At 11:31 AM +0930 10/8/02, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> > "install -C" doesn't change the timestamp, so you'll have tons of
>> files that are older than "some file in the build tree".
>
>What does the last access timestamp look like after install -C?
What does the last-access timestamp look lik
At 11:29 AM +0930 10/8/02, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>On Monday, 7 October 2002 at 21:57:28 -0400, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> > How about for each directory, if there are old files found in the
>> directory then create a ".OLDINSTALL" sub-directory, and mov
At 10:55 AM +0930 10/8/02, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>On Monday, 7 October 2002 at 21:18:10 -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> > On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> >> On Monday, 7 October 2002 at 20:07:37 -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> >>> I don't think doing this by default is a g
At 9:16 AM +0930 10/8/02, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>On Monday, 7 October 2002, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> > I think that we need a mtree.obsolete that goes through and deletes
>> these sorts of things as part of installworld/upgrade scripts.
>
>I think we can greatly simplify things with one fir
At 9:37 AM +0800 10/6/02, suken woo wrote:
>hi,all:
>getting the following error messages during rpm. thanks any info.
>===> Building for rpm-3.0.6_6
>gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/ports/archivers/rpm/work/rpm-3.0.6'
>gmake: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2
>*** Error code 2
>
>Stop in /usr/po
At 9:02 PM +0200 10/4/02, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>There are numerous architectural issues which have never been
>fixed in vinum, and one or more of these bits now.
>
>Whoever loves vinum will have to chase it/them down and fix it.
>
>If I receive patches or requests for changes to GEOM as result
At 5:56 PM +0300 10/4/02, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
>Hi there!
>
>I'd like to rename src/lib/libexpat to src/lib/libbsdxml.
>The reason I think it should be done is the output of the
>following command (libpam not being an exception here):
>
>cd src/lib; for dir in lib*; do [ "$dir" != "lib`cd $dir; m
At 9:37 AM -0400 10/3/02, Matthew Emmerton wrote:
> > Garance A Drosihnwrites:
>>
>> >I think it would be very prudent that any base-system expat have
> > >it's own name, even if it's just "expat2fb".
> >
>> It sounds to me like this sums it up nicely. The thing about it
>> I like is that i
At 2:28 PM +0200 10/2/02, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
>We're at a lucky moment in time, where there's only one version of
>expat in the ports tree. But think about what happens when there
>are two mainstream versions at large again.
>
>Please let's learn from past mistakes and give this library a
>compl
At 10:22 AM +0100 9/26/02, Mark Murray wrote:
>Hi
>
>The attached patch gets done by me any time I set up a FreeBSD
>box (I like lots of VTYs and X on ALT-F12).
>
>Any objections to my committing this?
I think the we will have more users who are hurt (or at least
annoyed) by moving X, then we hav
At 6:02 PM -0400 9/24/02, Garrett Wollman wrote:
>< said:
>
> > When's the first time the FreeBSD sort(1) man page mentioned that
> > this syntax was deprecated? Can we at least start from there?
>
>It does not appear to have ever been properly documented.
>
>I don't object to maintaining backw
At 12:58 AM -0700 9/5/02, walt wrote:
>cc -O -pipe -mcpu=pentiumpro-c /usr/src/usr.bin/gcore/elfcore.c
>/usr/src/usr.bin/gcore/elfcore.c: In function `elf_coredump':
>/usr/src/usr.bin/gcore/elfcore.c:128: syntax error before "nleft"
>/usr/src/usr.bin/gcore/elfcore.c:131: `nleft' undeclared (fi
At 4:59 PM -0400 9/2/02, Mikhail Teterin wrote:
>On Sunday 01 September 2002 05:58 pm, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
>= GCC 3.2.1-pre is now in the tree. Please let me know if you
>= see any problems recompiling your world/kernel.
>=
>= Remember to recompile your C++ ports. GCC 3.2 is not binary
>= comp
At 1:36 PM -0400 8/15/02, Robert Watson wrote:
>Someone needs to restructure the driver to match some our other
>pseudo-device drivers where the device is properly created as
>part of module initialization. If fixed this and other things
>locally at one point on my notebook, but eventually got
>s
At 7:18 PM + 7/29/02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I cvsup'd on Friday of last week, after I restored /usr. Did
>the fix come later than that? I'm kind of afraid to try it
>again :) Thanks, Rob.
