On 8/21/2012 10:11 AM, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org writes:
Dag-Erling, do you have a timeline for getting started on the
ldns/unbound import?
I imported the code into the vendor tree, but did not proceed any
further
On 8/21/2012 11:08 AM, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Doug Barton wrote:
Neither importing ldns nor removing BIND is going to have any effect on
the stub resolver library in libc.
Yes it does as if we are not carefull, we'll neither have a _proper_
validating caching resolver
On 08/06/2012 13:23, Vitaly Magerya wrote:
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 07/07/2012 16:33, Garrett Wollman wrote:
The utilities (specifically host(1) and dig(1)) are the only
user-visible interfaces I care about.
[...]
ldns (a dependency of unbound) comes with drill, which is a dig
On 08/20/2012 01:55, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
We will continue to reject this until there are more firm plans,
proper documentation on the security support side, which I cannot
remember Simon got an answer for.
I gave a clear answer. If there are any pieces missing it's up to Simon
to follow up
On 08/20/2012 02:16, Mark Blackman wrote:
On 20 Aug 2012, at 10:12, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 08/20/2012 01:55, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
We will continue to reject this until there are more firm plans,
proper documentation on the security support side, which I cannot
remember
On 08/20/2012 02:19, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012, Doug Barton wrote:
On 08/20/2012 01:55, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
We will continue to reject this until there are more firm plans,
proper documentation on the security support side, which I cannot
remember Simon got an answer
On 07/31/2012 17:02, Yuri wrote:
One of my 9.1-BETA1 systems periodically freezes. If sound was playing,
it would usually cycle with a very short period. And system stops being
sensitive to keyboard/mouse. Also ping of this system doesn't get a
response.
Just for fun, have you tried switching
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/31/2012 09:48, Fabian Keil wrote:
I think guessing that INET and INET6 are available is a lot more
reasonable than doing the same for the external NFS modules.
FYI, there has been considerable work done to ensure that INET6 works
without
On 08/02/2012 12:18, David Chisnall wrote:
Thank you for your thoughtful reply,
You too ... I let some time go by to see what others had to say. I think
it's disappointing that more people aren't concerned about this issue.
On 2 Aug 2012, at 19:33, Doug Barton wrote:
However, my point
On 08/02/2012 09:20, Scott Long wrote:
On Aug 2, 2012, at 12:23 AM, Kevin Oberman kob6...@gmail.com
wrote:
Doug makes some good points.
No, he doesn't.
Yes I do! (So there)
He and Arnould being argumentative and accusatory
where none of that is warranted.
I used to run the
On 08/02/2012 05:54, David Chisnall wrote:
On 2 Aug 2012, at 05:30, Doug Barton wrote:
I used to ask the PTB to provide *some* form of remote
participation for even a fraction of the events at the dev summit.
I don't bother asking anymore because year after year my requests
were met
On 08/02/2012 09:44, Garrett Cooper wrote:
The Watson/Losh connection worked really well in BSDCan 2010 :).
I wasn't going to mention that, since I didn't want to tell tales out of
school. But the fact that remote participation actually was provided for
the right people, even though I was told
On 08/02/2012 10:13, David Chisnall wrote:
On 2 Aug 2012, at 17:46, Doug Barton wrote:
Well that's a start. :) And where was this availability announced?
If I missed it, that's on me. But providing remote access that you
don't tell people about isn't really any better than not providing
BTW, for those who'd like to get a flavor of what the IETF model looks
like, the Vancouver meeting is in process now:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/84/agenda.html
Feel free to join in as a lurker.
--
I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do
something.
On 08/02/2012 10:34, Doug Barton wrote:
BTW, for those who'd like to get a flavor of what the IETF model looks
like, the Vancouver meeting is in process now:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/84/agenda.html
Feel free to join in as a lurker.
Sorry, this agenda makes it easier to see
On 08/02/2012 10:37, David Chisnall wrote:
Thank you for volunteering to organise this. It's good to see people with
both the motivation and experience required to do something well actively
contributing to the project.
Cheap copout. And quite sad, especially coming from a newly elected
On 08/02/2012 10:40, Warner Losh wrote:
One thing to remember about the IETF. There's many vendors that devote
significant resources to the IETF. While I was at Cisco, for example, I know
that we provided audio and video bridges to IEFT meetings to facilitate
remote attendance at the
On 08/02/2012 05:39, John Baldwin wrote:
I find this a bit ironic from you given that I've met you in person at
USENIX ATC which is an order of magnitude more expensive than BSDCan (and
in fact, one of the reasons the US-based BSDCon died and was effectively
supplanted by BSDCan was that
On 08/02/2012 11:12, David Chisnall wrote:
FreeBSD is a volunteer project.
