On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 09:37:52 +0300, Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 14:19:13 +0900, Makoto MATSUSHITA wrote:
Our strptime(3) implementation distinguishs '%A' and '%a', just like
strftime(3) does. However, the Single UNIX Specification v2 doesn't
Upgrade your
Hello
There seems to be a littel error in atacontrol.c
I sugesst:
diff -r1.3 atacontrol.c
78a79
exit(1);
133a135,136
if (argc == 1)
usage();
Best Regards
Michael Kirstein
--
Sent through GMX FreeMail - http://www.gmx.net
To Unsubscribe: send mail to
It seems Michael Kirstein wrote:
Hello
There seems to be a littel error in atacontrol.c
I sugesst:
diff -r1.3 atacontrol.c
78a79
exit(1);
133a135,136
if (argc == 1)
usage();
Fixes are underways...
-Sren
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL
According to Brooks Davis:
I'm seeing a very strange problem with ps. I was calling "ps -U
Speaking of ps, since we moved into SMPng, almost all processes seems to have
the 'D' state... I guess it is expected but a little strange, no?
388 [13:28] roberto@sidhe:~ ps aux
USER PID %CPU %MEM
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mike Smith writes:
I don't quite understand Paul's reasoning, though; it's not actually
useful to unload/reload parts of a device's bus attachment without
unloading/reloading all the downstream parts of the driver.
I think the fix should probably be committed and
ache Fix already commited in -current strptime.c v1.23 and not yet in
ache -stable.
Very glad to hear that, thank you.
We are in a freeze stage, but are there any chances to merge this into
4-stable... ah, maybe I'm dreamin' :-)
-- -
Makoto `MAR' MATSUSHITA
To Unsubscribe: send mail to
I finally caught a backtrace from one of those recurring stack smash
panics. I've been getting a few of these every day for a couple of
weeks now but never caught a dump; I caught this one by typing 'panic'
immediately instead of trying to get a trace at the ddb prompt first.
These panics
This was completely untested by us, and is not guaranteed to work! I think
you were lucky. We move and change blocks on the filesystem, during some
time the filesystem is NOT consitent, so if one of those files is accessed than
you might run into a panic.
Sorry? In single user with a
On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 04:41:03PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
I finally caught a backtrace from one of those recurring stack smash
panics. I've been getting a few of these every day for a couple of
weeks now but never caught a dump; I caught this one by typing 'panic'
immediately
Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 16:41:03, des (Dag-Erling Smorgrav) wrote about "Interesting
backtrace...":
I finally caught a backtrace from one of those recurring stack smash
panics. I've been getting a few of these every day for a couple of
weeks now but never caught a dump; I caught this one by
Ian Dowse wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mike Smith writes:
I don't quite understand Paul's reasoning, though; it's not actually
useful to unload/reload parts of a device's bus attachment without
unloading/reloading all the downstream parts of the driver.
What do you mean by the
Hi Doug and all others.
here is a first version of the MD5 mergemaster. It works like this:
No checksum in existing /etc file
-
- If a installed version of a /etc file is the same as the temproot
version, we add a md5 checksum to the cvs-header of the file
Valentin Nechayev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I did not reported them yet because of lack of understanding
what's happen because pmap_zero_page() call is occured in vm_fault()
without this call in source code ;|
It's called by vm_page_zero_fill() which is inlined and therefore
doesn't show up
Ian Dowse wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mike Smith writes:
I don't quite understand Paul's reasoning, though; it's not actually
useful to unload/reload parts of a device's bus attachment without
unloading/reloading all the downstream parts of the driver.
What do you mean
Doug,
Database access in a shell script ? Tell me how to do this and
I'll do. Else I'll rewrite mergemaster in perl.
Yes - I think this is a good idea, shell-scripts just suck !
And mergemaster is badly formatted too, it's not easy to programm
like this (yes I know the formatting is needed to
Verbose boot log as requested.
Copyright (c) 1992-2001 The FreeBSD Project.
Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994
The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.
FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT #63: Sun Mar 18 22:21:49 CET 2001
[EMAIL
Andrea Campi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sorry? In single user with a readonly / and nothing else? I would have to be
EXTREMELY unlucky to get any other access while the fs is inconsistent ;-)
Just because you dropped to single-user mode (from multi-user, as I
recall from your previous mail)
On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 10:41:20PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Andrea Campi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sorry? In single user with a readonly / and nothing else? I would have to be
EXTREMELY unlucky to get any other access while the fs is inconsistent ;-)
Just because you dropped to
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andrea Campi writes:
Anyway, that was not my point. If I reboot into single-user, and am thus sure
to have the / fs in a clean, consistent state, should I expect growfs to work
in a safe way? If so, we should document it.
I think it is still unlikely to be
Andrea Campi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I didn't state it explicitely but yes, I dropped to single user from
multi user, remounted / to ro, fsck'ed it.
Don't do that. It doesn't work the way it's supposed to.
I only did this because I
must confess
On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 04:41:03PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
I finally caught a backtrace from one of those recurring stack smash
panics. I've been getting a few of these every day for a couple of
weeks now but never caught a dump; I caught this one by typing 'panic'
immediately
Pascal Hofstee [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
With a CURRENT build/installworld from yesterday ... i get a VERY unstable
system that page faults under the slightest CPU load (e.g. playing MP3's)
What kind of CPU?
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL
On Sun, 18 Mar 2001, David Malone wrote:
Presumably what is happening is i586_bzero begins and finds that
PCPU(NPXPROC) is not zero, so it decides to preserve the fpu
registers. Then something interrupts it, but doesn't restore
PCPU(NPXPROC). When i586_bzero returns it uses the first 8 bytes
On 18-Mar-01 Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
I finally caught a backtrace from one of those recurring stack smash
panics. I've been getting a few of these every day for a couple of
weeks now but never caught a dump; I caught this one by typing 'panic'
immediately instead of trying to get a trace
Bruce Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
K6-2's aren't really i586's and i586_bzero should never be used for
them (generic bzero is faster),
Wrong. I fixed machdep.c to compute and print the bandwidth correctly:
des@des ~% egrep '(CPU|bzero)' /var/run/dmesg.boot
CPU: AMD-K6(tm) 3D processor
John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Can you throw some extra tests in there to make sure m isn't NULL? Also, you
might want to check VM_PAGE_TO_PHYS(m) for any weird values.
No need - David and Jake already tracked it down to evilness in
i586_bzero().
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL
Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wrong. I fixed machdep.c to compute and print the bandwidth correctly:
I mean npx.c. I'll commit the fix in a second.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current"
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Bruce Evans wrote:
K6-2's aren't really i586's and i586_bzero should never be used for
them (generic bzero is faster), but there is apparently another
bug that may cause them to be used. From des's dmesg output:
i586_bzero() bandwidth = -1980152482 bytes/sec
On 19 Mar 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Bruce Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
K6-2's aren't really i586's and i586_bzero should never be used for
them (generic bzero is faster),
Wrong. I fixed machdep.c to compute and print the bandwidth correctly:
Wrong yourself. The fpu is too
On 19 Mar 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wrong. I fixed machdep.c to compute and print the bandwidth correctly:
I mean npx.c. I'll commit the fix in a second.
Please send it to the maintainer for review.
Bruce
To Unsubscribe: send mail to
Bruce Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 19 Mar 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wrong. I fixed machdep.c to compute and print the bandwidth correctly:
I mean npx.c. I'll commit the fix in a second.
Please send it to the maintainer for
In muc.lists.freebsd.current, you wrote:
Anyone have any experience with the Abit BP6 motherboards? I've been
reporting and talking about problems with -CURRENT the past little while,
where when I start X, it pretty much dies soon after ... well, this
weekend, I needed to make my system
On 19 Mar 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Anyway, the bug is not K6-specific - I guess the reason why we're only
seeing it on K6's is that they're the only 586-class CPUs that are
fast enough to still be in widespread use.
I have the same panics in one of my pentium 166 mmx boxes. Even some
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 01:00:08AM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Pascal Hofstee [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
With a CURRENT build/installworld from yesterday ... i get a VERY unstable
system that page faults under the slightest CPU load (e.g. playing MP3's)
What kind of CPU?
AMD K6-2
34 matches
Mail list logo
