On Thursday 08 April 2010 06:25:47 Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
I'm not ready yet to publish code. I planned to announce this RFC
a bit later, when code will be finished. But Konstantin (kib@) suggested
do it before finishing.
That's a shame. As long as the source isn't available it's of little
On 08.04.2010 10:27, Bruce Cran wrote:
That's a shame. As long as the source isn't available it's of little interest
to me.
For anyone who wants to see the bits of code I've got so far, I've created a
Google Code project at http://code.google.com/p/gcpart/ . I'm currently trying
to figure out
2010/4/7 Andrey V. Elsukov bu7c...@yandex.ru:
On 07.04.2010 21:49, Randi Harper wrote:
Wow. This is awesome. patches? :D
:)
I'm not ready yet to publish code. I planned to announce this RFC
a bit later, when code will be finished. But Konstantin (kib@) suggested
do it before finishing.
Hi,
Sorry for taking long to fix. Here is another patch.
**But before trying it out, please check rev. of your system.**
If you are using r206358 (15:29 UTC Apr. 7) or newer, the driver won't work. If
you are using older system, please try this patch.
-20100408.tgz
--
WBR, Andrey V. Elsukov
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Quoting Andrey V. Elsukov bu7c...@yandex.ru (from Thu, 08 Apr 2010
10:51:08 +0400):
On 08.04.2010 10:27, Bruce Cran wrote:
That's a shame. As long as the source isn't available it's of
little interest
to me.
For anyone who wants to see the bits of code I've got so far, I've created a
On 7 April 2010 18:33, Dan Nelson dnel...@allantgroup.com wrote:
In the last episode (Apr 07), krad said:
On 7 April 2010 05:38, Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 9:35 PM, lhmwzy lhm...@gmail.com wrote:
What's your mean??
See the archives for the
Alexander Leidinger alexan...@leidinger.net writes:
Please consider using SVN instead. A lot more users will be able to
check out from there.
We don't grant non-committers access to the Subversion repo.
It looks like other people had a look at sysinstall, not at sade. As
sysinstall is
On 8 Apr 2010, at 10:05, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Alexander Leidinger alexan...@leidinger.net writes:
Please consider using SVN instead. A lot more users will be able to
check out from there.
We don't grant non-committers access to the Subversion repo.
The SVN repo is available to the
Quoting Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no (from Thu, 08 Apr 2010
11:05:34 +0200):
Alexander Leidinger alexan...@leidinger.net writes:
Please consider using SVN instead. A lot more users will be able to
check out from there.
We don't grant non-committers access to the Subversion repo.
On 08.04.2010 11:05, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Alexander Leidinger alexan...@leidinger.net writes:
Please consider using SVN instead. A lot more users will be able to
check out from there.
We don't grant non-committers access to the Subversion repo.
It looks like other people had a look
on 08/04/2010 12:05 Dag-Erling Smørgrav said the following:
Alexander Leidinger alexan...@leidinger.net writes:
Please consider using SVN instead. A lot more users will be able to
check out from there.
We don't grant non-committers access to the Subversion repo.
But nothing stops Andrey
On 08.04.2010 14:15, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
We don't grant non-committers access to the Subversion repo.
Ooops... seems I misremembered his status. Somehow I associate him with
something FreeBSD related. Andrey, did you participate in a GSoC?
No, I'm not fit for GSoC.
My suggestion is
Rui Paulo rpa...@freebsd.org writes:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no writes:
Alexander Leidinger alexan...@leidinger.net writes:
Please consider using SVN instead. A lot more users will be able
to check out from there.
We don't grant non-committers access to the Subversion repo.
The
Alexander Leidinger alexan...@leidinger.net writes:
I think this is more complicated than to refactor the interesting part
into a backend with an API which both tools can use. This would also
allow someone to write a GUI program (e.g. for PC-BSD).
There have been at least three or four
Hello.
There is only one possibility to change sector size of physical disk (gnop -S
4096 ...).
May be it is possible to add such possibility to gpart? e.g. gpart create -S
4096 -t gpt ad0?
It will help all unlucky WD Advanced Format disks users. :-D
--
Alexey Tarasov
(\__/)
(='.'=)
E[: | |
Alexey Tarasov m...@lexasoft.ru writes:
There is only one possibility to change sector size of physical disk
(gnop -S 4096 ...). May be it is possible to add such possibility to
gpart? e.g. gpart create -S 4096 -t gpt ad0?
I don't quite see how that would work - do you mean gpart should
No, no.
I mean that gpart should act like gnop presenting another sector size to user.
I that possible at all?
On 08.04.2010, at 17:36, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
I don't quite see how that would work - do you mean gpart should
configure a gnop? AFAIK there is no gnop label, so you can't set
Quoting Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no (from Thu, 08 Apr 2010
14:01:33 +0200):
Alexander Leidinger alexan...@leidinger.net writes:
I think this is more complicated than to refactor the interesting part
into a backend with an API which both tools can use. This would also
allow someone to
On Thursday 08 April 2010 5:05:34 am Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Alexander Leidinger alexan...@leidinger.net writes:
Please consider using SVN instead. A lot more users will be able to
check out from there.