Yeah, I get that. I've been around quite a bit longer than you have, in
case you didn't notice. :)
I understand what you're saying, it's going to take work to change this
mindset, and to provide these resources. If you
On 8/1/2012 8:36 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
I think this proves the point everybody has been saying: you are being
needlessly contrary and confrontational.
Actually if you take a step back and look at what Arnaud is saying
objectively, he's right. If anyone can attend the meeting by simply
getting
The xhci code in 8-stable works, but it's not mentioned in the NOTES
files in sys/conf, sys/i386/conf, or sys/amd64/conf. The module is
hooked up in sys/modules/usb/Makefile, and that's how I've been using it
so far. Is it not possible to compile this code into the kernel?
Doug
--
Change
On 07/19/2012 02:17, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On Thursday 19 July 2012 11:14:42 Doug Barton wrote:
The xhci code in 8-stable works, but it's not mentioned in the NOTES
files in sys/conf, sys/i386/conf, or sys/amd64/conf. The module is
hooked up in sys/modules/usb/Makefile, and that's how
On 07/19/2012 03:29, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On Thursday 19 July 2012 11:38:11 Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/19/2012 02:17, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On Thursday 19 July 2012 11:14:42 Doug Barton wrote:
The xhci code in 8-stable works, but it's not mentioned in the NOTES
files in sys/conf, sys
On 07/17/2012 01:56 PM, Dave Hayes wrote:
I've been using FreeBSD since the 90s. My perception (over many years of
observation) is that the FreeBSD people most able to document what
exists and how to use it seem to also have the greatest resistance to
writing any documentation.
Writing code
On 07/17/2012 03:38 PM, Dave Hayes wrote:
On 07/17/12 15:14, Doug Barton wrote:
Some sources of this are: I rarely read the handbook
So now that we've discussed *our* shortcomings, let's discuss yours. :)
Read the handbook. Seriously.
I should have written that better. I *do* read
On 07/15/2012 02:39, Mike Meyer wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jul 2012 13:29:59 -0700
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
For the OP, make sure you have the latest BIOS. I had a similar problem
with vt-x and it was solved by a later BIOS upgrade.
And *that* solved the problem. The performance
For the OP, make sure you have the latest BIOS. I had a similar problem
with vt-x and it was solved by a later BIOS upgrade.
hth,
Doug
--
Change is hard.
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
that. I think you misunderstood my flippant
comment below.
On 2012-Jul-09 13:52:15 -0700, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 07/09/2012 13:47, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On 2012-Jul-09 14:15:13 +0200, in freebsd-security, Andrej (Andy)
Brodnik and...@brodnik.org wrote:
Excuse my ignorance
On 07/09/2012 14:47, Mark Blackman wrote:
I never use '-t' with dig. drill *told* me I should use '-t'
then completely failed to acknowledge I had done so.
Have you reported this bug?
--
Change is hard.
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/09/2012 19:56, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On 2012-Jul-10 00:40:07 +0200, Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no
wrote:
They are sufficiently similar that writing a wrapper that
supports a significant subset of dig's command-line option and
uses drill
On 07/09/2012 16:45, George Mitchell wrote:
On 07/09/12 17:01, Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/09/2012 06:45, Mark Blackman wrote:
Indeed, 'dig' and 'host' must be present and working as expected
in a minimally installed system.
So if you don't like the versions that get imported, install bind
On 07/10/2012 00:28, Mike Meyer wrote:
I suspect that dnsmasq is a lot better tool for that job than BIND
I think better is in the eye of the beholder, particularly whether or
not the O is either small or well-staffed enough to pre-enter
hostnames into the zone files. That said, dnsmasq is a
On 7/10/2012 4:27 AM, Mark Blackman wrote:
On 10 Jul 2012, at 08:12, Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/09/2012 14:47, Mark Blackman wrote:
I never use '-t' with dig. drill *told* me I should use '-t'
then completely failed to acknowledge I had done so.
Have you reported this bug?
Nope, you?
I'm
On 07/08/2012 23:16, Avleen Vig wrote:
On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 07/08/2012 22:43, Avleen Vig wrote:
It would be silly not to keep bind-tools in base.
