Re: Is XFree86 4.3.0 going to be in 4.8? -nt-
On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 12:17:43AM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote: > On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 10:22, Fred Clift wrote: > > On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > > > > > > > As for non-i386 -Server: > > > > > > I have an almost finished set of diffs for ia64 to build and > > > > See the alpha list for patches I posted today to make -Server build for > > alpha - these are not 'ports ready' patches, but are against the stock > > source... > > Okay, I added that to the port. Could you try the updated ports? Also, > anyone else who's listening, the ports need much more widespread testing > in order for it to make it into 4.8-RELEASE. Is it OK to present result directly to you or should it be to STABLE? > > The current diffs are at: > http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/X/files.html > > -- > Eric Anholt[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message -- Gunnar Flygt, Postmaster SR To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Re: Is XFree86 4.3.0 going to be in 4.8? -nt-
The achievement in integrating Xfree86 v4.3.x in the release of FBSD v4.8 will be admirable. I've been looking at it as of this week as well as KDE v3.1 and Gnome v2.2 on various platforms. There are some issues, but its in the integrating between the desktop environments (KDE vs Xfree86) and not FreeBSD specific. I'm reviewing the quality of the builds/ports of KDE 3.1 and Gnome 2.2 integration with Xfree86 v 4.3.x. I'll be glad to look into this on FreeBSD for QA testing. ~Ken - Original Message - From: "Eric Anholt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Ken Mays" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Igor Pokrovsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Jose M. Alcaide" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Daniel Eischen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 3:17 AM Subject: Re: Is XFree86 4.3.0 going to be in 4.8? -nt- > On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 05:25, Ken Mays wrote: > > Would the FreeBSD team consider the benefits of integrating Xfree86 v4.3.x > > for v4.8?!? The upgrade that was done on the video drivers alone was worth > > it for me. > > The release engineers have been considering allowing XFree86 4.3 in > 4.8-RELEASE, but it needs widespread testing. Anyone interested, please > apply the diffs at: > http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/X/files.html > to your ports tree and install. > > Besides basic problems I may have caused with the ports, oddities in > cursor handling would be particularly likely because of changes in 4.3.0 > which were somewhat last-minute. Some changes have been made in XFree86 > CVS post-4.3.0 already, so if you report anything I may be able to track > down a fix. > > -- > Eric Anholt[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Re: nForce2 support in ATA driver
It seems Max Khon wrote: > hi, there! > > I noticed that nForce2 support (as well as nForce1 fixes) were not MFC'ed > to RELENG_4. Is it planned to MFC it before 4.8-RELEASE? Dunno, the changes are part of a larger rewrite of the ATA code in current and cannot be backported without changes. I dont think I have the time before 4.8 to do anything about it... -Søren To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Re: 4.8 PR1 locks up for rm(1) big files
Hi, > Did you notice what the wait channel was? If the machine is still > there, you could hit ^T and see what it says. I just reproduced it on a second faster server. The file is also 80GB big. Unfortunatly I lost the link of my ssh connection. After ~10 mins the server was again running and up. So this seems to be a scheduler and softupdates issue ! Martin To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
jails update
Are there any dangers in doing simply a "make installworld" within all jails after doing "make buildworld" for one jail or even only the host system? /usr/src and /usr/obj are moved into the jail tree when necessary to avoid NFS. Regards, Frank To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Re: Is XFree86 4.3.0 going to be in 4.8?
I'd like to cast a vote for waiting on our 4.8 release until there is a solid 4.3.[01] release of X, as long as the delay is say, weeks, rather than months. I've had to patch the X ports by hand with stuff from the X cvs tree in order to get it to recognize my new video card, and there are a lot of other users in the same/similar boats. Not only is the marginal value of this release made more significant with an up to date X, but there is precedent for a delay of this nature. Just a thought, Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
nForce2 support in ATA driver
hi, there! I noticed that nForce2 support (as well as nForce1 fixes) were not MFC'ed to RELENG_4. Is it planned to MFC it before 4.8-RELEASE? /fjoe To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Re: r1.322 of src/Makefile.inc1
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Ceri Davies wrote:
>
> Was this behaviour from mergemaster intended ?