The fix in question was to -stable, not -current (I am not sure
if that was mentioned earlier).
At 6:43 PM -0700 7/26/02, karl agee wrote:
>system: 5.0-current.
>
>trying to print to a post script laser printer which works fine
>in the past. setup using apsfilter.
>
>When I attempt to print any file from any program the desktop
>locks up then the system reboots. why?
Try copying a postsc
At 12:01 PM +0200 7/26/02, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
>Erik Greenwald wrote:
>>speaking of, is there any good way to automatically eliminate old
>>unnecessary parts of the base?
>
>>should there be one? :)
>
>An increasing number of people seem to believe that and there has
>been some discussion la
At 7:53 PM -0600 7/17/02, Eric Anholt wrote:
>On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 18:40, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>
> > XDM generally did still seem to come up okay, although occasionally
> > the system would panic right at that initial XDM startup. While
> > I tried a few thing
I just thought I'd mention a little problem I ran into, because I had
not seen anyone else mention it. It might be specific to my PC
hardware, and actually it was pretty simple to solve once I took
the time to look into it. I don't know that anything needs to be
done about any of this, but perha
At 11:42 PM +0200 7/17/02, John Angelmo wrote:
>John Baldwin wrote:
>>Hey all (ab)users of -current. Please try to work on getting -current
>>as stabilized as possible in the next few days and hold off on any
>>large changes until after re@ creates the Perforce branch for DP2 on
>>Friday.
>
>Well
At 7:27 PM -0600 7/16/02, Eric Anholt wrote:
>It notably doesn't include md5summing of Wraphelp.c. If I can
>find what's the 'best' Wraphelp.c (and most legal? What's the
>status of wraphelp importing/exporting?), I'll switch it. Is
>there any circumstance when someone wouldn't have access to
>
At 12:04 PM +0200 7/16/02, John Angelmo wrote:
>Hello
>
>I erased my /usr/ports just to be sure that all the different
>patches out, then cvsuped to get the latest version, to my
>disappointment XFree86-4 Still dosn't build under Current, I
>still got the same perl error in fonts, the perl port is
At 12:42 PM +0100 7/6/02, Paul Richards wrote:
>On Sat, 2002-07-06 at 03:46, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>> At 3:05 AM +0100 7/6/02, Paul Richards wrote:
>> >Let's start with a premise: No-one running current is using
>> >it for anything other than developing FreeB
At 3:05 AM +0100 7/6/02, Paul Richards wrote:
>Let's start with a premise: No-one running current is using
>it for anything other than developing FreeBSD.
This is assumption is too limiting.
People running -current are doing it to test the latest builds.
What they *do* to test it is their busine
At 3:33 PM -0700 7/5/02, Terry Lambert wrote:
>
>So, to summarize:
>
Let me summarize my own position.
There are a number of files which installworld does install. After
an installworld is done, there may be a number of files on a person's
hard disk which were not put there by the most recent i
At 11:16 AM +0100 7/5/02, Paul Richards wrote:
>On Fri, 2002-07-05 at 10:52, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> > On (2002/07/05 10:45), Paul Richards wrote:
> > > I'd like to resurrect it's original meaning and add code
> > > to clean out old versions of Perl.
> >
> > This would not fit in with the rest
At 8:07 PM +0200 7/3/02, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
>Yes, remember that you're building the MATROX stuff, which I'm not.
Yes, I should have mentioned that. Is Maxim compiling the matrox
drivers? Perhaps I should retry without those.
>Also, remember that my patches were for the base system's toolchai
At 10:38 AM -0700 7/3/02, Terry Lambert wrote:
>Julian Elischer wrote:
>> TAILQ_FOREACH_REMOVABLE or TAILQ_FOREACH_SAFE
>> (I prefer the first) are my suggestions for the name.)
>
>TAILQ_FOREACH_MODIFY ?
