Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Mike Smith
Then go look them up. I'm not about to stuff the entire PnP device database into the kernel just to satisfy your curiosity. 8( I was going to ask where, but I see they are in /usr/src/sys/boot/common/pnpdata. That's a useful subset that I keep forgetting about; thanks for reminding

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Terry Lambert
Warner Losh wrote: : Whether it's perfect or not, making the device.hints go away : in the presents of PnP BIOS on the machine would seem to be : able to address the issue of doubled entries... right? Not entirely. There are ISA devices in devices.hints that aren't plug and play and

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Mike Smith
I once wrote the following patch to deal with this problem by probing ISA devices in the following order. 1. sensitive ISA devices described in device.hints 2. PnP BIOS ISA devices 3. other ISA devices described in device.hints 4. PnP ISA devices This order is still slightly wrong. You

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Mike Smith
I remember an ACER system with a bus mouse on the motherboard which was unknown to the PnP BIOS, and Windows 95 trying to be a PnP OS used to always do what above looks to be the PnP ISA devices phase of things, and gave IRQ 12 to the second IDE disk interface, instead of the on-board

user/group bind

2001-08-26 Thread Jim Bryant
After being informed of the paragraph in UPDATING on this topic, I went to /usr/src/etc to see what the settled-upon UID/GID of bind is... Ummm... Did someone forget to commit changes to the /usr/src/etc/group and /usr/src/etc/passwd baseline files? What UID/GID should be used? jim -- ET

Re: user/group bind

2001-08-26 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 06:10:53PM -0500, Jim Bryant wrote: After being informed of the paragraph in UPDATING on this topic, I went to /usr/src/etc to see what the settled-upon UID/GID of bind is... Ummm... Did someone forget to commit changes to the /usr/src/etc/group and

Re: user/group bind

2001-08-26 Thread Jim Bryant
Okay, please don't say it... I'm blind... Boot to the head! I see it now, as GID 53... Jim Bryant wrote: After being informed of the paragraph in UPDATING on this topic, I went to /usr/src/etc to see what the settled-upon UID/GID of bind is... Ummm... Did someone forget to commit

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread Warner Losh
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Andrey A. Chernov writes: : Complaints _are_ easily addressed, tcsh author is responsible and fix all : thing that I report to him. If you complain about 'upgrade' problem, i.e. : we don't have latest tcsh, ask our tcsh maintainer for upgrade. I'm our tcsh

This Weekends Sale... All Combo Pkg\\\'s $79.99

2001-08-26 Thread Spawn Devices
Well it seems the www.spawndevices.com $15 - $25 buck boots and emu\'s made a few of you happy good... glad to hear it... Well the special for you this weekend is all Combo Packages are $79.99... Your choice an Emu or a Bootstrap (DPBB) with either a Dual Crystal ISO or a WT2-X

buildworld fails in libssh on -CURRENT

2001-08-26 Thread Andrei Popov
Having overcome a small issue with buildworld in games/fortune/strfile, there's a new +issue: buildworld fails in /usr/src/secure/lib/libssl make's output is a bit lengthy at this point, so I've slightly clipped it: === libssl ( echo #ifndef MK1MF_BUILD; echo /* auto-generated by

Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!

2001-08-26 Thread Julian Elischer
I am ready to do my megga-commit to add the first stage of KSE-threading support to the kernel. If there is any argument as to the wisdom of this move, then this is the time to speak up! At this stage a commit would break alpha and ia64 until they are patched. From experience I can say that

Ia64 and ALPHA (+arm, sparc?) kernel developers:

2001-08-26 Thread Julian Elischer
Can the IA64 and Alpha developers (Arm too?) look at the KSE patch set at http://www.freebsd.org/~julian/thediff This compiles and runs pretty solidly on 386. it needs people who understand the other architectures to make the appropriate changes and send them to me (or check them int P4) so

Re: exec issue in tcsh?

2001-08-26 Thread Brandon D. Valentine
On Sat, 25 Aug 2001, Jim Bryant wrote: Wow. Why not use xdm? 8) Too lazy? Heh. You just uncomment one line in /etc/ttys and HUP init. It's not compilicated. -- Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might be a law against it by that time. -- /usr/games/fortune,

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread David O'Brien
On Sat, Aug 25, 2001 at 02:02:21PM +0200, Oliver Fromme wrote: Probably because it's just too late. During the initial discussion, the voices pro and contra were about 50:50 (at least that was my impression), and finally the pro ones succeeded, probably because they had more weight (this

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread David O'Brien
On Fri, Aug 24, 2001 at 11:10:53PM -0500, Matthew D. Fuller wrote: Then please enumerate them so that they can be given due attention. This is exactly the sort of detailed feedback that was requested when we first raised the issue of switching over, and nobody could come up with any

