Onboard NIC is a Realtek (rl driver) which is pretty bug / problem free. Realtek? (Gack... Wheeze) As I understand it, those are the chips with such a badly thought out DMA architecture that data has to be copied between buffers within the kernel even though the chipset does DMA. Timecounter i8254 frequency 1193182 Hz quality 0 CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 3800+ (1999.78-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = AuthenticAMD Id = 0x20fb1 Stepping = 1 Features=0x178bfbffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CLFLUSH,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,HTT Features2=0x1SSE3 AMD Features=0xe2500800SYSCALL,NX,MMX+,FFXSR,LM,3DNow+,3DNow AMD Features2=0x3LAHF,CMP Multicore: 2 physical cores How come the kernel is reporting that an AMD chip has HTT? Is this a bug? --Brett ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Mon, October 17, 2005 11:56 pm, Brett Glass wrote: Features=0x178bfbffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PG E,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CLFLUSH,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,HTT Features2=0x1SSE3 AMD Features=0xe2500800SYSCALL,NX,MMX+,FFXSR,LM,3DNow+,3DNow AMD Features2=0x3LAHF,CMP Multicore: 2 physical cores How come the kernel is reporting that an AMD chip has HTT? Is this a bug? No, this is how dual core is reported. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
Brett Glass wrote: At 06:34 PM 10/15/2005, David Syphers wrote: http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.0R/todo.html Linked to from the schedule page... Been there. Want to get folks' opinions, and also more detail than is likely to appear on th epage. Good to see alot of it just needs testing now compared to the last time I looked ( ~2weeks ). I also thought that FreeBSD was going to implement the same installer as DragonFly-BSD? Will 6 support SSE3? I noticed that 5.4 does not and only finds SSE SSE2, what about SSE3? I still think I'll wait for 6.1 before installing it anyway. Jayton ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Sat, 15 Oct 2005 23:03:53 -0400 Joshua Coombs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For what it's worth, on UP, my 386 (stop laughing) is showing twice the inbound and outbound tcp throughput across multiple apps compared to 4.11. Disk throughput is slightly higher, but nothing super impressive. If 6.0 can show gains on a 386, that tells me there is some actual merit to the changes. The news I read about fFreeBSD-6.0 is quit good lately. I might even upgrade my 5.4 box. I'm told it will be a rather smooth proces. The *ONLY* question is: will I need to *recompile* all installed ports if I go from 5.4 to 6.0 release? -- dick -- http://nagual.st/ -- PGP/GnuPG key: F86289CE ++ Running FreeBSD 4.11-stable ++ FreeBSD 5.4 + Nai tiruvantel ar vayuvantel i Valar tielyanna nu vilja ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Sun, 16 Oct 2005, dick hoogendijk wrote: On Sat, 15 Oct 2005 23:03:53 -0400 Joshua Coombs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For what it's worth, on UP, my 386 (stop laughing) is showing twice the inbound and outbound tcp throughput across multiple apps compared to 4.11. Disk throughput is slightly higher, but nothing super impressive. If 6.0 can show gains on a 386, that tells me there is some actual merit to the changes. The news I read about fFreeBSD-6.0 is quit good lately. I might even upgrade my 5.4 box. I'm told it will be a rather smooth proces. For my private Desktop machine I didn't run into any problems - and I am no kind of FreeBSD guru. The *ONLY* question is: will I need to *recompile* all installed ports if I go from 5.4 to 6.0 release? Probably not, but there are about 13000 (or so) ports available. I guess you will have to try and find out. You should be cautious if you depend on OpenOffice.org , this stuff is always quite sensitive, though I have got 2.0Beta running very well. Regards, Uli. -- dick -- http://nagual.st/ -- PGP/GnuPG key: F86289CE ++ Running FreeBSD 4.11-stable ++ FreeBSD 5.4 + Nai tiruvantel ar vayuvantel i Valar tielyanna nu vilja ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Peter Ulrich Kruppa - Wuppertal - Germany * * ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 13:57:52 +0200, dick hoogendijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 15 Oct 2005 23:03:53 -0400 Joshua Coombs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For what it's worth, on UP, my 386 (stop laughing) is showing twice the inbound and outbound tcp throughput across multiple apps compared to 4.11. Disk throughput is slightly higher, but nothing super impressive. If 6.0 can show gains on a 386, that tells me there is some actual merit to the changes. The news I read about fFreeBSD-6.0 is quit good lately. I might even upgrade my 5.4 box. I'm told it will be a rather smooth proces. The *ONLY* question is: will I need to *recompile* all installed ports if I go from 5.4 to 6.0 release? There are a couple of options: 1. Do not remove old (5.4) libraries. All 5.4 libs wil still be found. 