I sense great material for a bikeshed... :-)
For mine, how about: TAILQ_FOREACH_VOLATI
At 9:27 AM -0700 7/3/02, David O'Brien wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 03, 2002, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> > Sheldon has a few informative messages which include
> > some patches to test. (although I don't think the patches
>> are a complete fix for the problems we
At 5:26 PM +0300 7/3/02, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I am trying to upgrade installed XFree86-4-Server package,
>but found that a new gcc can't compile it. Following is
>relevant error output:
[...skipped...]
>Please investigate & fix.
Some information is in the email-thread under the subje
At 4:00 AM -0400 7/3/02, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>I started up XDM, and that also worked. Not only that, but my
>machine didn't instantly reboot when XDM started, which had been
>happening to me for the last few days...
Bah humbug. I went to log into XDM, and the machine sat th
At 3:18 AM -0400 7/3/02, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>At 4:57 PM +0200 6/26/02, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
>>c) ports/x11-servers/XFree86-4-Server:
>>
>>Add the attached patch-gcc31, taken from Motoyuki Konno's post to
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with the fo
At 4:57 PM +0200 6/26/02, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
>Here's what I did to get XFree86-4 to build with the base system's
>toolchain in -CURRENT:
I thought I'd try this out. Before starting, I did a cvsup of
all my ports tree.
>a) ports/devel/imake-4:
>
>Replace files/patch-d and files/patch-xthre
At 11:01 PM -0700 7/2/02, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> I get just about the same performance for GCC2 as I
> do for GCC3 in the tests I've run so far. It makes
> me wonder what the hell GCC3 is burning all that
> cpu *on*.
One of the guys here at RPI (dec, actually) claims he got
buil
At 4:57 PM +0200 6/26/02, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
>Here's what I did to get XFree86-4 to build with the base system's
>toolchain in -CURRENT:
>
>a) ports/devel/imake-4:
>
>Replace files/patch-d and files/patch-xthreads with the attached
>patch-config::cf::FreeBSD.cf.
>
>Add the attached p
At 5:37 AM -0700 6/29/02, Juli Mallett wrote:
>I get identical output from dumpfs and libufs-dumpfs currently
>and I can toggle softdep flags fine with tunefs. I'd like to
>commit this by the coming Tuesday as I will be out of town
>from Tuesday morning and will not have any way to further
>work
At 12:48 PM +0200 6/9/02, Anton Berezin wrote:
>On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 02:14:09PM -0400, Trish Lynch wrote:
>
> > Anton, if you don;t get around to it this weekend, mind
> > if I take a stab at it?
>
>No, I don't mind at all. If only we can agree who does what. :-(
RPI has been running with
At 7:02 PM +0300 5/22/02, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
>The upgrade instructions found in src/UPDATING and src/Makefile.inc1
>are not quite correct. Suggesting to reboot with the new kernel
>and non-matching userland is safer than opposite of course, but
>does not always work nor guaranteed to work at a
At 11:18 AM -0700 5/11/02, Julian Elischer wrote:
>seems something broke in the networking side of things using
>host-only networking.. vmnet1 doesn't show up any more..
>
>If I have a moment I'll look for it but if anyone has
>familiarity with it feel free to get there forst..
>
>oh yeah.. it doe
At 6:29 PM -0500 5/9/02, Jordan DeLong wrote:
> > Symlink or redirector, but please not this. :-)
>
>Shouldn't ports *not* touch anything outside of ${PREFIX}?
>I, for one, can't stand when ports do that
>(except /etc/shells -- that's different).
I agree. That's why a redirector makes more sens
At 11:27 PM +0200 4/5/02, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>For the life of me I cannot understand why we feel the
>need to whine like that at any root which crosses our
>way, so unless somebody can explain to me why this is
>vital, I'll commit the following patch.
There are times when it has been useful
At 10:46 PM -0800 3/30/02, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>On Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 05:54:36PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 06:43:13PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> > > No. This isn't something that is guaranteed to work per
> > > the standards, iirc. The proper fix is to put
At 6:36 AM +0100 3/26/02, Mark Santcroos wrote:
>Currently rebuilding with latest sources, will look into
>it after that.