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Kazutaka YOKOTA
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] David W. Chapman Jr. writes: : I'm running -current as of an hour ago. I've gotten this since I've : been running 4.2-stable, any ideas on how I can find out what it : belongs to? : : unknown: PNP0303 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0501 can't assign

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread Oliver Fromme
David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: _But_ my vote would be for still having a real csh in /bin, additionally. (And don't tell me that tcsh is a real csh -- it's not, see below.) By chance have you looked at the csh source in the CSRG SCCS files? How about the tcsh sources from

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 13:20:23 +0200, Oliver Fromme wrote: Our csh still behaves differently like any /bin/csh on any other system that I know, and can't be easily made to behave like them. When I wrote real csh, I meant a csh which exhibits the traditional behaviour and user interface

Re: exec issue in tcsh?

2001-08-26 Thread David Wolfskill
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 02:43:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Brandon D. Valentine [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sat, 25 Aug 2001, Jim Bryant wrote: Wow. Why not use xdm? 8) Too lazy? Heh. You just uncomment one line in /etc/ttys and HUP init. It's not compilicated. Indeed. However, there are some

fxp SCB timeout problems [FIX]

2001-08-26 Thread Jonathan Lemon
I believe that I have a real fix for the SCB timeout problems that have been plauging users of recent Intel fxp boards. If you have a board that uses the Intel ICH2/ICH2-M chipset (usually 815E style boards) and feel comfortable applying patches to the system, please contact me to test a

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Warner Losh
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kazutaka YOKOTA writes: : Shouldn't we just suppress the message? It just confuses users. : : The attached patch will print this message only when we boot : the kernel by 'boot -v'. They are there to remind certain folks that the ISA PnP code is broken slightly

Re: exec issue in tcsh?

2001-08-26 Thread Nate Williams
Wow. Why not use xdm? 8) Too lazy? Heh. You just uncomment one line in /etc/ttys and HUP init. It's not compilicated. Indeed. However, there are some differences in startup of which to be aware (.xinitrc vs. .xsession). I just hard-link the two files together. :) Nate To

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Brad Huntting
: unknown: PNP0303 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0501 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0501 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0401 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0700 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0f13 can't assign resources Shouldn't we just suppress the message?

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Wilko Bulte
On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 09:51:57AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kazutaka YOKOTA writes: : Shouldn't we just suppress the message? It just confuses users. : : The attached patch will print this message only when we boot : the kernel by 'boot -v'. They are there

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Kazutaka YOKOTA
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kazutaka YOK OTA writes: : Shouldn't we just suppress the message? It just confuses users. : : The attached patch will print this message only when we boot : the kernel by 'boot -v'. They are there to remind certain folks that the ISA PnP code is broken slightly

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Mike Smith
: unknown: PNP0303 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0501 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0501 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0401 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0700 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0f13 can't assign resources Shouldn't we just suppress the

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Warner Losh
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wilko Bulte writes: : They are also in RELENG_4.. Those should be hidden by -v then :-) Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message

Re: fxp SCB timeout problems [FIX]

2001-08-26 Thread Mike Tancsa
I have it on two machines with this chipset and it looks good so far. After installing, dmesg shows fxp0: Intel Pro/100 Ethernet port 0xc400-0xc43f mem 0xd5001000-0xd5001fff irq 11 at device 8.0 on pci1 fxp0: *** DISABLING DYNAMIC STANDBY MODE IN EEPROM *** fxp0: New EEPROM ID: 0x49a0 fxp0:

Re: exec issue in tcsh?

2001-08-26 Thread Warner Losh
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jim Bryant writes: : Wow. Why not use xdm? 8) : : Too lazy? vi /etc/ttys; s/off/on on xdm line; kill -1 1 Too lazy to do even that? Wow! That's Lazy :-) Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread Kaila
On Sat, 25 Aug 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote: On Sat, Aug 25, 2001 at 01:50:33AM -0500, Jim Bryant wrote: For 5.0, I maybe the black sheep in saying this, but I'd like to see /bin/csh be the real thing for 5.0. By all means, leave tcsh in /bin, but for the sake of backwards compatability,

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread Mike Smith
The motto used to be do it right, not do it the way WE want it on OUR machines, and screw the people who don't make the decisions or cause to much trouble to ignore. It still is. And recognising that csh has evolved over the last decade is part of doing it right. What you're really saying

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread Kaila
On Sun, 26 Aug 2001, Mike Smith wrote: The motto used to be do it right, not do it the way WE want it on OUR machines, and screw the people who don't make the decisions or cause to much trouble to ignore. It still is. And recognising that csh has evolved over the last decade is part