Sounds easy, but not so much in practice. Keeping any of the code
doesn't solve the problem
On 07/09/2012 00:34, Avleen Vig wrote:
On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 07/08/2012 23:16, Avleen Vig wrote:
On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 07/08/2012 22:43, Avleen Vig wrote:
It would be silly not to keep bind
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/09/2012 13:47, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On 2012-Jul-09 14:15:13 +0200, in freebsd-security, Andrej (Andy)
Brodnik and...@brodnik.org wrote:
Excuse my ignorance - but is there a how-to paper on transition
from bind to unbound for SOHO?
You
On 07/09/2012 06:33, Jonathan McKeown wrote:
On Monday 09 July 2012 09:34:34 Avleen Vig wrote:
The issue is also one of barrier-to-entry. By removing `dig` and
`host`, I think we're making things unnecessarily more difficult for
people who don't *know* FreeBSD. `dig` and `host` a universally
On 07/09/2012 06:45, Mark Blackman wrote:
Indeed, 'dig' and 'host' must be present and working as expected
in a minimally installed system.
So if you don't like the versions that get imported, install bind-tools
from ports.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
On 07/07/2012 19:44, Warner Losh wrote:
On Jul 7, 2012, at 5:33 PM, Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Sat, 07 Jul 2012 16:17:53 -0700, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org said:
BIND in the base today comes with a full-featured local resolver
configuration, which I'm confident that Dag-Erling can do
On 07/08/2012 01:03, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On 8. Jul 2012, at 02:44 , Warner Losh wrote:
On Jul 7, 2012, at 5:33 PM, Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Sat, 07 Jul 2012 16:17:53 -0700, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org said:
BIND in the base today comes with a full-featured local resolver
On 07/08/2012 01:07, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On 7. Jul 2012, at 23:45 , Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/07/2012 16:34, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On 7. Jul 2012, at 23:17 , Doug Barton wrote:
Other than authoritative DNS, what features does unbound lack that you
want?
DNS64 as a start.
Personally
On 07/07/2012 17:35, Adam Vande More wrote:
I am unclear on how this solves the main problem I think was stated
about syncing up with release branches.
I've already explained this at length in the past. ISC has changed both
their release schedule and their policy regarding not allowing new
On 07/07/2012 17:47, Darren Pilgrim wrote:
On 2012-07-07 16:45, Doug Barton wrote:
Also re DNSSEC integration in the base, I've stated before that I
believe very strongly that any kind of hard-coding of trust anchors as
part of the base resolver setup is a bad idea, and should not be done.
We
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/08/2012 10:10, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
From first impression it seems that drill(1) has a syntax that
leaves something to be desired like the eased use of host or dig.
So once again, if you need the exact capabilities of ISC host and dig,
On 07/08/2012 10:43, Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Sun, 08 Jul 2012 02:31:17 -0700, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org said:
Neither of which has any relevance to the actual root zone ZSK, which
could require an emergency roll tomorrow.
Surely that's why there's a separate KSK. The ZSK can
On 07/08/2012 13:25, Gabor Kovesdan wrote:
On 2012.07.08. 1:17, Doug Barton wrote:
Other than authoritative DNS, what features does unbound lack that you
want?
[Picking up a random mail from the thread.]
Other than the functionality, when we replace something, it is also
important to do
On 07/08/2012 07:41, Dan Lukes wrote:
The ideal, long-term solution is to re-think what The Base is, and
give users more flexibility at install time.
Flexibility is double-edged sword.
Feel free to replace one resolver with another resolver (but don't do it
so often, please). Applications
On 07/08/2012 22:43, Avleen Vig wrote:
It would be silly not to keep bind-tools in base.