Whatever the problem had been, it looks like it was fixed
between March 23 and today (the 26th). I did a buildworld
as of 4pm or so, and vmware2 is up and running OK on the
m
At 4:34 PM -0800 3/23/02, David wrote:
>On Sat, Mar 23, 2002 at 05:23:35PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> >
> > I think we should keep AJ enabled until at least DP2. It has
> > found bugs in the past, and I suspect that a lot of new code
> > is going in between now and then.
>
>Robert Watson
I've just upgraded my i386-current box from about March 13 to
a snapshot from late last night. Now when I run vmware, the
vmware program dies with:
VMware Workstation PANIC: BUG F(571):1607 bugNr=2302
when I try to "Power on" some virtual machine. When I got in
today, I cvsup'ed again, rem
At 2:54 PM -0600 3/23/02, Jim Bryant wrote:
>last cvsup, less than an hour ago.
>
>
I started with an empty obj-tree, and I ended up with an error
from make being unable to make smbus.h
In my case, I just reversed the change which made version 1.3 of:
http://www.freebsd.
At 10:36 PM -0800 3/17/02, whoever wrote:
>Hi,
> I updated to current 5.0
>several weeks back and just noticed that
>the utmp logging for people users logged
>in is missing. [...] All the listings in
>last are also incomplete.
>The last login entry for any ttyv* is the
>last day I ran 4.4 s
At 8:35 AM -0800 3/17/02, David O'Brien wrote:
>My earlier concerns about the use of Perforce were when a developers
>expected other developers to use Perforce for _shared_ development.
>Or that tried to claim that their code was "published" if it was
>in the Perforce depot on Freefall.
Exactly m
At 1:15 AM -0800 3/17/02, Murray Stokely wrote:
>On Sun, Mar 17, 2002 at 01:08:43AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
>> Minimally, pick a date, and then do a CVS diff against that
>> date, and include it on the CDROM.
>
> I would be happy to do this. I checked out a copy of the CVS tree
>right bef
At 2:17 PM -0500 3/15/02, Robert Watson wrote:
>My feeling is that at this point, we probably should just use
>Perforce due to limitations in CVS.
This seems fine to me. I am uneasy about perforce in cases
where someone is developing something which is *meant* to be
merged back into the main bra
At 6:32 PM -0600 3/8/02, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
> > Try compiling KDE after installing a world with the
> > following patch applied:
> > http://people.FreeBSD.org/~mike/patches/endian-ng3.diff
>>
> > I plan on committing this on Sunday.
>
>I don't know if its related to this patch, but I
>On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Murray Stokely wrote:
> >As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed
> > to releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT
> > on or around April 1, 2002.
Will this release include some kind of bootable-install support
for any new hardware p
One thing to keep in mind here is that this is still going to be
a snapshot of -current, and not a production release of -stable.
We want a snapshot that does not have any serious problems, but
"innocent users" should still realize that there are definitely
going to be a lot of loose ends and roug
At 4:57 AM +1100 3/9/02, Bruce Evans wrote:
>I'm surprised that everyone hasn't complained about world breakage
>from this. It has been broken for almost 2 weeks now. Everything
>that goes near ntohl and has WARNS >= 2 fails to compile. Without
>WARNS, the bug is reported as above, but a bogus
At 10:17 AM -0600 3/8/02, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
>Yes. Recent changes to netinet/in.h have made it require the
>inclusion of arpa/inet.h. As well, arpa/inet.h must include
>netinet/in.h. IOW, each of these files must #include the
>other in order to work correctly.
>
>As you might guess, this
At 7:04 PM -0800 3/7/02, Matthew Dillon wrote:
>:Bruce also had some comments which were shrugged off, I thought they
>:were important. Specifically, please do not make unnecessary changes
>:to the assembler code. Macros do not need to be defined before they
>:are used, I believe this was the ju
At 5:43 PM +0200 3/7/02, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
>"Michael D. Harnois" wrote:
> > Could this have anything to do with the fact that, since I built
> > world yesterday, I can't log in as root?
