Re: Breaking build world costs $5? (was: Can we please have a current that compiles?)
On Mon, May 15, 2000 at 09:21:54PM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: Maybe the comitters ought to take an idea from many software companies and contribute $5 to the beer fund every time they break the build. Have it all come due at the next BSDcon to fund a committer beer bash. :-) I'd go along with that. What do the other committers think? I think it's a genuinely stupid idea. It was sufficiently stupid that my previously stated opinion on the topic was in anger so hastily written and fired-off that only its immediate target understood quite how rude I was being, rather than the broad audience I had been hoping for. -- Signature withheld by request of author. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Breaking build world costs $5? (was: Can we please have a current that compiles?)
On Sun, May 14, 2000 at 11:06:50AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Greg Lehey writes: : Maybe the comitters ought to take an idea from many software companies and : contribute $5 to the beer fund every time they break the build. Have it : all come due at the next BSDcon to fund a committer beer bash. :-) I think that we should make it $5.00 the first time. $10 the second time. $20 the third time, etc. I think this'd be a great idea, provided we also implemented some sort of scheme that paid for committer time that was wasted as a result of reading needless crossposts that add little to one of the lists and nothing to the other. -- Signature withheld by request of author. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Breaking build world costs $5? (was: Can we please have a current that compiles?)
On Sun, May 14, 2000 at 10:23:07PM -0400, Tim Vanderhoek wrote: Maybe the comitters ought to take an idea from many software companies and contribute $5 to the beer fund every time they break the build. Have it all come due at the next BSDcon to fund a committer beer bash. :-) I think that we should make it $5.00 the first time. $10 the second time. $20 the third time, etc. Or perhaps we should tie it to the time it takes the security officer to fix, either with his own patches or by inviting patches from others, security holes that have been reported in certain libraries. If it takes the committer longer to fix the world breakage than it takes the security officer to deal with the hole, then the committer may be fined. In all other cases, the security officer can be fined. At committer's discretion. We can then add bonuses. Say, for example, I fix someone else's world breakage fast enough that they are able to avoid the fine, then they have to pay me either $5.00, $10, or $20. In cases where more than one committer was responsible, either indirectly or directly, then all involved should be fined. -- Signature withheld by request of author. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: proposed pkg_delete change
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 02:30:59AM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: (such as kde, after testing the port) I want to delete that package, and all it's dependancies; instead of going around looking for the [...] That would be cool, yes. If you've got the time to do it, I think it would be well-worth the effort. Even cooler: A tree-like drawing of the dependency graph, allowing me to do right-click--toggle keep/erase for given port left-click--select port and all dependencies for erasure (excluding dependencies shared by another port not previously left-clicked) -- Signature withheld by request of author. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Small MAKEDEV bug
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 06:56:03PM -0400, Jeroen C. van Gelderen wrote: I don't buy it :-). This syntax is similar to a special case of the syntax of jot(1). It's better to use jot(1) directly, e.g.: MAKEDEV $(jot -w da 2 0)# make 2 acd devices beginning at acd0 b$ which jot /usr/bin/jot b$ The jot utility doesn't appear to be in /bin. b$ echo '$(jot -w da 2 0)' | wc 1 5 17 b$ echo $(jot -w da 2 0) | wc 1 2 8 b$ Heh. /me mumbles something about the prototypical UNIX hacker... :-) -- Signature withheld by request of author. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: /usr/ports/ too big?
On Thu, Feb 10, 2000 at 11:45:44AM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote: All I would propose is that those subdirectories do not need to be part of the base distribution -- that typing 'make modulename' in the parent directory (e.g. typing 'make ssh' in ports/security) would first download the subdirectory and then do a normal make within that subdirectory. Something of this general idea exists in the portcheckout port. I haven't looked at the newest version of the port and I imagine there are improvements to be made, still, but it does implement the general idea of demand based downloading of port skeletons. Expanding it to have a full interface that works from the INDEX file and produces a set of skeletons guaranteed to compile should not be too hard. -- Signature withheld by request of author. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Please help spread the CVSup mirror load more evenly
On Sun, Jan 23, 2000 at 06:56:39PM -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
Each host gets a value of 1 (unless you go in and tweak it). Hosts
are tried in order of their values and in some unspecified order in
[...]
