hi all
my trouble description:
--part of dmesg---
CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.40GHz (2392.26-MHz 686-class CPU)
Origin = GenuineIntel Id = 0xf27 Stepping = 7
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
sam wrote:
hi all
my trouble description:
Do NOT use ULE on 6.x. ULE has been revamped heavily on 7.0 and the
version on 6.x is old, and is known to contain some bugs.
Cheers,
- --
Xin LI [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.delphij.net/
FreeBSD -
Xin LI wrote:
I can not speak for that, but my understanding is, no, it won't be
MFC'ed. The performance enhancements on 7.x included a lot of factors,
ULE is one of them, and there are also some other enhancements in the
system, which could be not suitable for MFC due to ABI/KBI change.
Quoting Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Yes, there is no possibility of ULE 2.0 being merged to 6.x. Use it in
6.x if you dare, just don't complain to us if it breaks your system :-)
All right, I won't :-)
i.e. if at any point you start experiencing problems, do not report them
until you
Quoting Xin LI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Do NOT use ULE on 6.x. ULE has been revamped heavily on 7.0 and the
version on 6.x is old, and is known to contain some bugs.
Is it particular to 6.x *SMP* systems ?
I've been using 6.3-R with ULE for about a fortnight without any trouble (on a
pentium4-m
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Xin LI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Do NOT use ULE on 6.x. ULE has been revamped heavily on 7.0 and the
version on 6.x is old, and is known to contain some bugs.
Is it particular to 6.x *SMP* systems ?
Particular to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Yes, there is no possibility of ULE 2.0 being merged to 6.x. Use it in
6.x if you dare, just don't complain to us if it breaks your system :-)
All right, I won't :-)
i.e. if at any point you start experiencing problems, do
7 matches
Mail list logo