>
>Bah, just completed `make world' after doing `make includes' and
>found that I can't login as *any* user
At 9:25 PM +0300 3/7/02, Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
> fix is incomplete because 'u_int32_t' is not defined
>(but must be) for standalone . Please add some includes
>for u_int32_t definition too, probably
As a minor side question, should we also have that defined as
uint32_t instead of u_int32_t ?
At 1:15 PM -0800 3/6/02, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> This has been broken for several days now, maybe longer. It
> would be nice if whoever broke it would fix it.
Is this in a 'make buildworld' step? I just did one buildworld
on i386, and it completed fine (src is cvsup'ed as of about noon)
At 1:27 PM -0800 2/27/02, Julian Elischer wrote:
>There are saveral places (e.g. if_ie.c) where data
>is copied out of a buffer that is shared with the hardware.
>
>The pointer to this is correctly labelled as "volatile", though
>at the time we will copy the data out we know it to be stable.
Note
At 6:48 PM -0800 2/26/02, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 10:00:52AM -0500, Kevin Way wrote:
>
>> I, for one, lost interest in doing the work when I realized I was
>> receiving, quite literally, 5 times more complaints than combined
>> patches, constructive criticism or positive f
At 7:27 PM -0800 2/26/02, Julian Elischer wrote:
>On Tue, 26 Feb 2002, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>
>> That would be me...
>>
> > I meant "lock" in the sense of expecting no one to make any
> > major changes in the same area of code. I seem to remember
&
At 6:55 PM -0800 2/26/02, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > (1) The timeout begins when contention occurs, of the lock has been
>> declared. This means that if you seriously intend to do some work,
>> you can say "I'm going to do the work", but you don't risk losing the
>> lock until som
At 4:53 PM -0500 2/26/02, Robert Watson wrote:
>The purpose of this message is to initiate a serious discussion
>of what guidelines might be put in place to help facilitate the
>use of additional version control mechanisms [...]. I've mixed
>in some suggested things to think about as possible ans
At 1:00 AM -0800 2/24/02, Julian Elischer wrote:
>On Sat, 23 Feb 2002, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> > It is working fairly well for me too, on a dual-pentium machine.
>> I can't get vmware2 working, but most of everything else that I
>> do is working, and I'm
At 6:24 PM +0100 2/23/02, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
>Thumbs up and big cheers to all of you (well, us) guys working on
>-CURRENT. It's pretty stable and has been for a while now - and
>even on my poor old 350 MHz K6-2, it performs well enough to make
>a kickass desktop & development platform. L
At 9:00 PM -0500 2/21/02, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>At 1:08 PM -0500 2/19/02, Michael Lucas wrote:
>>In an ideal world, you're correct.
>>
>>The real question here should have been: do those people who
>>are actively committing rapidly to the tree want to see thi
At 1:08 PM -0500 2/19/02, Michael Lucas wrote:
>In an ideal world, you're correct.
>
>The real question here should have been: do those people who
>are actively committing rapidly to the tree want to see this
>happen? They are the people who will realistically have to
>deal with the PRs.
This is
With 4.5-release out the door, I thought I'd start trying to use
5.0-current on my "main freebsd machine" instead of 4.x-stable. I
figure at some point we (as developers) have got to try to migrate
to that release as much as possible.
I had been doing some stuff with 5.0-current at home. That s
At 12:10 AM -0500 2/6/02, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>One simple test I tried was that I have a copy of the freebsd cvs
>repository in /usr/cvs/free, on it's own partition. Each system
>has it's own /usr/src, of course. I cvsup'ed /usr/cvs/free, and
>then did a
>
At 5:23 PM -0800 2/6/02, Joe Kelsey wrote:
>It is plain that many people will want to be able to install a
>version of gcc that is officially supported and that also
>includes *all* of the standard platforms that come as part of
>the gcc release.
This line of reasoning does not scale up well.
