On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 11:48:55AM -0400, PJ wrote:
> Bob Hall wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 05:36:43PM -0400, PJ wrote:
> >
> >> Bob Hall wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 02:34:40AM +, Mark wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> Actually, this has got very little to do with
PJ wrote:
It's owrthless to read your entire comment here as everyone is
forgetting two things, here...
1. COMMON SENSE
2. NOT EVERYONE WHO READS MANUALS OR MAN PAGES IS NECESSARILY LIMITED TO
THE NARROW MINDBEND OF THE "INITIATED".
There are those who think those who bitch because they've no
Ian Smith wrote:
> PJ,
>
> having (in this case at least) the luxury of reading freebsd-questions
> as a digest, I'm going to quote a few of your extracts from several
> messages, largely without surounding context, as it's all incredibly
> repetitive, masively overquoted and mostly just "graspi
PJ wrote:
(trimmed down)
>
> Is entirely possible that I mucked up somewhere and did not do the
> shutdown -r quite right... anyway, it is working fine now.
> I still have some minor questions, though...
> Can glabel be done on a dormant file system and then boot that file
> system to change the f
Manolis Kiagias wrote:
> PJ wrote:
>
>> Manolis Kiagias wrote:
>>
>>
>>> PJ wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
Manolis, my state of mind is quite clear... and I'm coping with
everything quite allright... I'm not about to get mad at anyone or
anything...
but tell me, ho
Bob Hall wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 05:36:43PM -0400, PJ wrote:
>
>> Bob Hall wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 02:34:40AM +, Mark wrote:
>>>
>>>
Actually, this has got very little to do with being a native English
speaker or not. It's ere a matter of inton
2009/10/17 michael
> PJ wrote:
>
>> michael wrote:
>>
>>
>>> PJ wrote:
>>>
>>>
Why is it that the manual pages, as thorough as they may be, are very,
very confusing.
Perhaps I am being too wary, but I find that too many
instructions/examples are stumbling blocks to appreciatio
PJ,
having (in this case at least) the luxury of reading freebsd-questions
as a digest, I'm going to quote a few of your extracts from several
messages, largely without surounding context, as it's all incredibly
repetitive, masively overquoted and mostly just "grasping for ambiguity"
as Warren
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 05:18:48 +0200 Polytropon wrote:
>On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 20:59:18 -0600 (MDT), Warren Block
>wrote:
>> I understand it, but see ambiguity in the word "should". Easy enough to
>> rewrite:
>>
>> BUGS
^
^^^
^
^^^
^^^
^^^
^^^
^^^
Please no
RW wrote:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 23:49:52 -0400
Bob Hall wrote:
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 02:34:40AM +, Mark wrote:
Actually, this has got very little to do with being a native English
speaker or not. It's ere a matter of intonation (which, in writing,
can only be conveyed to a certain
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 23:49:52 -0400
Bob Hall wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 02:34:40AM +, Mark wrote:
> > Actually, this has got very little to do with being a native English
> > speaker or not. It's ere a matter of intonation (which, in writing,
> > can only be conveyed to a certain degree,
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:07:25 -0400
> From: PJ
> Subject: Re: I hate to bitch but bitch I must
> To: Polytropon
> Cc: Steve Bertrand ,
> "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org"
>
> Message-ID: <4ada23fd.8020...@videotron.ca
PJ wrote:
[snip]
>>
>>
> I think you're trying to take the meaning of "should" a little too
> far... to keep it simple, and without trying to intellectualize it, it
> simply means (and this can change within certain contexts) "normally, it
> should work" (in our context, here) but there is no im
Matthew Seaman wrote:
> Manolis Kiagias wrote:
>> PJ wrote:
>
>>> Now, does that mean that glabel does not work if there are several
>>> disks
>>> on the system... it certainly does not say so nor does it adv ertise
>>> that this would not work if there are several ATA disks present..
>>> Previousl
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 05:54:23PM -0400, PJ wrote:
> Why is it that the manual pages, as thorough as they may be, are very,
> very confusing.
> Perhaps I am being too wary, but I find that too many
> instructions/examples are stumbling blocks to appreciation of the whole
> system:
> for instance
Polytropon wrote:
note there I have also used glabel on the swap (command used was glabel
label /dev/ad10p1)
A really honest question: What does the "p" in "ad10p1"
indicate? I always thought swap partitions are something
like "ad10b" (an own partition right after the root
partition a).
ad10
Manolis Kiagias wrote:
PJ wrote:
Now, does that mean that glabel does not work if there are several disks
on the system... it certainly does not say so nor does it adv ertise
that this would not work if there are several ATA disks present..