Sounds easy, but not so much in practice. Keeping any of the code
doesn't solve the problem of the release cycles not syncing up. And for
the vast majority of users needs the tools we will import will be
On 07/07/2012 14:16, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On 3. Jul 2012, at 12:39 , Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org writes:
The correct solution to this problem is to remove BIND from the base
altogether, but I have no energy for all the whinging that would happen
if I tried
On 07/07/2012 16:33, Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Sat, 07 Jul 2012 16:17:53 -0700, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org said:
BIND in the base today comes with a full-featured local resolver
configuration, which I'm confident that Dag-Erling can do for unbound
(and which I would be glad to assist
On 07/07/2012 16:34, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On 7. Jul 2012, at 23:17 , Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/07/2012 14:16, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On 3. Jul 2012, at 12:39 , Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org writes:
The correct solution to this problem is to remove BIND from
On 07/05/2012 01:28, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On 2012-Jul-05 09:22:25 +0200, Jonathan McKeown
j.mcke...@ru.ac.za wrote:
As for the idea that Linux refugees need extra help to migrate,
that's the sort of thinking that led to things like:
alias dir=ls
Whilst we're on the subject, can we please
On 07/04/2012 10:01, Freddie Cash wrote:
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Simon L. B. Nielsen si...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:39 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 07/03/2012 05:39, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org writes:
The correct solution
On 07/04/2012 11:51, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
What would be really nice here is a command wrapper hooked into the
shell so that when you type a command and it does not exist it presents
you with a question for suggestions to install somewhat like Fedora has
done.
I would also like to see this
On 07/04/2012 14:55, Brett Glass wrote:
At 06:39 AM 7/3/2012, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
I'm willing to import and maintain unbound (BSD-licensed validating,
recursive, and caching DNS resolver) if you remove BIND.
I've been using djb, and -- despite its quirks -- I'm very happy with
On 07/04/2012 15:01, Mike Meyer wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 14:19:38 -0700
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 07/04/2012 11:51, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
What would be really nice here is a command wrapper hooked into the
shell so that when you type a command and it does not exist
On 07/04/2012 15:55, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
Seeing as sudo plays a big part of this
No ... not only is sudo not a necessary component, it shouldn't be
involved at all. The feature works on debian/ubuntu for regular
userspace commands.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your
On 07/04/2012 15:57, Yuri wrote:
On 07/04/2012 15:08, Doug Barton wrote:
First, I agree that being able to turn it off should be possible. But I
can't help being curious ... why would you *not* want a feature that
tells you what to install if you type a command that doesn't exist
On 07/04/2012 16:41, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 03:59:29PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/04/2012 15:55, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
Seeing as sudo plays a big part of this
No ... not only is sudo not a necessary component, it shouldn't be
involved at all. The feature
On 07/04/2012 17:30, Tim Kientzle wrote:
On Jul 4, 2012, at 4:41 PM, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 03:59:29PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/04/2012 15:55, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
Seeing as sudo plays a big part of this
No ... not only is sudo not a necessary component
On 07/04/2012 21:08, Brett Glass wrote:
At 04:03 PM 7/4/2012, Doug Barton wrote:
Other than that, if whoever actually pushes all the rocks uphill to make
the installer more modular in this regard decides to include djbdns,
more power to them. :)
I'm not suggesting that everyone
On 07/02/2012 19:08, Robert Simmons wrote:
Are there plans to pull the following into head before the code freeze for
9.1?
BIND 9.9.1p1
We never change the version of BIND in a release branch. The 9.8 version
that's there is up to date.
The correct solution to this problem is to remove
On 07/03/2012 05:39, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org writes:
The correct solution to this problem is to remove BIND from the base
altogether, but I have no energy for all the whinging that would happen
if I tried (again) to do that.
I don't think
On 07/03/2012 06:36, Mark Felder wrote:
On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 07:39:34 -0500, Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no wrote:
I don't think there will be as much whinging as you expect. Times have
changed.
Agreed; if we need DNS in base (really, why?) then unbound+nsd are prime
candidates, but
On 07/02/2012 04:12, George Mitchell wrote:
I've been using IPv6 for quite a few years without problems and I've
had no difficulty browsing
Many more sites are actually putting, or have put, IPv6 into production
since the latest world IPv6 day last month. Some growing pains are
inevitable.
On 07/02/2012 09:25, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
On Mon, 2 Jul 2012, David Wolfskill wrote:
Huh??!?
At least as far back as 06 Jan (based on the mtime of /etc/src.conf), I
had set up src.conf to read:
PORTS_MODULES=x11/nvidia-driver
Don't do that.
PORTS_MODULES is documented to belong in
The problem is fixed now. This time I tested build and install with the
same code. :(
Sorry for the breakage,
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
On 07/02/2012 13:41, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
On Mon, 2 Jul 2012, Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/02/2012 09:25, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
On Mon, 2 Jul 2012, David Wolfskill wrote:
Huh??!?
