Re: Using TMPFS for /tmp and /var/run?

2012-03-31 Thread Matthias Andree
Am 29.03.2012 22:52, schrieb Eric van Gyzen: Respectfully, no. The default is to store /tmp in UFS, either in its own partition (with Auto Defaults) or in / (if no partition was created for it), and to refrain from clearing it at boot. Thus, although /tmp is not guaranteed to persist in

Re: Using TMPFS for /tmp and /var/run?

2012-03-31 Thread Matthias Andree
Am 30.03.2012 21:36, schrieb Adrian Chadd: Let me tell you a story. Someone decided that ext4 could have a decent speed up if it implemented the posix standard for not flushing files on close(). After all, if you needed it to be guaranteed to be written to disk, you would call a flush

[head tinderbox] failure on i386/i386

2012-03-31 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2012-03-31 01:00:00 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca TB --- 2012-03-31 01:00:00 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for i386/i386 TB --- 2012-03-31 01:00:00 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2012-03-31 01:00:00 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2012-03-31 01:00:00 -

Re: Using TMPFS for /tmp and /var/run?

2012-03-31 Thread Matthew Seaman
On 31/03/2012 03:05, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: P.S. I am somewhat unconvinced by this: http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/RunDirectory Those who do not understand /var are condemned to reinvent it? -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey signature.asc

Re: USB Flash drive problem with 9.0

2012-03-31 Thread Alexander Motin
On 03/31/12 07:57, Kaho Toshikazu wrote: Could you collect more information about what's exactly happens with the device? Can you execute some camcontrol inquiry or camcontrol readcap commands after kernel misdetected size with READ CAPACITY(16)? If yes (device is still alive), could you run

Re: USB Flash drive problem with 9.0

2012-03-31 Thread Kaho Toshikazu
Hello Alexander Motin, Your patch solves the problem. Thank you. -- Kaho Toshikazu On 03/31/12 07:57, Kaho Toshikazu wrote: Could you collect more information about what's exactly happens with the device? Can you execute some camcontrol inquiry or camcontrol readcap commands after

[head tinderbox] failure on i386/pc98

2012-03-31 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2012-03-31 08:40:00 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca TB --- 2012-03-31 08:40:00 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for i386/pc98 TB --- 2012-03-31 08:40:00 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2012-03-31 08:43:18 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2012-03-31 08:43:18 -

Re: USB Flash drive problem with 9.0

2012-03-31 Thread Alexander Motin
On 03/31/12 13:40, Kaho Toshikazu wrote: Your patch solves the problem. Thank you. Committed to HEAD at r233746. On 03/31/12 07:57, Kaho Toshikazu wrote: Could you collect more information about what's exactly happens with the device? Can you execute some camcontrol inquiry or camcontrol

[head tinderbox] failure on mips/mips

2012-03-31 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2012-03-31 10:59:51 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca TB --- 2012-03-31 10:59:51 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for mips/mips TB --- 2012-03-31 10:59:51 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2012-03-31 11:00:55 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2012-03-31 11:00:55 -

[head tinderbox] failure on ia64/ia64

2012-03-31 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2012-03-31 10:57:02 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca TB --- 2012-03-31 10:57:02 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for ia64/ia64 TB --- 2012-03-31 10:57:02 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2012-03-31 10:58:28 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2012-03-31 10:58:28 -

HEADSUP: Call for FreeBSD Status Reports - 1Q/2012

2012-03-31 Thread Daniel Gerzo
Dear all, I would like to remind you that the next round of status reports covering the first quarter of 2012 are due on April 15th, 2012. As this initiative is very popular among our users, I would like to ask you to submit your entry as soon as possible, so that we can compile the report in

[head tinderbox] failure on i386/i386

2012-03-31 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2012-03-31 08:40:00 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca TB --- 2012-03-31 08:40:00 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for i386/i386 TB --- 2012-03-31 08:40:00 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2012-03-31 08:47:21 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2012-03-31 08:47:21 -

Re: projects/mfi_head to -current next week

2012-03-31 Thread Doug Ambrisko
Alex Keda writes: | On 16.03.2012 19:39, Doug Ambrisko wrote: | Hi folks, | | I'd like to start merging mfi(4) from projects/head_mfi into -current | next week. The mfi(4) driver is stable and I don't know of any issues | with it now. I fixed a few issues that I knew of this past week.

[head tinderbox] failure on i386/pc98

2012-03-31 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2012-03-31 16:20:01 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca TB --- 2012-03-31 16:20:01 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for i386/pc98 TB --- 2012-03-31 16:20:01 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2012-03-31 16:23:32 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2012-03-31 16:23:32 -

[head tinderbox] failure on mips/mips

2012-03-31 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2012-03-31 18:34:49 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca TB --- 2012-03-31 18:34:49 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for mips/mips TB --- 2012-03-31 18:34:49 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2012-03-31 18:35:47 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2012-03-31 18:35:47 -

Re: rctl limit cpu

2012-03-31 Thread Edward Tomasz NapieraƂa
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 04:30:33PM +0400, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 09:32:49PM +0200, Edward Tomasz Napiera?a wrote: Wiadomo?? napisana przez Alexander Pyhalov w dniu 26 lip 2011, o godz. 15:32: Hello. I see in rctl man page, that I can limit cpu time in

[head tinderbox] failure on ia64/ia64

2012-03-31 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2012-03-31 18:31:45 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca TB --- 2012-03-31 18:31:45 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for ia64/ia64 TB --- 2012-03-31 18:31:45 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2012-03-31 18:33:29 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2012-03-31 18:33:29 -

[head tinderbox] failure on i386/i386

2012-03-31 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2012-03-31 16:20:01 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca TB --- 2012-03-31 16:20:01 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for i386/i386 TB --- 2012-03-31 16:20:01 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2012-03-31 16:27:40 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2012-03-31 16:27:40 -

[head tinderbox] failure on i386/pc98

2012-03-31 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2012-03-31 23:50:00 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca TB --- 2012-03-31 23:50:00 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for i386/pc98 TB --- 2012-03-31 23:50:00 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2012-03-31 23:53:09 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2012-03-31 23:53:09 -

Python won't build?

2012-03-31 Thread John Nielsen
I updated a machine yesterday from 9-STABLE to 10-CURRENT (r233631). Everything went smoothly with the update itself, but I ran in to an issue with Python when rebuilding all of my installed ports. Python won't build; it complains about the definition of LONG_BIT. I had python27 installed but

[head tinderbox] failure on mips/mips

2012-03-31 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2012-04-01 02:06:41 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca TB --- 2012-04-01 02:06:41 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for mips/mips TB --- 2012-04-01 02:06:41 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2012-04-01 02:07:47 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2012-04-01 02:07:47 -

[head tinderbox] failure on ia64/ia64

2012-03-31 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2012-04-01 02:03:14 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca TB --- 2012-04-01 02:03:14 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for ia64/ia64 TB --- 2012-04-01 02:03:14 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2012-04-01 02:04:34 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2012-04-01 02:04:34 -