Each time you successfully connect, you get a bonus of B.
I think you need to keep an element of randomness to prevent "good
enough" from defeating "best".
Bonus B should be weighted by wire speed. I don't know how to make
cvsup spit this out when in batch mode.
This isn't exactly the algorithm you described. Finding differences
is left as an exercise. Acceptability of the constants chosen for the
algorithm varies with expected usage pattern of script.
This is the type of thing that should really be done in cvsup itself,
but I don't feel like learning Modula-3... :)
I disclaim responsibility for any stupid errors. All subtle errors
are completely my fault.
PS: I don't believe this script will work under Linux. Oops. ;-)
Sample cvshosts.dat file:
50 cvsup1.freebsd.org
50 cvsup2.freebsd.org
50 cvsup3.freebsd.org
50 cvsup4.freebsd.org
50 cvsup5.freebsd.org
50 cvsup6.freebsd.org
50 cvsup7.freebsd.org
50 cvsup8.freebsd.org
And the script,
#! /bin/sh
DATFILE=cvshosts.dat
if [ -z "$1" ];
then
fairings=$( (while read -t 0 host
do
if [ "${host%%[ ]*}" -eq 0 ]
then
continue
fi
fairings="${fairings}
$((${host%% *} * $(jot -r 1 5 9) + $(jot -r 1 1 3))) ${host#*[ ]}"
done; echo "${fairings}") ${DATFILE})
hosts=`echo "$fairings" | sort -rn | awk '{print $2}'`
else
hosts=$1
shift
fi
# Potential security problem, probably
trap 'rm -f /tmp/cvshosts.dat.$$' 0
cp $DATFILE /tmp/cvshosts.dat.$$
echo "Will try hosts $(echo $hosts)"
for host in $hosts
do
echo "Using host $host"
if cvsup -1 -P m -s -g ~/bin/sup/fbsd-supfile -L 2 -h $host
then
# 1 works fairly well as a 2, also
perl -pi -e \
's/^(\d+)[ \t]+'"$host"'[ \t]*$/int (($a=$1+1)100?10:$a) . "'" $host"'"/e' \
$DATFILE
exit;
else
perl -pi -e \
's/^(\d+)[ \t]+'"$host"'[ \t]*$/int (($a=$1-$1\/6)1?1:$a) . "'" $host"'"/e' \
$DATFILE
fi
done
mv /tmp/cvshosts.dat.$$ $DATFILE
trap 0
--
Signature withheld by request of author.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Here's what I'm using
On Fri, Jan 21, 2000 at 11:56:38PM -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
arbitrary and works for me. I'm sure this could be improved,
especially to make the order random.
It really isn't too hard... I wouldn't be surprised if this
crosses another solution in email. :)
#! /bin/sh
if [ -z "$1" ];
then
set cvsup7.freebsd.org \
cvsup8.freebsd.org \
cvsup6.freebsd.org \
cvsup4.freebsd.org \
cvsup3.freebsd.org \
cvsup2.freebsd.org \
cvsup1.freebsd.org \
cvsup5.freebsd.org
for n in `jot -r $#`
do
fairings="${fairings}
$n $1"
shift
done
hosts=`echo "$fairings" | sort | awk '{print $2}'`
else
hosts=$1
shift
fi
echo "Will try hosts $(echo $hosts)"
for host in $hosts; do
echo "Using host $host"
for i in 1 2; do
if cvsup -1 -P m -s -g ~/bin/sup/fbsd-supfile -L 2 -h $host $*; then
exit;
fi
done
done
--
Signature withheld by request of author.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Here's what I'm using
On Sat, Jan 22, 2000 at 11:05:18AM -0500, Tim Vanderhoek wrote:
On Fri, Jan 21, 2000 at 11:56:38PM -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
arbitrary and works for me. I'm sure this could be improved,
especially to make the order random.
It really isn't too hard... I wouldn't be surprised if this
crosses another solution in email. :)
It occurred to me that it would be a good and useful idea to weight
the randomness such that certain favoured hosts have a greater chance
of being the first host tried.
