Re: Bug in make setting wrong MAKESYSPATH

On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 1:54 AM, Thomas Mueller wrote: > I tried building ports, starting with ports-mgmt/synth, on HEAD (12-current) > and ran into difficulties with syntax error in bsd.compiler.mk . > > With PORTSDIR on another partition, mounted as /BETA1, I got these

Re: Bug in make setting wrong MAKESYSPATH

Thomas Mueller wrote: > I tried building ports, starting with ports-mgmt/synth, on HEAD > (12-current) and ran into difficulties with syntax error in > bsd.compiler.mk . > > With PORTSDIR on another partition, mounted as /BETA1, I got these > errors, but not when I

Re: [rfc] breaking out if_ath into ... lots of modules

On 22 May 2017 at 13:17, John Baldwin wrote: > Why not have if_ath.ko just be a wrapper module that depends on everything > like dtraceall.ko? That would let 'kldload if_ath' and the auto-loading > code in ifconfig still DTRT. You could name the "only the driver" module >

Re: [rfc] breaking out if_ath into ... lots of modules

On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 2:17 PM, John Baldwin wrote: > On Monday, May 22, 2017 12:29:15 PM Adrian Chadd wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I've been putting this off for a few years, but now I've reached a > > point where I kind of need to do this. > > > > The TL;DR is this - I'd like to

Re: [rfc] breaking out if_ath into ... lots of modules

On Monday, May 22, 2017 12:29:15 PM Adrian Chadd wrote: > Hi, > > I've been putting this off for a few years, but now I've reached a > point where I kind of need to do this. > > The TL;DR is this - I'd like to break the ath driver /back/ out into > separate modules, and then have them be

[rfc] breaking out if_ath into ... lots of modules

Hi, I've been putting this off for a few years, but now I've reached a point where I kind of need to do this. The TL;DR is this - I'd like to break the ath driver /back/ out into separate modules, and then have them be run-time loadable. It's part for space savings, and part for the upcoming

Re: Ssh.. can we please have HPN back?

On 23/5/17 12:13 am, Allan Jude wrote: On 2017-05-22 03:50, Julian Elischer wrote: On 22/5/17 2:20 pm, Allan Jude wrote: On 2017-05-18 22:28, Julian Elischer wrote: So after stripping out the HPN version of ssh from our product becasue "it was no longer needed" we dicovered that we were

Re: Ssh.. can we please have HPN back?

On 2017-05-22 03:50, Julian Elischer wrote: > On 22/5/17 2:20 pm, Allan Jude wrote: >> On 2017-05-18 22:28, Julian Elischer wrote: >>> So after stripping out the HPN version of ssh from our product becasue >>> "it was no longer needed" we dicovered that we were premature in >>> doing so. >>>

Re: The futur of the roff toolchain

On 21/5/17 8:57 pm, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: Hi all, [...] No the problem left is documentations available in share/doc. I would like to push them elsewhere. Those documents are mostly useful for historical reason (hence we want to keep them) but not really for daily use of modern FreeBSD.

Re: Shutter: gnome-vfs-2.0/modules/libfile.so: Undefined symbol "ih_startup"

On Mon, 22 May 2017 13:20:50 +0100 Graham Perrin wrote: > for FreeBSD > 9.2-RELEASE-p10 offers a patch for devel/gnome-vfs, the maintainer has tested > it with Shutter and it "works fine". > > I applied the

Shutter: gnome-vfs-2.0/modules/libfile.so: Undefined symbol "ih_startup"

for FreeBSD 9.2-RELEASE-p10 offers a patch for devel/gnome-vfs, the maintainer has tested it with Shutter and it "works fine". I applied the patch with FreeBSD 12.0-CURRENT #0 r317181, installed gnome-vfs from ports then used pkg

Re: Problem with re(4) Ethernet driver has resurfaced in 11-STABLE and HEAD

from O. Hartmann: > Just for my curiosity: do you have "options FLOWTABLE" defined in your kernel > config? I was not even aware of "options FLOWTABLE", having not seen it in GENERIC kernel config. I had to look in $SRCDIR/sys/conf/NOTES to find it. What would I get by adding "options

Re: Ssh.. can we please have HPN back?

On 22/5/17 2:20 pm, Allan Jude wrote: On 2017-05-18 22:28, Julian Elischer wrote: So after stripping out the HPN version of ssh from our product becasue "it was no longer needed" we dicovered that we were premature in doing so. Apparently ssh still really needs HPN to get any throughput at all

Re: Ssh.. can we please have HPN back?

On 2017-05-18 22:28, Julian Elischer wrote: > So after stripping out the HPN version of ssh from our product becasue > "it was no longer needed" we dicovered that we were premature in doing so. > Apparently ssh still really needs HPN to get any throughput at all when > there are latencies