In a message written on Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 12:12:59PM +1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
If you have a file, web, mail, database, etc server it's predominant
application is already dynamically linked.
It just occured to me what bothers me about this line of thinking,
since several people have
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Andrew Gallatin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: I'll bet a larger percentage of our users build ports than need nss or
: ldap.
I'll bet a larger percentage of the people are ignoring this thread
than reading it since it has been so devoid of concrete numbers.
M. Warner Losh writes:
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Andrew Gallatin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: I'll bet a larger percentage of our users build ports than need nss or
: ldap.
I'll bet a larger percentage of the people are ignoring this thread
than reading it since it
Daniel O'Connor wrote:
You DO know FreeBSD is a cooperative project right?
Of course I do. I was using it when it was just 386BSD 0.1 and a patchkit.
I've watched it through a lot of changes and while I've never been a part
of the team, mostly due to lack of time, I try to throw whatever I can
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Andrew Gallatin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
:
: M. Warner Losh writes:
: In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Andrew Gallatin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: : I'll bet a larger percentage of our users build ports than need nss or
: : ldap.
:
On Nov 24, 2003, at 8:09 PM, M. Warner Losh wrote:
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Andrew Gallatin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: I'll bet a larger percentage of our users build ports than need nss
or
: ldap.
I'll bet a larger percentage of the people are ignoring this thread
than
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 12:14:23 +1030
Daniel O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Try timing cd /usr/ports/www/mozilla-devel ; make clean with static
and dynamic /bin. bsd.port.mk spawns many many many /bin/sh processes.
OK my bad, it will probably slow down the ports building.
you can use put
Richard Coleman wrote:
I think a better compromise is to add the make.conf option so that extra
utilities may be added to /rescue.
As David already pointed out, this is not entirely trivial.
Adding the programs isn't difficult, but it requires adjusting
library includes, which would be tricky to
Richard Coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Are you suggesting that (t)csh also move to /usr/bin to match
/usr/bin/sh? The screams caused by such a change would be deafening.
Would there be any screams at all?
chsh -s /bin/sh root# prevent lock-out
rm -f /bin/csh /bin/tcsh
M. Warner Losh wrote:
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Andrew Gallatin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: I'll bet a larger percentage of our users build ports than need nss or
: ldap.
I'll bet a larger percentage of the people are ignoring this thread
than reading it since it has been so
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 03:26:14 +0100
Clement Laforet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
:27 CET 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/LUCIFER i386
Forget about it :-)
Next time i should think befor posting ;-)
sorry for the noise
clem
___
[EMAIL
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, Frank Mayhar wrote:
Daniel O'Connor wrote:
You DO know FreeBSD is a cooperative project right?
Of course I do. I was using it when it was just 386BSD 0.1 and a patchkit.
I've watched it through a lot of changes and while I've never been a part
of the team, mostly due
On 25-Nov-2003 Nate Lawson wrote:
Someone more familiar with ithread_loop should probably answer this. One
workaround might be to enable ACPI_NO_SEMAPHORES on your box.
I built and booted a kernel with ACPI_NO_SEMAPHORES, but it still
hangs at the same point in the boot. The stack trace is
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 07:19:31PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Andrew Gallatin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
:
: M. Warner Losh writes:
: In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Andrew Gallatin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: : I'll bet a larger
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: What qualifies as a concrete, real benchmark? I take it you don't
: think Drew's qualifies.
No. forkbomds are realworld.
Warner
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
On Tuesday 25 November 2003 12:44, Frank Mayhar wrote:
_This_ is the issue. You assert that this change benefits a fair number
of users. I and others assert that it hurts performance and makes
disaster recovery more complex (while the existence of /rescue is a great
idea, it still adds
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 06:27:13PM -0800, Tim Kientzle wrote:
The debate right now is over what programs from /usr/bin and
/usr/sbin should be included. Right now, that includes
tar, gzip, bzip2, and vi/ex.
All but vi(ex) were built statically, but installed into /usr/bin.
--
-- David
Good people,
I have managed to crowbar ACPI support into working on ThinkPad 560Z
with the attached patch. The problem seems to be that TP returns
everything and a kitchen sink in the list of available IRQs, but expects
OS to use one you have set up using
On Nov 24, 2003, at 10:56, Ade Lovett wrote:
The executive summary is that after some unfortunate hardware
failures, I picked up an ASUS A7V8X-X motherboard with a 6 USB 2.0
ports.
Just as an addendum, on the advice of someone on irc, I tried booting
both NetBSD (1.6.1) and OpenBSD (3.4) on
M. Warner Losh wrote:
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Andrew Gallatin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
:
: M. Warner Losh writes:
: In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Andrew Gallatin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: : I'll bet a larger percentage of our users build ports than
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 03:15:57PM -0500, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
% /usr/bin/time ./harness.sh ./sh.dynamic 100
1.60 real 0.21 user 1.18 sys
% ./harness.sh ./sh.static 100
1.12 real 0.08 user 0.87 sys
So.. forking a dynamic sh is roughly
M. Warner Losh writes:
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm just saying that most of the developers I'm talking to on IRC say
this tread is insane, has no content and they are blowing it off
because of that. A concrete, real benchmark will go a long way
towards changing that. Until then,
Newbie developer question
Would it be possible to ship a static /bin/sh and a dynamic
/bin/dynamic-sh, with /bin/sh execing /bin/dynamic-sh if it is invoked
interactively? If I'm understanding the issues correctly, a dynamic
/bin/sh is desired for the benefit of interactive users, while the
:Ding! Oh god, not another one! *plonk*
:
:We need nsswitch type functionality in /bin/sh. To the people who want to
:make it static, lets see some static binary dlopen() support or a nsswitch
:proxy system.