It
At 12:10 AM -0500 2/6/02, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>One simple test I tried was that I have a copy of the freebsd cvs
>repository in /usr/cvs/free, on it's own partition. Each system
>has it's own /usr/src, of course. I cvsup'ed /usr/cvs/free, and
>then did a
>
At 9:13 AM -0800 2/6/02, David O'Brien wrote:
>On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 01:02:34AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
>> WITNESS can really hurt. Quite possibly I should turn it off in
>> GENERIC now (I wouldn't mind if someone else did that.)
>
>I think it should stay. Especially as we are not getting
At 11:54 PM -0500 2/5/02, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>At 8:08 PM -0800 2/5/02, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>>All David has to do is set WARNS=0 or NO_WERROR=1 in or
>>/etc/defaults/make.conf temporarily when he tests and commits the
>>changeover, and he'll sidestep all the p
With 4.5-release out the door, I thought I'd start trying to use
5.0-current on my "main freebsd machine" instead of 4.x-stable. I
figure at some point we (as developers) have got to try to migrate
to that release as much as possible.
I had been doing some stuff with 5.0-current at home. That s
At 8:08 PM -0800 2/5/02, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>On Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 10:12:15PM -0500, Jeroen C.van Gelderen wrote:
>
>> David is about to switch to GCC 3.0 and I guess he does not like moving
>> targets. I would expect that for the GCC 4.0 upgrade a similar freeze
> > request will go out. An
At 10:56 PM -0700 2/1/02, M. Warner Losh wrote:
>Actually, there's a simple way around this that is failsafe.
>
>firewall_enable=YES What it deos now
> =NOWide open
> =FAILSAFE Defaults to wired down.
>
>/etc/defaults/rc.conf
>
>firewall_enable=FAILSAFE
At 4:52 PM -0500 2/1/02, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>It *is* reasonable for them to assume the same
>behavior would be true for network_enable=no.
I meant "firewall_enable=no" here! If the option *was* called
"network_enable=no", then it would be VERY reasonable t
At 5:16 PM -0500 2/1/02, Benjamin P. Grubin wrote:
> > I understand the first "error" (where the machine ends up completely
>> open) is not desirable. It is very very bad. However, I
>> think we can write some code to help out that user. That
>> user is extremely likely to be sitting at the
At 6:36 PM +0100 2/1/02, Erik Trulsson wrote:
>Consider that the actual code in the various rc* start scripts is
>in most cases of the form:
>
>if foo_enable==yes
> do stuff
>else
> do nothing
Let me approach this from a different angle. Several people have
tried to argue this by proposing v
At 6:36 PM +0100 2/1/02, Erik Trulsson wrote:
>Consider that the actual code in the various rc* start scripts is
>in most cases of the form:
>
>if foo_enable==yes
> do stuff
>else
> do nothing
The RC scripts are starting up in a "known" environment (loosely
speaking). Enough is known about t
>Thomas Quinot writes:
>> Currently, when reboot is invoked with the '-p' command line flag
>> (powerdown), it performs a shutdown with RB_HALT|RB_POWEROFF.
>> In some situations, it can be useful to try to perform a poweroff,
>> but reboot if it fails (e.g. when you are shutting down the syst
At 12:43 PM -0700 10/16/01, Brooks Davis wrote:
>I've been trying to get applix 5.0 to work and I've been running into
>some interesting problems. The first one was that current has the
>getresuid syscall and the gtk12 build detects and uses it. Unfortunately
>FreeBSD 3.x and 4.x don't have this
At 1:52 AM +0900 10/3/01, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, 2 Oct 2001 12:30:33 -0400
> >>>>> Garance A Drosihn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>drosih> The print queue for 'lp' on oink refers to a remote machine that
>drosih>
At 2:19 PM +0200 10/1/01, Alexander Langer wrote:
>
>> alex> 15329 ?? S 0:00.02 lpd -4
>> alex> alex@oink ~ $ lpq
> > alex> lpd: Host name for your address
>(fe80::250:baff:fed4:a512%xl0) unknown
>
>I started lpd on this machine: (with the -4 flag, see above).
>alex@oink ~ $ uname -a ;
At 12:57 PM -0700 9/11/01, Julian Elischer wrote:
>The state of the patch is:
>Everything runs except nwfs and smbfs (my head hurts whe I read them)
>
>We will be committing this in the next day or so, as we have really hit
>a dead end as far as how far we can go without doing this.