At least as far back as 06 Jan (based on the mtime of /etc/src.conf), I
had set up src.conf to read
On 06/21/2012 05:28 AM, Peter Jeremy wrote:
32.0s - rc scripts (mounting root through VTY login prompt)
I think that there is some confusion about what I wrote originally, so
let me clarify. From the time that /etc/rc starts through the time that
the prompt appears almost all of the time is
I was working on a reply along similar lines, but instead I'll say that
i agree 100% with what Mark said, and thanks to him for saving me a lot
of time. :)
Richard, with all that said if you still are interested in specs for a
test program, I'm still willing to help with that. Just let me know.
On 6/18/2012 9:39 PM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
The latter item is the only place where making changes to rc.d is going
to help, and only then by parellelizing, and even then you are not
really going to gain much since most things at boot time are serial.
grep sleep /etc/rc.d/*
On 6/18/2012 4:05 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
Doug, we already have OpenRC implemented. You can install Gentoo FreeBSD
in a jail, install regular FreeBSD in another jail and do your own
performance comparisons.
Bt! Thanks for playing. :) You're the one proposing the change,
YOU get to do
It's unfortunate that this thread evolved into a discussion about
replacing rc.d, since that's almost certainly not relevant to the
original topic of improving the overall boot time.
If you analyze the boot process thoroughly you should see that out of
the total time taken to boot, nearly 0 is
On 06/15/2012 11:37, rank1see...@gmail.com wrote:
*** The following files exist in /etc/rc.d but not in
/var/tmp/temproot/etc/rc.d/:
sshd
man src.conf, and search for SSH. You have one of those options defined
in your environment.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your
On 06/13/2012 06:50 AM, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 09/06/2012 19:17 Doug Barton said the following:
If this were a problem we didn't already have a solution for, I'd be
much more interested in what you're proposing.
I wonder if you were in the same mindset when you worked on service(8
On 06/07/2012 11:10, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 07/06/2012 17:29 Doug Barton said the following:
On 06/07/2012 02:57 AM, Gleb Kurtsou wrote:
What do you think about adding generic support for overriding *_enable
options in rc.conf?
I'd like to be able to disable services at boot prompt, e.g
On 06/07/2012 02:57 AM, Gleb Kurtsou wrote:
What do you think about adding generic support for overriding *_enable
options in rc.conf?
I'd like to be able to disable services at boot prompt, e.g.
# set rc.slim_enable=no -- overrides slim_enable=yes in rc.conf
Similarly rc.pf_enable=no
On 06/07/2012 08:12 AM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
I've run into _multiple_ scenarios where this isn't possible because
the terminal settings are screwed up in single user mode, and had to
resort to `sed -i '' `.
If that happens, a) report it! SUM is a very important part of FreeBSD,
and it needs
As someone pointed out when this thread started, it's off-topic for
hackers. Please take it to advocacy.
--
It's always a long day; 86400 doesn't fit into a short.
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price. :)
On 4/25/2012 7:55 AM, rank1see...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, those can be left in place, if they are part of STDOUT, as I
leave only STDERR to reach my eyes. And I see exactly those 2 'ln -s
...' lines because they are outputed to STDERR.
Right, I have the same issue with mergemaster ever since I
On 4/2/2012 3:59 PM, Joe Greco wrote:
On 4/2/2012 11:43 AM, Joe Greco wrote:
As a user, you can't win. If you don't report
a problem, you get criticized. If you report a problem but can't figure
out how to reproduce it, you get criticized. If you can reproduce it
but you don't submit a
On 03/30/2012 07:41, Joe Greco wrote:
On 3/29/2012 7:01 AM, Joe Greco wrote:
On 3/28/2012 1:59 PM, Mark Felder wrote:
FreeBSD 8-STABLE, 8.3, and 9.0 are untested
As much as I'm sensitive to your production requirements, realistically
it's not likely that you'll get a helpful result without
On 4/2/2012 11:43 AM, Joe Greco wrote:
As a user, you can't win. If you don't report
a problem, you get criticized. If you report a problem but can't figure
out how to reproduce it, you get criticized. If you can reproduce it
but you don't submit a workaround, you get criticized. If you
On 3/28/2012 1:59 PM, Mark Felder wrote:
FreeBSD 8-STABLE, 8.3, and 9.0 are untested
As much as I'm sensitive to your production requirements, realistically
it's not likely that you'll get a helpful result without testing a newer
version. 8.2 came out over a year ago, many many things have
On 3/29/2012 7:01 AM, Joe Greco wrote:
On 3/28/2012 1:59 PM, Mark Felder wrote:
FreeBSD 8-STABLE, 8.3, and 9.0 are untested
As much as I'm sensitive to your production requirements, realistically
it's not likely that you'll get a helpful result without testing a newer
version. 8.2 came out
On 3/9/2012 7:02 AM, Alex Yong wrote:
I've been playing around with IPv6 networking on FreeBSD release 8.2 and
found that there seems to be no strong incoming host model as specified in
RFC 1122.