This makes the script a little more useful (as opposed to just
being a toy).
Just change the multiplicative factor to increase the weighting
factor. Order hosts in the set line from most to least favoured. As
written, this gives cvsup7 and cvsup8 the greatest chance of being the
first hosts tried.
For even more fun, make this automatically keep a running track record
of download speed and have it adjust the host weighting accordingly.
#! /bin/sh
if [ -z "$1" ]
then
set cvsup7.freebsd.org \
cvsup8.freebsd.org \
cvsup6.freebsd.org \
cvsup4.freebsd.org \
cvsup3.freebsd.org \
cvsup2.freebsd.org \
cvsup1.freebsd.org \
cvsup5.freebsd.org
for n in `jot -r $#`
do
fairings="${fairings}
$(($n - $# * 2)) $1"
shift
done
hosts=`echo "$fairings" | sort -n | awk '{print $2}'`
else
hosts=$1
shift
fi
echo "Will try hosts $(echo $hosts)"
for host in $hosts; do
echo "Using host $host"
for i in 1 2; do
if cvsup -1 -P m -s -g ~/bin/sup/fbsd-supfile -L 2 -h $host $*; then
exit;
fi
done
done
--
Signature withheld by request of author.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: more
On Sun, Sep 12, 1999 at 03:20:02PM +0200, Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai wrote: On this CURRENT of 3-4 weeks old I can do /blah and then use / to find the next occurance of blah in the same file. With the `new' more this behaviour has been barfed. Accidentally. I didn't notice that particular (mis?)-feature when reading the older code. I'll re-add it. You can, of course, also use "n" in the meantime. Of course, one really wonders why we need "/\n" to be a synonym for "n", but I hadn't meant to change this behaviour. -- This is my .signature which gets appended to the end of my messages. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: can't install on machine with 8 Meg
On Sat, Jun 12, 1999 at 01:08:00PM -0400, Brian Dean wrote: Hi, I'm installing 4.0-19990610-SNAP onto a machine with 8 Meg of memory and it fails as follows: pid 6 (sh), uid 0, was killed: out of swap space There's a rumour going around that you need 12 meg to install. Why, I don't know. The handbook claims that you can run the system in as little as 4 meg. It is very misleading to claim this if you can't install it. Or maybe I think that the handbook (or the installation instructions) also state that you need either 5meg or 8meg to install. Somebody filed a bugreport that you actually need 12 meg to install these days. Anyways, since you're the second (at least) person to say that 8meg wasn't enough, the instructions probably should be changed. It is true that you can run a system with as little as 4 meg. I've installed 2.2 on a system with 4 meg (it was one of the ones that had a cool motherboard and needed 4 meg instead of 5). Joerg claims he used to run FreeBSD on a system with only 2 meg. You can't use the GENERIC installation kernel to run on these low-memory machines, though. -- This is my .signature which gets appended to the end of my messages. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: About the panic
On Mon, Jun 07, 1999 at 01:45:47AM -0400, Chuck Robey wrote: Don't wory. I guess with my dual controllers, that's likely what did it. I only had ahc0, not ahc1, in my config file. For some reason, it didn't like that anymore. Hmm... I guess GENERIC wouldn't have booted for you either. -- This is my .signature which gets appended to the end of my messages. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: About the panic
On Mon, Jun 07, 1999 at 12:01:15PM -0400, Chuck Robey wrote: Don't wory. I guess with my dual controllers, that's likely what did it. I only had ahc0, not ahc1, in my config file. For some reason, it didn't like that anymore. Hmm... I guess GENERIC wouldn't have booted for you either. The old generic I had? Yeah, it probably would have booted, but my last No, a brand new GENERIC of the type that would be found on a sysinstall boot disk. -- This is my .signature which gets appended to the end of my messages. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: -stable vs -current (was Re: solid NFS patch #6... )
On Fri, Apr 30, 1999 at 04:52:58PM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote: I expect the 3.2 release to be a really good release. I seem to recall that 2.2.x wasn't even called -stable until 2.2.2. That .2 release is exactly where 3.x is right now... -- This .sig is not innovative, witty, or profund. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
