Dnia 16-11-2004, Wto o godzinie 13:38 +1030, Daniel O'Connor napisa(a):
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 13:27, Zoltan Frombach wrote:
It could be a full-duplex/half duplex mismatch issue. Try not to use
auto-negotiation. You can set your interface to fixed full-duplex (or
half-duplex) in /etc/rc.conf
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:22, Tomek Tylec wrote:
I've found vr(4) devices (which are very common in Via chipset
motherboards) don't like talking to some switches and I need to force
half duplex then unplug and replug the cable :(
I've tried all possible combinations with media and mediaopts,
Hiho! :-)
What is the current status of ehci(4) in 5.3-stable, i.e. what are my
chances that if I buy cheap 3.5 external usb 2.0 case it will just or
probably work?
Thanks in advance!
Bye
Marc
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Hello.
I'm running into a recurring problem. I tried to search the list for
some info, but couldn't quite find anything related (there are some
discussions on interrupt storms lately, but none seem to apply).
I'm running FreeBSD-5.x on some old low end boxes, mostly for small
tasks like small
At 05:55 AM 16/11/2004, Marc UBM Bocklet wrote:
Hiho! :-)
What is the current status of ehci(4) in 5.3-stable, i.e. what are my
chances that if I buy cheap 3.5 external usb 2.0 case it will just or
probably work?
I think your chances would be better using a firewire adaptor and HD. On
the Intel
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 07:58:53 -0500, Mike Tancsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 05:55 AM 16/11/2004, Marc UBM Bocklet wrote:
Hiho! :-)
What is the current status of ehci(4) in 5.3-stable, i.e. what are my
chances that if I buy cheap 3.5 external usb 2.0 case it will just or
probably work?
Hello all,
I'm trying to create a stripe over 10 disks and am hitting
a 32-bit wall in the volume size. The plex properly sees
the full 3726 GB, but the volume shaves off the 32nd bit
and only sees 1678 GB.
Usual for vinum?
Also, i kicked up gvinum to compare, but he doesn't seem to
have a stripe
Sam wrote:
Also, i kicked up gvinum to compare, but he doesn't seem to
have a stripe command (despite saying he does in the help).
there is a geom stripe class called gstripe thats outside of the gvinum
user interface.
jim
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing
Has there been any change in the status of the x225 bug in 5.3? I've got a
5.3-release CD, and it still shows the same problem. Right now, my plans
to deploy FreeBSD are stuck, until this bug gets resolved.
To refresh memory (and I'm filling in a bug report as soon as I'm done
here) - on any
). However, if I
boot verbosely, I get no errors and everything mounts fine.
Any ideas on what might be going on? I am downloading 5.3-STABLE-20041116 to
see if any changes may have fixed this problem.
Thanks,
-Matt
Copyright (c) 1992-2004 The FreeBSD Project.
Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986
Hi,
I've been asked to help this former customer.
This box is running 5.2.1 with as most exotic application jave/tomcat. And
it crashes too often. The first essential question for the customer is: Is
this hardware??? So I did the 'make -j 8 buildworld' test, which it survived
with flying
Dnia 16-11-2004, Wto o godzinie 20:08 +1030, Daniel O'Connor napisa(a):
Hmm, I'm not sure what changed sorry - perhaps you could look for changes in
the code by using cvsweb.freebsd.org.
I made an experiment. I downloaded if_vr.c from cvs which was tagged as
5.2.1-RELEASE. Then I substituted
Karel J. Bosschaart wrote:
On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 07:39:13AM -0700, Dan MacMillan wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Andrew Sinclair
Sent: November 16, 2004 15:32
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: What OS are you? fun
By the way, speed of light in the other thread is way off. The
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004, Samuel Trommel wrote:
Recently I upgraded from 5.2.1-release to 5.3-release. When I try to
start named I get a weird error:
Nov 15 19:23:12 freebsd named[1152]: starting BIND 9.3.0 -4 -u bind -t
/var/named/etc/namedb/ -c /etc/named.conf
Nov 15 19:23:12 freebsd
Can someone help me build a hardwired version of the loader that will
let me boot my system?
System is a 440LX dual CPU DEC Personal Workstation Station 333i+.
There are no IDE devices. CD and HD are SCSI on 2940U2W controller.
I saw in the code that this is bad news if guessing is required.
El Lunes, 15 de Noviembre de 2004 19:51, Samuel Trommel escribió:
Hello,
Recently I upgraded from 5.2.1-release to 5.3-release. When I try to
start named I get a weird error:
Nov 15 19:23:12 freebsd named[1152]: starting BIND 9.3.0 -4 -u bind
-t /var/named/etc/namedb/ -c /etc/named.conf
I already found out (Chroot problem /dev/random /dev/null)
Thanks anyway for the help..
Samuel
-Original Message-
From: Jose M Rodriguez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: dinsdag 16 november 2004 23:43
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Samuel Trommel
Subject: Re: Named 9.3.0 weird error at
Doug i appreciate your help, but it has nothing to with my config file...
I migrated BIND 9.2.3 (Builded from ports) to the integrated BIND 9.3.0. The
problem is that my chrootpoint is setup wrong.
[23:57:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/named/etc/namedb]# ls -alF
total 18
drwxr-xr-x 9 root wheel 512
I'm somewhat confused. When I take snapshots, offtimes, they seem to
be different sizes.
I have a system that has two 120 Gig disks that are vinum (now gvinum)
raid1'd. On that I have a root, swap, usr, var and 'u' partitions.
All vinum created.
As one (of several) backup policies, we take
David Gilbert wrote:
and progressively delete them such that the oldest
snapshot we keep is about 30 days old.
Off topic comment: consider using ports/sysutils/fileprune for this task.
Diomidis Spinellis
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 06:22:29PM -0500, David Gilbert wrote:
But the snapshots are often different sizes. This strikes me as odd,
as I understood the format of a snapshot was to be the same as the
format of the partition itself --- so they should all have the same
size as the physical
On Tuesday, 16 November 2004 at 12:50:33 -0500, Sam wrote:
Hello all,
I'm trying to create a stripe over 10 disks and am hitting
a 32-bit wall in the volume size. The plex properly sees
the full 3726 GB, but the volume shaves off the 32nd bit
and only sees 1678 GB.
Usual for vinum?
No.
I have the following:
uhci0: VIA 83C572 USB controller port 0xd400-0xd41f irq 12 at device 17.2 on p
ci0
uhci0: Reserved 0x20 bytes for rid 0x20 type 4 at 0xd400
uhci0: [GIANT-LOCKED]
'device ehci' in the kernel doesn't seem to recognise it. Is this a
known issue ... or is it a magic byte
I would risk the upgrade to 5.3. What can you lose? It is crashing
frequently already... 5.2.1 was not a stable release officially. Just make
sure that you follow the migration guide step by step
(http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.3R/migration-guide.html). Do not skip
mergemaster. And you must
24 matches
Mail list logo