We don't grant non-committers access to the Subversion repo.
It looks like other
On 8 Apr 2010, at 13:49, John Baldwin wrote:
On Thursday 08 April 2010 5:05:34 am Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Alexander Leidinger alexan...@leidinger.net writes:
Please consider using SVN instead. A lot more users will be able to
check out from there.
We don't grant non-committers access to
Alexey Tarasov m...@lexasoft.ru writes:
I mean that gpart should act like gnop presenting another sector size
to user. I that possible at all?
That depends on the underlying partition scheme. My guess is no.
(it all boils down to whether the desired logical sector size can
somehow be
Ok, in case of GPT? :-)
GPT implementation can be the simplest solution to this problem compared to
implementing additional ATA commands to determine if disk is in Advanced Format.
On 08.04.2010, at 18:09, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Alexey Tarasov m...@lexasoft.ru writes:
I mean that gpart
Alexander Leidinger alexan...@leidinger.net writes:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no writes:
There have been at least three or four attempts to do this in the
past. One of them was even fully funded by the FreeBSD Foundation.
They all failed.
I was told a lot of people tried to make the
John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org writes:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no writes:
My suggestion is to add a sysinstall mode to sade where it
operates under certain (minor) constraints and reports what it did
in a format that sysinstall can parse, so sysinstall can just
fork-exec sade instead
Alexey Tarasov m...@lexasoft.ru writes:
Ok, in case of GPT? :-)
I doubt it, but I don't know for sure.
GPT implementation can be the simplest solution to this problem
compared to implementing additional ATA commands to determine if disk
is in Advanced Format.
There are two issues:
1) There
1) There is already an ATA command to report both physical and logical
sector sizes, but the disk lies - it always reports 512/512.
Advanced Format disks reports 512, but there is another command in ATA standard
which can tell us if it uses 4k sector.
2) The disk may have already been
Quoting Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no (from Thu, 08 Apr 2010
16:15:27 +0200):
Alexander Leidinger alexan...@leidinger.net writes:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no writes:
There have been at least three or four attempts to do this in the
past. One of them was even fully funded by the
http://www.wdc.com/wdproducts/library/WhitePapers/ENG/2579-771430.pdf
References
The ATA8-ACS and SBC-3 standards have provisions for a disk drive to report
Advanced Format sector sizes and other performance optimization information.
These standards are used for SATA, SAS, USB, and IEEE
Hi,
PseudoCylon wrote:
Hi,
Sorry for taking long to fix. Here is another patch.
**But before trying it out, please check rev. of your system.**
If you are using r206358 (15:29 UTC Apr. 7) or newer, the driver won't work.
If you are using older system, please try this patch.
Alexander Leidinger alexan...@leidinger.net writes:
I did not suggest to run the same program and get different
interfaces. My suggestion was to have a backend-lib and a frontend.
The backend containing the business-logic, and the frontend being
the presentation layer.
What you call the
On 04/08/2010 14:39, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
Quoting Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no (from Thu, 08 Apr 2010
16:15:27 +0200):
Alexander Leidinger alexan...@leidinger.net writes:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no writes:
There have been at least three or four attempts to do this in the
On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 18:40:50 +0400
Alexey Tarasov m...@lexasoft.ru wrote:
http://www.wdc.com/wdproducts/library/WhitePapers/ENG/2579-771430.pdf
References
The ATA8-ACS and SBC-3 standards have provisions for a disk drive to report
Advanced Format sector sizes and other performance
On 2010-04-08 17:24, Gary Jennejohn wrote:
References
The ATA8-ACS and SBC-3 standards have provisions for a disk drive to report
Advanced Format sector sizes and other performance optimization information.
These standards are used for SATA, SAS, USB, and IEEE 1394 based interface
ZFS is still currently in heavy development so it might happen. Having siad
that it looks like oracle have totally buggered it up for everyone with
their retroactive licenses. I hope the CDL was tight enough that stuff wont
have to get pulled from freebsd
is that even possible with CDDL?
Sam
On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 10:53:48 +, Kris Moore k...@pcbsd.org wrote:
It's not nice to hijack a topic, but this is way to interesting for me, so
I do it anway :)
This has a few advantages, in that the backend can be used stand-alone
for scripted installations and also provide great flexibility
On 04/08/2010 16:30, Marian Hettwer wrote:
On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 10:53:48 +, Kris Moorek...@pcbsd.org wrote:
It's not nice to hijack a topic, but this is way to interesting for me, so
I do it anway :)
:) I didn't mean to hijack either, was trying to discuss advantage of
having backend
I too love the idea of generalizing (abstracting) the dirty-work to a
set of libraries and leaving the user interface up to the userland
applications. Thusly, an app in /usr/X11R6/bin can use said libraries in
plugging in functionality to an X11 GUI application, meanwhile an app
in /bin or /sbin
(( wishing that I hadn't un-CC'd the group on earlier e-mails ))
Some concerns that I have with separating the code into a back-end
versus front-end...