Previously I had also tried a reboot press 4 with exa
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 23:50:51 +0100, krad wrote:
> easiest way is to boot in on a live cd/usb label it all up with tunefs and
> edit the fstabs then reboot off disks
Yes, that's the most comfortable way. FreeBSD's live disc should
be completely fine. There's no problem with "should work on /
even
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:07:25 -0400, PJ wrote:
> Just a note: I find it strange that nobody looked into the problem of
> the confusion... I thought I had pointed out where the co;nfusion
> arises... and no one seems to have either understood the
> inconsistencies or bothere to read the explanation.
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 23:47:56 +0100, krad wrote:
> he has a raw file system on that device, ie dangerously dedicated, no
> partitions etc
That's the standard mode for data disks that are not intended
to be booted from. It's usable for USB sticks as well. There's
no need for a slice.
The comment "
PJ wrote:
>
> manual: "it is assumed that a single ATA disk is used, which is
> currently recognized by the system as ad0. It is also assumed that the
> standard FreeBSD partition scheme is used, with /, /var, /usr and /tmp
> file systems, as well as a swap partition."
>
> Now, does that mean that
PJ wrote:
michael wrote:
PJ wrote:
Why is it that the manual pages, as thorough as they may be, are very,
very confusing.
Perhaps I am being too wary, but I find that too many
instructions/examples are stumbling blocks to appreciation of the whole
system:
for instance, let's look at the
2009/10/17 Manolis Kiagias
> PJ wrote:
> > Manolis Kiagias wrote:
> >
> >> PJ wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Manolis, my state of mind is quite clear... and I'm coping with
> >>> everything quite allright... I'm not about to get mad at anyone or
> >>> anything...
> >>> but tell me, honestly, when you see
PJ wrote:
> Manolis Kiagias wrote:
>
>> PJ wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Manolis, my state of mind is quite clear... and I'm coping with
>>> everything quite allright... I'm not about to get mad at anyone or
>>> anything...
>>> but tell me, honestly, when you see the stuff I have described above?
>>>
2009/10/17 PJ
> michael wrote:
> > PJ wrote:
> >> Why is it that the manual pages, as thorough as they may be, are very,
> >> very confusing.
> >> Perhaps I am being too wary, but I find that too many
> >> instructions/examples are stumbling blocks to appreciation of the whole
> >> system:
> >> f
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009, PJ wrote:
Warren Block wrote:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Bob Hall wrote:
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 07:27:42PM -0400, PJ wrote:
BUGS
This utility should work on active file systems.
I'm a native English speaker, and the manual makes perfect sense to me.
It's very clear to me that
2009/10/17 PJ
> Manolis Kiagias wrote:
> > PJ wrote:
> >
> >> Manolis, my state of mind is quite clear... and I'm coping with
> >> everything quite allright... I'm not about to get mad at anyone or
> >> anything...
> >> but tell me, honestly, when you see the stuff I have described above?
> >> Wo
Polytropon wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 23:17:29 +0100, Vincent Hoffman
> wrote:
>
>> yes. this makes a ufs label which you can access via /dev/ufs
>> for example (my home system)
>> jh...@ostracod
>> (23:08:34 <~>) 0 $ ls /dev/ufs
>> SCRATCH SSDROOT SSDUSR SSDVAR
>> [
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 23:17:29 +0100, Vincent Hoffman wrote:
> yes. this makes a ufs label which you can access via /dev/ufs
> for example (my home system)
> jh...@ostracod
> (23:08:34 <~>) 0 $ ls /dev/ufs
> SCRATCH SSDROOT SSDUSR SSDVAR
> [...]
> /dev/ufs/SCRATCH on /scratc
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:55:20 -0400, PJ wrote:
> But can you explain what this means? It just is not clear for me.
> "# tu;nefs -L home /dev/da3"
> This puts a label on that disk? So now it can be referred to as home?
> da3 = home ?
Yes, exactly that's the purpose. In such a setting, da3 would
ref
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:10:42 -0400, PJ wrote:
> Here are the outputs:
>
> fstab:
> # DeviceMountpointFStypeOptionsDumpPass#
> /dev/ad12s1bnoneswapsw00
> /dev/ad12s1a/ufsrw11
> /dev/ad12s1h/backups
PJ wrote:
> michael wrote:
>
>> PJ wrote:
>>
>>> Why is it that the manual pages, as thorough as they may be, are very,
>>> very confusing.
>>> Perhaps I am being too wary, but I find that too many
>>> instructions/examples are stumbling blocks to appreciation of the whole
>>> system:
>>> f
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:28:18 -0400, PJ wrote:
> From the way things are written, it would appear that one must do tunefs
> before doing glabel and that they are interdependent.
As it has been mentioned ealier and as far as I understood:
"tunefs -L" is for UFS file systems only, while "glabel labe
michael wrote:
> PJ wrote:
>> Why is it that the manual pages, as thorough as they may be, are very,
>> very confusing.