:
:If half as much effort had been spent on implementing such a thing as there
:has been
Peter Wemm writes:
We need nsswitch type functionality in /bin/sh. To the people who want to
make it static, lets see some static binary dlopen() support or a nsswitch
proxy system.
Maybe this is just nieve, but I always thought that it was the
responsibility of the party introducing the
:I supported the decision because:
:
:1. It has been requested for years
:2. It benefits PAM and NSS.
:3. It is easy to revert.
Easy to revert? You are talking about depending on mechanisms for
authentication and other things that WILL NOT WORK with static binaries
as they
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, Matthew Dillon wrote:
:Ding! Oh god, not another one! *plonk*
:
:We need nsswitch type functionality in /bin/sh. To the people who want to
:make it static, lets see some static binary dlopen() support or a nsswitch
:proxy system.
:
:If half as much effort had been
At 8:59 PM -0500 2003/11/24, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
Of course not. Nobody in their right mind uses csh for scripting.
To my great horror, csh is used in most of the DNS debugging and
many of the log-processing scripts that I have inherited. One of
these days, I will finally live up to my
In the last episode (Nov 24), Scott Long said:
I think that you forgot to attach the patches that demonstrate all of
this.
Also, I'm really starting to resent you using the FreeBSD mailing
lists as an advocacy channel for DragonFly. I fail to see how
FreeBSD 4.x and DFBSD relate to FreeBSD
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, Matthew Dillon wrote:
:I supported the decision because:
:
:1. It has been requested for years
:2. It benefits PAM and NSS.
:3. It is easy to revert.
Easy to revert? You are talking about depending on mechanisms for
authentication and other things that
:
: :I supported the decision because:
: :
: :1. It has been requested for years
: :2. It benefits PAM and NSS.
: :3. It is easy to revert.
:
: Easy to revert? You are talking about depending on mechanisms for
: authentication and other things that WILL NOT WORK with static binaries
:
:I think that you forgot to attach the patches that demonstrate all of
:this.
:
:Also, I'm really starting to resent you using the FreeBSD mailing lists as
:an advocacy channel for DragonFly. I fail to see how FreeBSD 4.x and
:DFBSD relate to FreeBSD 5-current, which is the overall topic of this
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Andrew Gallatin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: 1) Microbenchmark:40% worse
: 2) Bootstone(*): 25% worse
: 3) Ports: 16% worse
Thanks for the real numbers.
Warner
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, Matthew Dillon wrote:
:I think that you forgot to attach the patches that demonstrate all of
:this.
:
:Also, I'm really starting to resent you using the FreeBSD mailing lists as
:an advocacy channel for DragonFly. I fail to see how FreeBSD 4.x and
:DFBSD relate to
On Tuesday 25 November 2003 12:20, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
OK my bad, it will probably slow down the ports building.
I'll bet a larger percentage of our users build ports than need nss or
ldap.
Err, yes..
Of course you are claiming it should be either/or, which is not very
reasonable.
What
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 11:00:24AM -0500, Rahul Siddharthan wrote:
David O'Brien wrote:
On Sun, Nov 23, 2003 at 06:00:36PM -0800, Tim Kientzle wrote:
Scenarios that require /rescue are ones in which /bin and /sbin
are unusable, which is almost always going to imply a trashed file
in /bin,
PW Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 18:56:21 -0800
PW From: Peter Wemm
PW We need nsswitch type functionality in /bin/sh. To the
PW people who want to make it static, lets see some static
PW binary dlopen() support or a nsswitch proxy system.
I started a new thread inquiring about the challenges
Neither side of the static/dynamic root debate wants to give in. And
neither side wants to be one the that has to recompile the world to get
what they want. So make it so that no one wins.
1. Have sysinstall ask whether you want a dynamic or static root installed.
2. When recompiling the
Agreed.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Coleman
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 10:55 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Make it so that nobody wins
Neither side of the static/dynamic root debate wants to give in. And
neither
Richard Coleman wrote:
Neither side of the static/dynamic root debate wants to give in. And
neither side wants to be one the that has to recompile the world to get
what they want. So make it so that no one wins.
Actually, I don't have a personal axe to grind so much as I just feel
that
On Monday 24 November 2003 07:06 pm, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
M. Warner Losh writes:
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm just saying that most of the developers I'm talking to on IRC say
this tread is insane, has no content and they are blowing it off
because of that. A concrete, real
[ From: set to /dev/null as too many can't follow the Reply-To: ]
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 11:00:24AM -0500, Rahul Siddharthan wrote:
NO. /rescue was allowed in the system to handle the case of a trashed
file in /lib[exec]. To allow a sysadmin to recover a system from the
same type of
And I just did a make clean run in /usr/ports/archivers (by manually
mv'ing a static and dynamic sh to /bin in turn):
static: 96.63 real53.45 user39.27 sys
dynamic: 112.42 real55.51 user51.62 sys
The wall clock is bad (16% worse) and the system time
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 08:55:31PM -0500, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
Daniel O'Connor writes:
Why didn't you pipe up when this was discussed _long_ ago?
In the orginal thread, there was an agreement that the performance
would be measured BEFORE the default was changed, and the default
need it or not. :-) So, FTP server is not concern. /rescue/fetch MAY help
to recover RUINED FreeBSD from ashes... As /rescue/mount_cd9660, or
mount_msdosfs... In other words we can drom mount_msdosfs from /rescue
just because almost everybody can burn CD... We will save a few KBytes of
FWIW,
101 - 145 of 145 matches
Mail list logo