>
>We expect t
At 5:09 PM -0700 8/27/01, Darryl Okahata wrote:
> Is there some reason why KSE couldn't be integrated
>ASAP *AFTER* 5.0 is released?
>
>[ Personally, I'd like to see it in 5.0, but, with all the qualms that
> people seem to have, I'm curious as to why it can't be integrated
> immediately
At 6:28 PM -0500 8/27/01, Jim Bryant wrote:
>The patches seem relatively benign, and after some basic
>immediate testing, they should be committed to -current.
>That's all I'm trying to say.
Then shut up and help test it. That's what KSE needs,
some people who are willing to help out with the wo
At 6:59 PM -0500 8/27/01, Jim Bryant wrote:
>Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>>What I explicitly said in the above
>>message (and which you explicitly deleted) was that KSE should
>>wait for a later release if the remaining work is not done. If
>>you have some other opinio
At 5:02 PM -0500 8/27/01, Jim Bryant wrote:
>Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>>We can't just keep pushing back the release date because "some
>>very important enhancements" could be made. It will ALWAYS be
>>true that there are more "very important enhanceme
At 2:48 PM -0700 8/27/01, Julian Elischer wrote:
>I don't WANT to commit without more testing and more support for
>the other platforms. However I need support from the people DOING
>those platforms to go further.
>
>I also want more people to try the patches. So far the only problem
>Matt Dillon
At 1:49 PM -0700 8/27/01, Sean Chittenden wrote:
> > > If there are grave concerns about having KSE and SMPng in
> > > 5.X, then why not push back the release date? The value far
> > > outweighs the extra months needed to get it finished and out
> > > the door, ...etc...
> >
>> Good idea
At 10:39 AM -0700 8/27/01, John Baldwin wrote:
>On 27-Aug-01 Daniel Eischen wrote:
> > I think waiting for 6.0-current is too long. Perhaps after 5.0-release.
>> If we get this in 5.0, we might be able to have a usable kse threads
>> library for 5.1 or 5.2.
>
>I'm predicting a short release cy
At 1:23 PM +0200 8/14/01, Johann Visagie wrote:
>You may also want to restrict it so that only interactive login sessions
>cause bash to be invoked. To summarise:
>
> if ( "$tty" != "" ) then
> if ( -x /usr/local/bin/bash ) then
> setenv SHELL /usr/local/bin/bash
> exec /usr/loc
At 12:40 PM -0500 7/31/01, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>* Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010731 12:39] wrote:
> > My only real observation is that with Protocol using (2) by default,
> > my logins to RELENG_4 boxes using RSA key authentication are broken.
>
>The protocol 2,1 thing should not be
At 2:02 AM -0400 7/30/01, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>I will do some tests at home tomorrow morning, and
>let you know how it works out.
In the following:
"gilead" refers to a MacOS 10 machine in my office at work which
is running MacOS 10.0.4 plus an update
At 9:53 PM -0400 7/29/01, Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote:
>I need to know, if OpenSSH is ever going to get MFC'ed, are there any
>people currently running OpenSSH 2.9 from -CURRENT's base and getting
>major problems with it? Or even minor ones that actually make things
>more difficult? [...]
At 12:24 AM -0700 7/19/01, Terry Lambert wrote:
>I guess I need to paint a picture...
I guess we need to just ignore you on this particular topic.
--
Garance Alistair Drosehn= [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Systems Programmer or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rensselaer Polytechnic Instit
At 11:18 PM -0700 7/17/01, Peter Wemm wrote:
>If I had to guess, I'd put the total [genuine] -current userbase
>at between 20 and 50 people. And many of those intentionally lag
>by a few weeks to a month or two.
At the kernel-confab at usenix, I heard some people talking about
how "current wasn'
At 9:40 AM -0700 7/17/01, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>On Tue, Jul 17, 2001, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>
>> Is there some way freebsd could switch base-system components to
>> use libedit, and then turn libreadline into a port for any other
>> ports which need libreadline?
&
101 - 200 of 298 matches
Mail list logo