First, you're infinitely more likely to get a useful response if you
send your message to
On 3/5/2012 8:24 PM, Devin Teske wrote:
On Mar 5, 2012, at 6:20 PM, Andrzej Tobola wrote:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 04:44:53PM -0800, Devin Teske wrote:
INSTRUCTIONS:
1. cd /usr/src
cd /usr/src/usr.sbin ?
Sorry… /usr/src/usr.bin
You don't need to be root to run it, so it's
On 03/02/2012 08:52, John Baldwin wrote:
On Thursday, March 01, 2012 5:23:11 pm Doug Barton wrote:
On 3/1/2012 1:14 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
My firefox on my BSD desktop was caching the image.
Holding down Shift when clicking reload usually handles this.
Only if you already know that FF
On 3/1/2012 1:14 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
My firefox on my BSD desktop was caching the image.
Holding down Shift when clicking reload usually handles this.
hth,
Doug
--
It's always a long day; 86400 doesn't fit into a short.
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of
On 02/23/2012 05:22, John Baldwin wrote:
On Wednesday, February 22, 2012 9:59:02 pm Doug Barton wrote:
On 02/22/2012 01:42, Ivan Voras wrote:
The Dragonfly team has recently liberated their VM from the giant lock and
there are some interesting benchmarks comparing it to FreeBSD 9
On 02/22/2012 01:42, Ivan Voras wrote:
The Dragonfly team has recently liberated their VM from the giant lock and
there are some interesting benchmarks comparing it to FreeBSD 9 and a
derivative of RedHat Enterprise Linux:
On 02/21/2012 02:49, Tom Evans wrote:
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 02/20/2012 06:44, Tom Evans wrote:
Whatever happened to POLA? This change surprised me, wasn't mentioned
in /usr/src/UPDATING,
You're supposed to compare your existing kernel config
On 02/20/2012 08:54, Alex Goncharov wrote:
,--- You/Tom (Mon, 20 Feb 2012 14:44:09 +) *
| On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 1:14 AM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
| Because loading modules through loader.conf is
| veeryy slooww I added an rc.d script called
On 02/20/2012 06:44, Tom Evans wrote:
wrt to sound drivers no longer being built as modules, I wonder why
this change has been made. I don't recall a mass of people complaining
that they couldn't load drivers,
Then you haven't been paying attention. :)
Whatever happened to POLA? This
On 02/20/2012 07:23, Patrick Powell wrote:
Oooh! Ahhh! Just what I was looking for. l will extract this from 9
and put it on my system.
Glad you like it. :) One thing though, you're actually better off
updating to the latest -stable of whatever branch you're using, some
work has gone into
On 02/19/2012 08:13, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
Given the context of the thread, this:
loading modules through loader.conf is
veeryy slooww ...
seemed to be an objection to modularizing the kernel.
The only way you could come to that conclusion is if you
On 02/18/2012 10:43, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
loading modules through loader.conf is
veeryy slooww ...
Is it noticeably slower to load (say) a 6MB kernel + 2MB of
modules than to load an 8MB kernel?
I don't know
On 02/17/2012 15:11, matt wrote:
We have a modular kernel. It makes best-practices-sense to keep the
kernel true to what's required to boot and initialize the hardware
required to come up multiuser. I am actually against having sound in
there at all.
I think the question is not, What should
On 01/18/2012 16:58, Dieter BSD wrote:
The original goal for 5.0 was to completely remove the Giant lock (and
do other cool SMP-related stuff). Eventually it was realized that this
was too big a goal to fully accomplish in 5.0 (albeit too late in the
process) and the goal was changed to do the
On Thu, 19 Jan 2012, John Kozubik wrote:
Hi Doug,
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012, Doug Barton wrote:
On 01/18/2012 11:46, John Kozubik wrote:
- mark 9 as the _only_ production release
While I understand your motivation, I am not sure this is a workable
goal when combined with the goal that others
1 - 100 of 435 matches
Mail list logo