>> Perhaps I am being too wary, but I find that too many
>> instructions/examples are stumbling blocks to appreciation of the whole
>> system:
>> for instance, let's look at the i
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 05:36:43PM -0400, PJ wrote:
> Bob Hall wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 02:34:40AM +, Mark wrote:
> >
> >> Actually, this has got very little to do with being a native English
> >> speaker or not. It's ere a matter of intonation (which, in writing, can
> >> only be
Bob Hall wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 02:34:40AM +, Mark wrote:
>
>> Actually, this has got very little to do with being a native English
>> speaker or not. It's ere a matter of intonation (which, in writing, can
>> only be conveyed to a certain degree, of course). 'Should' can certainly
Steve Bertrand wrote:
> PJ wrote:
>
>> Steve Bertrand wrote:
>>
>>> PJ wrote:
>>>
>>>
Polytropon wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:54:23 -0400, PJ wrote:
>
>
>>>
>>>
>> but from man tunefs:
>> BUGS
>>
Manolis Kiagias wrote:
> PJ wrote:
>
>> Manolis, my state of mind is quite clear... and I'm coping with
>> everything quite allright... I'm not about to get mad at anyone or
>> anything...
>> but tell me, honestly, when you see the stuff I have described above?
>> Woldn't that confuse anyone in
Warren Block wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Bob Hall wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 07:27:42PM -0400, PJ wrote:
> BUGS
> This utility should work on active file systems.
>>
>> I'm a native English speaker, and the manual makes perfect sense to me.
>> It's very clear to me that since the s
Mark wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org
> [mailto:owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of PJ
> Sent: zaterdag 17 oktober 2009 3:50
> To: Steve Bertrand
> Cc: Polytropon; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: I hate
Polytropon wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 21:29:04 -0400, PJ wrote:
>
>> It is simple to understand Emglish but not so simple what was meant by
>> whoever wrote it...I cannot correct something that I do not uderstand...
>> come on, man, that should be easy to understand.
>>
>
> As English is
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 07:27:42PM -0400, PJ wrote:
> Polytropon wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:54:23 -0400, PJ wrote:
> >> but from man tunefs:
> >> BUGS
> >> This utility should work on active file systems.
> >> What in hades does this mean--just above it says cannot be run on active
> >> fil
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 22:54, nealhogan@ wrote:
It is simple to understand Emglish but not so simple what was meant by
whoever wrote it...I cannot correct something that I do not uderstand...
come on, man, that should be easy to understand.
I am afraid that with all the globalization people still d
PJ wrote:
Why is it that the manual pages, as thorough as they may be, are very,
very confusing.
Perhaps I am being too wary, but I find that too many
instructions/examples are stumbling blocks to appreciation of the whole
system:
for instance, let's look at the instructions for changing disk l
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 02:34:40AM +, Mark wrote:
> Actually, this has got very little to do with being a native English
> speaker or not. It's ere a matter of intonation (which, in writing, can
> only be conveyed to a certain degree, of course). 'Should' can certainly
> mean "Don't try that."
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 20:59:18 -0600 (MDT), Warren Block
wrote:
> I understand it, but see ambiguity in the word "should". Easy enough to
> rewrite:
>
> BUGS
> This utility does not work on active file systems.
>
> Now here's my challenge to PJ: use send-pr(1) or the web PR interface at
> http
-Original Message-
From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org
[mailto:owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of PJ
Sent: zaterdag 17 oktober 2009 3:50
To: Steve Bertrand
Cc: Polytropon; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: I hate to bitch but bitch I must
>>>>
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Bob Hall wrote:
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 07:27:42PM -0400, PJ wrote:
BUGS
This utility should work on active file systems.
I'm a native English speaker, and the manual makes perfect sense to me.
It's very clear to me that since the statement is in the BUGS section,
it means
> It is simple to understand Emglish but not so simple what was meant by
> whoever wrote it...I cannot correct something that I do not uderstand...
> come on, man, that should be easy to understand.
> I am afraid that with all the globalization people still do not
> understand that translations sho
>
> The benefit(s)? If there are other long-term members who agree with what
> you are getting at, then I'd say that the benefits are that it shows to
> newcomers that no matter what, you'll always receive a respectable and
> educated response.
>
Does that really include taking seriously everythin
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 21:29:04 -0400, PJ wrote:
> It is simple to understand Emglish but not so simple what was meant by
> whoever wrote it...I cannot correct something that I do not uderstand...
> come on, man, that should be easy to understand.
As English is not my native language, I *now* unders
.
>>
>> He needs to work things out before blogging on
>> freebsd-questi...@.