Depends on what you mean by "behaviour from mergemaster." :) It relies
entirely on src/etc/Makefile to "know" (or more precisely, to avoid
knowledge of) what files to deal with.
I just committed the attached patch to fix this on -current. Release
engineers, I'd like to MFC it before 4.8 if possible. The only .db files
that exist currently in TEMPROOT are the password files that were already
being deleted, and the newly added login.conf.db; so there won't be any
actual difference in user experience.
Doug
> *** Displaying differences between ./etc/login.conf.db and installed version:
>
> Binary files /etc/login.conf.db and ./etc/login.conf.db differ
>
> Use 'd' to delete the temporary ./etc/login.conf.db
> Use 'i' to install the temporary ./etc/login.conf.db
> Use 'm' to merge the temporary and installed versions
> Use 'v' to view the diff results again
>
> Default is to leave the temporary file to deal with by hand
>
> How should I deal with this? [Leave it for later] d
>
>*** Deleting ./etc/login.conf.db
>
>
> Ceri
>
>
--
This .signature sanitized for your protectionIndex: mergemaster.sh
===
RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/usr.sbin/mergemaster/mergemaster.sh,v
retrieving revision 1.41
retrieving revision 1.42
diff -u -r1.41 -r1.42
--- mergemaster.sh 5 Feb 2003 11:09:21 - 1.41
+++ mergemaster.sh 5 Mar 2003 08:20:55 - 1.42
@@ -554,11 +554,11 @@
;; # End of the "RERUN" test
esac
-# We really don't want to have to deal with these files, since
-# master.passwd is the real file that should be compared, then
-# the user should run pwd_mkdb if necessary.
+# We really don't want to have to deal with files like login.conf.db, pwd.db,
+# or spwd.db. Instead, we want to compare the text versions, and run *_mkdb.
+# Prompt the user to do so below, as needed.
#
-rm -f ${TEMPROOT}/etc/spwd.db ${TEMPROOT}/etc/passwd ${TEMPROOT}/etc/pwd.db
+rm -f ${TEMPROOT}/etc/*.db
# We only need to compare things like freebsd.cf once
find ${TEMPROOT}/usr/obj -type f -delete 2>/dev/null
Re: Hyper Threading Support in FreeBSD 4.7
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 08:27:21PM -0600, Imtiaz, Fazle wrote: > I run a very high traffic web site with FreeBSD 4.7 and am considering > moving into Dual Xeon based platform. Does FreeBSD 4.7 support > hyper threading and if it does, are there any known issues and problems > with it? My system is already SMP enabled, does anything special need > to be done? 4.7 supports hyperthreading only if the BIOS includes the virtual CPUs in the MP table. Some BIOSes do this, and others do not. 4.8-PRERELEASE will always enable hyperthreading if the processors are capable of it. 4.8-RELEASE will probably make this a kernel option, so people who don't want hyperthreading can turn it off. John Balwdin is finalising the details of the option at the moment. David. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Re: Is XFree86 4.3.0 going to be in 4.8? -nt-
On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 05:25, Ken Mays wrote: > Would the FreeBSD team consider the benefits of integrating Xfree86 v4.3.x > for v4.8?!? The upgrade that was done on the video drivers alone was worth > it for me. The release engineers have been considering allowing XFree86 4.3 in 4.8-RELEASE, but it needs widespread testing. Anyone interested, please apply the diffs at: http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/X/files.html to your ports tree and install. Besides basic problems I may have caused with the ports, oddities in cursor handling would be particularly likely because of changes in 4.3.0 which were somewhat last-minute. Some changes have been made in XFree86 CVS post-4.3.0 already, so if you report anything I may be able to track down a fix. -- Eric Anholt[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Re: Is XFree86 4.3.0 going to be in 4.8? -nt-
On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 10:22, Fred Clift wrote: > On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > > > > As for non-i386 -Server: > > > > I have an almost finished set of diffs for ia64 to build and > > See the alpha list for patches I posted today to make -Server build for > alpha - these are not 'ports ready' patches, but are against the stock > source... Okay, I added that to the port. Could you try the updated ports? Also, anyone else who's listening, the ports need much more widespread testing in order for it to make it into 4.8-RELEASE. The current diffs are at: http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/X/files.html -- Eric Anholt[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
