On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 11:14:49PM +0200, Hellmuth Michaelis wrote:
> I am really, really astonished: all went smoothly! XFree86-4, the complete
> kde3 (i never managed to compile kde on stable or current before without
> the need to adjust something !), Staroffice52 and vmware all compiled out
>
Kris Kennaway wrote:
> Peter removed the stdio transitional aid for older -current systems.
> This means that older 5.0 libraries are no longer compatible with the
> new 5.0 libc, and you will need to recompile everything that depends
> on them. 4.x applications (i.e. things that link with libc.
Here's my final statement on the subject:
o It's ~20 hours, compressed, ~24 hours uncompressed.
o It's 15 minutes less, for a standard Pacific Bell DSL line,
assuming you get the 500K/second.
o It's 40 minutes out of ~6 hours, for EarthLink or Hughes
Satellite
> Makoto Matsushita wrote:
> > carl> 3.4 hours is a lot of time on a dial-up connection (granted it
> > carl> is not a one size fits all period of time).
> >
> > You forget that you still compressed image with about 30 hours (at
> > least, full 1 day or more), and it is not helpful for ordinal use
carl> I fail to see how a reduction of hours (even just one) is
carl> insignificant to someone on a dial-up connection. Time is money
carl> for some people; even a meager three hours.
Don't you think "30+ hours of time to fetch an ISO image" is _not_
wasting of money?
carl> Again, I fail to se
Makoto Matsushita wrote:
> carl> 3.4 hours is a lot of time on a dial-up connection (granted it
> carl> is not a one size fits all period of time).
>
> You forget that you still compressed image with about 30 hours (at
> least, full 1 day or more), and it is not helpful for ordinal users,
> not y
Makoto Matsushita wrote:
> tlambert2> fetch -o - URL | gunzip > unzipped_image
>
> You fully forgot that all users use FreeBSD.
I can tell you how to do the same thing in Windows, using "helper"
applications with Netscape (winzip), if you need it.
The FTP command I gave works on Linux, AIX
On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 12:45:41PM +0900, Makoto Matsushita wrote:
> carl> 3.4 hours is a lot of time on a dial-up connection (granted it
> carl> is not a one size fits all period of time).
>
> You forget that you still compressed image with about 30 hours (at
> least, full 1 day or more), and it
* De: Makoto Matsushita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [ Data: 2002-10-13 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: HEADS UP: Old port recompiles needed (Re: Unknown symbol
"__sF") ]
>
> carl> 3.4 hours is a lot of time on a dial-up connection (granted it
> carl> is not a one size fit
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 10:40:20PM -0500, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 11:29:32PM -0400, Carl Schmidt wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 11:43:20AM +0900, Makoto Matsushita wrote:
> > > tlambert2> That's 3.4 hours saved on a 28.8K modem download time,
> > > tlambert2> over
carl> 3.4 hours is a lot of time on a dial-up connection (granted it
carl> is not a one size fits all period of time).
You forget that you still compressed image with about 30 hours (at
least, full 1 day or more), and it is not helpful for ordinal users,
not you.
Again, reducing hours/percentag
tlambert2> fetch -o - URL | gunzip > unzipped_image
You fully forgot that all users use FreeBSD.
-- -
Makoto `MAR' Matsushita
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 11:29:32PM -0400, Carl Schmidt wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 11:43:20AM +0900, Makoto Matsushita wrote:
> > tlambert2> That's 3.4 hours saved on a 28.8K modem download time,
> > tlambert2> overall... a 14% reduction in size.
> >
> > The percentage doesn't matter. If I
On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 11:43:20AM +0900, Makoto Matsushita wrote:
> tlambert2> That's 3.4 hours saved on a 28.8K modem download time,
> tlambert2> overall... a 14% reduction in size.
>
> The percentage doesn't matter. If ISO image is compressed, user who
> downloads the image may de-compress t
Makoto Matsushita wrote:
> tlambert2> That's 3.4 hours saved on a 28.8K modem download time,
> tlambert2> overall... a 14% reduction in size.
>
> The percentage doesn't matter. If ISO image is compressed, user who
> downloads the image may de-compress that image to burn (I don't know
> any abou
tlambert2> That's 3.4 hours saved on a 28.8K modem download time,
tlambert2> overall... a 14% reduction in size.
The percentage doesn't matter. If ISO image is compressed, user who
downloads the image may de-compress that image to burn (I don't know
any about the burner softwares which support
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> > Compression gets rid of about 36MB.
>
> How long did that take to compress though?