>>
>> IMHO ;-)
>>
>>
>>> Steve
>>> ___
>>> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
>>> To unsubscribe, send an
Neal Hogan wrote:
Aha! Gotcha! Whoever wrote that has made an unintentionnal booboo. It is
a subtle difference and is indicative that whoever wrote it is not a
native english user... the meaning is clearly "should be executed, done,
carried out, performed" - should work means it
PJ wrote:
> Steve Bertrand wrote:
>> PJ wrote:
>>
>>> Polytropon wrote:
>>>
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:54:23 -0400, PJ wrote:
>>
> but from man tunefs:
> BUGS
> This utility should work on active file systems.
> What in hades does this mean--just above it sa
>>> Aha! Gotcha! Whoever wrote that has made an unintentionnal booboo. It is
>>> a subtle difference and is indicative that whoever wrote it is not a
>>> native english user... the meaning is clearly "should be executed, done,
>>> carried out, performed" - should work means it can be carried out
Steve Bertrand wrote:
> PJ wrote:
>
>> Polytropon wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:54:23 -0400, PJ wrote:
>>>
>
>
but from man tunefs:
BUGS
This utility should work on active file systems.
What in hades does this mean--just above it says cannot be run on a
Manolis Kiagias wrote:
> PJ wrote:
>
>> Manolis, my state of mind is quite clear... and I'm coping with
>> everything quite allright... I'm not about to get mad at anyone or
>> anything...
>> but tell me, honestly, when you see the stuff I have described above?
>> Woldn't that confuse anyone in
Bob Hall wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 07:27:42PM -0400, PJ wrote:
>> Polytropon wrote:
>>> On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:54:23 -0400, PJ wrote:
but from man tunefs:
BUGS
This utility should work on active file systems.
What in hades does this mean--just above it says cannot be run
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 07:27:42PM -0400, PJ wrote:
> Polytropon wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:54:23 -0400, PJ wrote:
> >> but from man tunefs:
> >> BUGS
> >> This utility should work on active file systems.
> >> What in hades does this mean--just above it says cannot be run on active
> >> fil
PJ wrote:
> Polytropon wrote:
>> On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:54:23 -0400, PJ wrote:
>>> but from man tunefs:
>>> BUGS
>>> This utility should work on active file systems.
>>> What in hades does this mean--just above it says cannot be run on active
>>> file systems. ???
>>>
>> It "should". This me
Manolis Kiagias wrote:
> PJ wrote:
>
>> Manolis, my state of mind is quite clear... and I'm coping with
>> everything quite allright... I'm not about to get mad at anyone or
>> anything...
>> but tell me, honestly, when you see the stuff I have described above?
>> Woldn't that confuse anyone in
Polytropon wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:54:23 -0400, PJ wrote:
>
>> Why is it that the manual pages, as thorough as they may be, are very,
>> very confusing.
>>
>
> A common misunderstanding about manpages can be that they
> are often (wishfully?) seen as a tutorial or a howto. In
> fac
PJ wrote:
>
> Manolis, my state of mind is quite clear... and I'm coping with
> everything quite allright... I'm not about to get mad at anyone or
> anything...
> but tell me, honestly, when you see the stuff I have described above?
> Woldn't that confuse anyone in their right mind?
>
>
I am so
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 19:10:58 -0400, PJ wrote:
> Ok, but that is exactly what I did. Exactly that and that is what is in
> the manual. And I can read and I did check and recheck my input for
> typos. But, I did get error messages!
> # glabel label rootfs/dev/ad12s1a
Exactly? I think a whitespace
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 19:10:58 -0400
PJ wrote:
*** Snip***
> > You will have best results when trying with a clear mind.
> > Also having a test system (or a VMware / Virtualbox machine) will
> > help you learn and practice unknown procedures without the anxiety
> > of breaking something on your pr
Manolis Kiagias wrote:
> PJ wrote:
>> Why is it that the manual pages, as thorough as they may be, are very,
>> very confusing.
>> Perhaps I am being too wary, but I find that too many
>> instructions/examples are stumbling blocks to appreciation of the whole
>> system:
>> for instance, let's look
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:54:23 -0400, PJ wrote:
> Why is it that the manual pages, as thorough as they may be, are very,
> very confusing.
A common misunderstanding about manpages can be that they
are often (wishfully?) seen as a tutorial or a howto. In
fact, they are references.
> Perhaps I am
2009/10/16 PJ
> Why is it that the manual pages, as thorough as they may be, are very,
> very confusing.
> Perhaps I am being too wary, but I find that too many
> instructions/examples are stumbling blocks to appreciation of the whole
> system:
> for instance, let's look at the instructions for c
PJ wrote:
> Why is it that the manual pages, as thorough as they may be, are very,
> very confusing.
> Perhaps I am being too wary, but I find that too many
> instructions/examples are stumbling blocks to appreciation of the whole
> system:
> for instance, let's look at the instructions for changi
69 matches
Mail list logo