2. Remove old libraries and install ports/misc/compat5x. All 5.4 lib wil still be found. 3. Remove old libraries and use /etc/libmap.conf to map the old libs on the new ones. 4. Recompile every port, so all dependencies are the 6.0 libs. Ronald. -- Ronald Klop Amsterdam, The Netherlands ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Sunday, 16. October 2005 18:34, Ronald Klop wrote: There are a couple of options: 1. Do not remove old (5.4) libraries. All 5.4 libs wil still be found. 2. Remove old libraries and install ports/misc/compat5x. All 5.4 lib wil still be found. 3. Remove old libraries and use /etc/libmap.conf to map the old libs on the new ones. 4. Recompile every port, so all dependencies are the 6.0 libs. 1. and 2. are not an option if you plan on eventually compiling new ports after the upgrade - you will most certainly get mixed linkage, which will result in runtime errors. Compat5x should only be used for leaf-ports (i.e, applications and libraries which aren't linked to anything else) - for example software that is distributed as dynamically linked binaries only. Option 4 is certainly the safest thing to do (and you could just upgrade from binary packages instead of recompiling). -- ,_, | Michael Nottebrock | [EMAIL PROTECTED] (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve | http://www.freebsd.org \u/ | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org pgpdx8CqRe2PP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
On Saturday 15 October 2005 04:46 pm, Brett Glass wrote: With what known problems is 6.0 likely to ship, and of these which are likely to impact uniprocessor systems? Are any showstopper bugs merely being worked around for release? http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.0R/todo.html Linked to from the schedule page... -David -- What's the good of having mastery over cosmic balance and knowing the secrets of fate if you can't blow something up? -Terry Pratchett ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
At 06:34 PM 10/15/2005, David Syphers wrote: http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.0R/todo.html Linked to from the schedule page... Been there. Want to get folks' opinions, and also more detail than is likely to appear on th epage. --Brett ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.0 release date and stability
Brett Glass [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The release schedule for FreeBSD 6.0, on the FreeBSD Web site, doesn't show a projected date for the finished product. How close is it? We are (believe it or not) still running and building production servers with 4.11, and would love to move to 6.0 (at least for uniprocessor systems; we may wait for 6.1 for SMP) if it is sufficiently stable and performs adequately. We're running our own tests on RC1, but don't have a lot of spare servers to try it on. So, it's worth asking: How stable is RC1 turning out to be on uniprocessor platforms? On SMP platforms? How is network and disk performance relative to 4.11? (When we tested 5.x, both network and file system performance were worse than that of 4.11.) With what known problems is 6.0 likely to ship, and of these which are likely to impact uniprocessor systems? Are any showstopper bugs merely being worked around for release? And, again, when is the likely release date? --Brett Glass Welp, it's in the RC stage, and I've not seen any reports of massive issues, so I imagine they'll move it through fairly quickly. For what it's worth, on UP, my 386 (stop laughing) is showing twice the inbound and outbound tcp throughput across multiple apps compared to 4.11. Disk throughput is slightly higher, but nothing super impressive. If 6.0 can show gains on a 386, that tells me there is some actual merit to the changes. Joshua Coombs ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