2 minutes on a P3-800 with 128M of RAM and one IDE disk. Doesn't matter,
because all it really adds is latency.
> What load did the machine that did the compression have? Currently,
Matthew Dillon wrote:
> :% ls -l
> :248643584 Sep 17 00:03 5.0-CURRENT-20020917-JPSNAP.iso
> :212988130 Oct 13 10:39 5.0-CURRENT-20020917-JPSNAP.iso.gz
> :
> :Compression gets rid of about 36MB.
> :
> :That's 3.4 hours saved on a 28.8K modem download time, overall...
> :a 14% reduction in size.
>
On 2002-10-13 14:49, Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> > That's a commonly asked question, and a very good answer is in the FAQ :P
> > There are good reasons why the overworked snapshot servers do not
> > attempt to compress the ISO images, which btw contain mos
:> On 2002-10-13 13:36, Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> > I had upgraded the machine with a snapshot from the Japan snapshot
:> > image server; apparently, no one ever thinks of compressiong ISO's,
:> > so that was at the limit of what I could download. 8-(.
:> >
:> > It may be a goo
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On 2002-10-13 13:36, Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I had upgraded the machine with a snapshot from the Japan snapshot
> > image server; apparently, no one ever thinks of compressiong ISO's,
> > so that was at the limit of what I could download. 8-(.
> >
>
On 2002-10-13 13:36, Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I had upgraded the machine with a snapshot from the Japan snapshot
> image server; apparently, no one ever thinks of compressiong ISO's,
> so that was at the limit of what I could download. 8-(.
>
> It may be a good idea to put this
Peter Wemm wrote:
> Add COMPAT4X=true to your make.conf. We added __stdoutp etc to RELENG_4
> and included it in the last two releases. -current's COMPAT4X stuff
> has the updated libc.so.4 with these symbols.
>
> If you want to run 4.x binaries, you need COMPAT4X=true so that we can
> update t
Terry Lambert wrote:
> Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 04:27:27AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > > Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > > > If you can't deal with having to recompile things over the -current
> > > > development cycle then don't run it.
> > >
> > > Uh, the issue was the upco
Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 04:27:27AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > > If you can't deal with having to recompile things over the -current
> > > development cycle then don't run it.
> >
> > Uh, the issue was the upcoming 5.0 release, which will cause
Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 01:38:12AM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 10:22:48AM +0200, Hellmuth Michaelis wrote:
> > >=20
> > > Had a very bad night after upgrading my main machine from a September-b=
> ased
> > > current to a -current as of yesterday,
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 03:32:14PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 04:27:27AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 04:01:53AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > > > Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > > > > Actually, this should only be requir
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 04:27:27AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 04:01:53AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > > Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > > > Actually, this should only be required for old ports (older than some
> > > > date which I don't know off-hand)
Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 04:01:53AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > > Actually, this should only be required for old ports (older than some
> > > date which I don't know off-hand). It might be easier to just rebuild
> > > everything though.
> >
> > Th
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 04:01:53AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > Actually, this should only be required for old ports (older than some
> > date which I don't know off-hand). It might be easier to just rebuild
> > everything though.
>
> This would be OK, if the X11 package
On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > Actually, this should only be required for old ports (older than some
> > date which I don't know off-hand). It might be easier to just rebuild
> > everything though.
>
> This would be OK, if the X11 package came from the FreeBS
Kris Kennaway wrote:
> Actually, this should only be required for old ports (older than some
> date which I don't know off-hand). It might be easier to just rebuild
> everything though.
This would be OK, if the X11 package came from the FreeBSD source
tree, instead of just as a binary on the CDRO
Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 10:22:48AM +0200, Hellmuth Michaelis wrote:
> > Had a very bad night after upgrading my main machine from a September-based
> > current to a -current as of yesterday, for many, many of the programs
> > running on that machine i got an error message lik
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 01:38:12AM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 10:22:48AM +0200, Hellmuth Michaelis wrote:
> >
> > Had a very bad night after upgrading my main machine from a September-based
> > current to a -current as of yesterday, for many, many of the programs
> > run
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 10:22:48AM +0200, Hellmuth Michaelis wrote:
>
> Had a very bad night after upgrading my main machine from a September-based
> current to a -current as of yesterday, for many, many of the programs
> running on that machine i got an error message like
Peter removed the stdio
Had a very bad night after upgrading my main machine from a September-based
current to a -current as of yesterday, for many, many of the programs
running on that machine i got an error message like
/usr/libexec/ld-elf.so.1: . Unknown symbol "__sF"
which somehow came from th
36 matches
Mail list logo