1. Is it currently the idea that -- when it comes down to the crunchgen
stuff -- we are going to re-work the code that generates the non-shared
Randi and I were discussion the possibility of having sysinstall
remember what you did and then able to write out a suitable
`install.cfg' file that could be subsequently used to perform a human-
less automated install with the same settings.
To expand a little on that...
I'd like to draw a
2010/4/8 Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no:
John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org writes:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no writes:
My suggestion is to add a sysinstall mode to sade where it
operates under certain (minor) constraints and reports what it did
in a format that sysinstall can parse, so
Garrett Cooper yanef...@gmail.com writes:
If the user shoots him or herself in the foot, that's their own
problem.
That kind of attitude is why people choose Linux over FreeBSD...
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - d...@des.no
___
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Devin Teske dte...@vicor.com wrote:
Randi and I were discussion the possibility of having sysinstall
remember what you did and then able to write out a suitable
`install.cfg' file that could be subsequently used to perform a human-
less automated install with
On Apr 8, 2010, at 6:06 AM, Alexey Tarasov wrote:
Hello.
There is only one possibility to change sector size of physical disk (gnop -S
4096 ...).
May be it is possible to add such possibility to gpart? e.g. gpart create -S
4096 -t gpt ad0?
It will help all unlucky WD Advanced Format
2010/4/8 Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no:
Garrett Cooper yanef...@gmail.com writes:
If the user shoots him or herself in the foot, that's their own
problem.
That kind of attitude is why people choose Linux over FreeBSD...
Where do you draw the line though? /media, /libexec, /proc, /sys,
Hello.
Thank you for the information.
In 8-STABLE snapshot 201002 diskinfo shows 512k sector size yet.
I will try CURRENT tomorrow.
On 08.04.2010, at 19:35, Dimitry Andric wrote:
On 2010-04-08 17:24, Gary Jennejohn wrote:
References
The ATA8-ACS and SBC-3 standards have provisions for a disk
2010/4/8 Garrett Cooper yanef...@gmail.com:
2010/4/8 Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no:
Garrett Cooper yanef...@gmail.com writes:
If the user shoots him or herself in the foot, that's their own
problem.
That kind of attitude is why people choose Linux over FreeBSD...
Where do you draw the
On 04/08/2010 18:15, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Devin Teskedte...@vicor.com wrote:
Randi and I were discussion the possibility of having sysinstall
remember what you did and then able to write out a suitable
`install.cfg' file that could be subsequently used to
I agree with you completely.
Seems that support of this disks is already commited in CURRENT, will try it
tomorrow.
A better approach is to have tunables for geom_disk to do this. This should
absolutely
not be part of a partitioning tool. It violates everything there is to
violate AFAICT.
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Garrett Cooper yanef...@gmail.com wrote:
2. install.cfg is just a hacky / non-style(9) compliant way of
specifying how to do an install. If you could separate out sysinstall
into separate utilities and have each of the pieces execute as shell
commands with
On 2010-04-08 21:34, Alexey Tarasov wrote:
Thank you for the information.
In 8-STABLE snapshot 201002 diskinfo shows 512k sector size yet.
I will try CURRENT tomorrow.
It looks like the code was MFC'd to stable/8 in r199443. However, even
in -CURRENT, the sector size you see in diskinfo will
On 8 April 2010 17:47, Sam Fourman Jr. sfour...@gmail.com wrote:
ZFS is still currently in heavy development so it might happen. Having
siad
that it looks like oracle have totally buggered it up for everyone with
their retroactive licenses. I hope the CDL was tight enough that stuff
wont
Hi--
On Apr 8, 2010, at 2:18 PM, krad wrote:
[ ... ]
is that even possible with CDDL?
im not a lawyer but it wouldn't surprise me
I'm not a lawyer either, but I was active in reviewing and suggesting changes
to CDDL submission for OSI approval back in 2004.
A copyright owner always has
Rui,
I updated my kernel to the latest today, and was unable to connect via
wireless. I have a 3945ABG using wpi. I rolled back to r206357 and
everything worked fine. I then rolled forward to r206369 (your rate
control mod + bug fixes and - debugging code) and it stopped working. I
didn't bother
On 04/04/10 22:49, Hiroki Sato wrote:
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote
in 4bb95564.1070...@freebsd.org:
do On 04/04/10 02:41, Hiroki Sato wrote:
do Kevin Oberman ober...@es.net wrote
doin 20100404053352.e6f751c...@ptavv.es.net:
do
do ob The use of FACILITY_enable in rc.conf
[ snipped ]
On 04/05/10 08:52, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
I have no idea (unless I'll read them) about the guts of various shell
function magic we use to configure interfaces, and I heck do not care
about where it's called autoblah_foo or zigbangbusheek as none of our
users does, so I'll ignore
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Chuck Swiger cswi...@mac.com wrote:
Hi--
On Apr 8, 2010, at 2:18 PM, krad wrote:
[ ... ]
is that even possible with CDDL?
im not a lawyer but it wouldn't surprise me
I'm not a lawyer either, but I was active in reviewing and suggesting changes
to CDDL
57 matches
Mail list logo
