On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 7:24 PM, Warren Block wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Jan 2013, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>
>>> One possibility: I believe I labeled each of the partitions
>>> during
>>> the gpt creation process. Can I use those labels to (hopefully) by-pass
>>> this issue?
>>
>>
>> Yes! This is the
Using the GPT labels is a winning solution.
Thanks to all those who helped,
Robert Huff
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any ma
TB --- 2013-01-04 02:04:44 - tinderbox 2.10 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2013-01-04 02:04:44 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2013
On Thu, 3 Jan 2013, Kevin Oberman wrote:
One possibility: I believe I labeled each of the partitions during
the gpt creation process. Can I use those labels to (hopefully) by-pass
this issue?
Yes! This is the current recommended way of doing it.
cat /etc/fstab
# DeviceMountp
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Robert Huff wrote:
> On 1/3/2013 11:40 AM, Warren Block wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 2 Jan 2013, Robert Huff wrote:
>>
>>> (While this may not be a strictly CURRENT issue, I asked on
>>> questions@, but have not found a solution.)
>>>
>>> Situation:
>>> One of m
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Robert Huff wrote:
> On 1/2/2013 1:57 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 2 Jan 2013, Robert Huff wrote:
>
>
>> For a full clean install, I believe that bsdinstall should prompt about
>> installing bootcode around here. I don't really understand from your
>> p
On 1/3/2013 11:40 AM, Warren Block wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jan 2013, Robert Huff wrote:
(While this may not be a strictly CURRENT issue, I asked on
questions@, but have not found a solution.)
Situation:
One of my boxes failed, and for various reasons it became easier
to just scrub and reb
On Thu, 3 Jan 2013, Alexander Motin wrote:
On 03.01.2013 16:45, Bruce Evans wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jan 2013, Alexander Motin wrote:
More important for scheduling fairness thread's CPU percentage is also
based on hardclock() and hiding from it was trivial before, since all
sleep primitives were stric
On Wed, 2 Jan 2013, Robert Huff wrote:
(While this may not be a strictly CURRENT issue, I asked on
questions@, but have not found a solution.)
Situation:
One of my boxes failed, and for various reasons it became easier to
just scrub and rebuild it. Like its predecessor it will run C
On 03.01.2013 16:45, Bruce Evans wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jan 2013, Alexander Motin wrote:
More important for scheduling fairness thread's CPU percentage is also
based on hardclock() and hiding from it was trivial before, since all
sleep primitives were strictly aligned to hardclock(). Now it is
slightl
Am 02.01.2013 14:26, schrieb Nathan Whitehorn:
> On 01/02/13 07:04, Stefan Esser wrote:
>> I'd be interested in the general policy on LINKS vs. SYMLINKS
>> between directories that might end up on different file systems.
>>
>> There seems to be an assumption that system directories in /usr
>> (e.g.
On Wed, 2 Jan 2013, Alexander Motin wrote:
On 02.01.2013 19:09, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 05:22:06PM +0100, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
Probably one way to close this discussion would be to provide
a sysctl so the sysadmin can decide which point in the interval
to pick when the
Experimenting with ath under RELENG8,9 and HEAD at home on my wifi
router, I found that with current from today (r244989) gives a steady
stream of errors. How can I debug the issue in my setup ?
input(Total) output
packets errs idrops bytespackets errs
Hello,
> If I comment out :
> ifconfig_bge0="inet 192.168.0.5 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> Network doesn't work.
Yes, you should not commnet out it,
you cannot connect from/to outside.
network_interfaces="auto" is same as /etc/default/rc.conf,
so that you can remove it safely from /etc/rc.conf
At 03:30 AM 1/3/2013, KAHO Toshikazu wrote:
> Hello,
>
>> There is still >ifa_del_loopback_route: deletion failed: 3
>> that wasn't there before,but the 127.0.0.1 seems to be configured now:
>
> Do you have a line like network_interfaces="lo0 bge0" in /etc/rc.conf?
>If you have it, try to re
At 03:30 AM 1/3/2013, KAHO Toshikazu wrote:
> Hello,
>
>> There is still >ifa_del_loopback_route: deletion failed: 3
>> that wasn't there before,but the 127.0.0.1 seems to be configured now:
>
> Do you have a line like network_interfaces="lo0 bge0" in /etc/rc.conf?
>If you have it, try to re
Hello,
> There is still >ifa_del_loopback_route: deletion failed: 3
> that wasn't there before,but the 127.0.0.1 seems to be configured now:
Do you have a line like network_interfaces="lo0 bge0" in /etc/rc.conf?
If you have it, try to remove it.
I think something broken, but people us
On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 09:52:37PM -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Alexander Motin wrote:
> > On 02.01.2013 18:08, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> >>
> >> .. I'm pretty damned sure we're going to need to enforce a "never
> >> earlier than X" latency.
> >
> >
> > Do you mean her
18 matches
Mail list logo