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread Steve Kargl
On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 02:57:31PM -0500, Kaila wrote: On Sun, 26 Aug 2001, Mike Smith wrote: Naming linking it to csh broke things for people who weren't informed it was happeneing, and then had to go and spend hours tracking down the problem and fixing it. How could you be uninformed

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 01:20:23PM +0200, Oliver Fromme wrote: Our csh still behaves differently like any /bin/csh on any other system that I know, and can't be easily made to behave like them. This is an assertion. Where is your supporting evidence? Kris PGP signature

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Terry Lambert
Kazutaka YOKOTA wrote: : I'm running -current as of an hour ago. I've gotten this since I've : been running 4.2-stable, any ideas on how I can find out what it : belongs to? : : unknown: PNP0303 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0501 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0501 can't

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Warner Losh
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Terry Lambert writes: : Shouldn't we just take the Linux/NetBSD information, and : actually identify the things instead of saying Unknown, : instead, and leave them printing to encourage someone the : messages annoy to do the work? I'd guess that's too much work.

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread Terry Lambert
Andrey A. Chernov wrote: When I wrote real csh, I meant a csh which exhibits the traditional behaviour and user interface (look and feel, if you prefer) of a csh. tcsh does not. Someone used to work with a real csh simply can't be happy with tcsh, especially if he has to change

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 14:14:48 -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: While we may be stuck with this bait-and-switch upgrade, I think his complaints are not co easily addressed. Certainly, the exec complaint remains valid, in any case: it's a bug that csh didn't have. Complaints _are_ easily

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Alexander Langer
Thus spake Warner Losh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): I'd guess that's too much work. Maybe someone can prove me wrong with trivial patches. Maintaining the device-table is probably the most work (since we already have the PNP string and most lists are sortedc by this string as well). Alex To

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread Mike Smith
It still is. And recognising that csh has evolved over the last decade is part of doing it right. No, doing it right would have been including tcsh and deprecating csh, then dropping it later as has been done with other things. This is what was done. The old csh is deprecated, but

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread Terry Lambert
Steve Kargl wrote: On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 02:57:31PM -0500, Kaila wrote: Naming linking it to csh broke things for people who weren't informed it was happeneing, and then had to go and spend hours tracking down the problem and fixing it. How could you be uninformed about this change?

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread Terry Lambert
Kris Kennaway wrote: On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 01:20:23PM +0200, Oliver Fromme wrote: Our csh still behaves differently like any /bin/csh on any other system that I know, and can't be easily made to behave like them. This is an assertion. Where is your supporting evidence? Hit TAB? --

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Terry Lambert
Kazutaka YOKOTA wrote: Um, we see these messages not only because our ISA PnP driver needs some update, but also because we create ISA device instances TWICE for each motherboard ISA devices, such as sio and atkbdc, due to /boot/device.hints. We need to have /boot/device.hints for those

KSE kernel comparissons

2001-08-26 Thread Julian Elischer
Comparative times for 'make buildworld' for unmodified and KSE (milestone-2) kernels unmodified -current 2138.464u 3358.378s 1:37:39.77 93.8%842+1080k 45105+176988io 3208pf+0w modified KSE kernel 2143.716u 3363.311s 1:37:50.33 93.8%841+1081k 45435+176988io 3214pf+0w I'm very glad to see

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Mike Smith
: unknown: PNP0303 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0501 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0501 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0401 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0700 can't assign resources : unknown: PNP0f13 can't assign resources Don't worry about these.

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Mike Smith
So, you are saying that this is because there is not a seperate No BIOS and BIOS section (or entry prefix) in the hints file, so that in a non-PnP system, both the No BIOS and BIOS entries will be examined, whereas on a PnP system, only the BIOS entries will be examined? This would be an

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Terry Lambert
Warner Losh wrote: : Shouldn't we just take the Linux/NetBSD information, and : actually identify the things instead of saying Unknown, : instead, and leave them printing to encourage someone the : messages annoy to do the work? I'd guess that's too much work. Maybe someone can prove me

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Warner Losh
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Terry Lambert writes: : So, you are saying that this is because there is not a seperate : No BIOS and BIOS section (or entry prefix) in the hints file, : so that in a non-PnP system, both the No BIOS and BIOS : entries will be examined, whereas on a PnP system, only

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Terry Lambert
Mike Smith wrote: So, you are saying that this is because there is not a seperate No BIOS and BIOS section (or entry prefix) in the hints file, so that in a non-PnP system, both the No BIOS and BIOS entries will be examined, whereas on a PnP system, only the BIOS entries will be

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Terry Lambert
Warner Losh wrote: Since that's not how it works, the solution is a non-starter. We just need to carefully order the ISA code probing sections to get the desired effects. We haven't done that yet. All PnP devices are probed together at the end, which isn't quite right. The problem was

Re: exec issue in tcsh?

2001-08-26 Thread Jim Bryant
David Wolfskill wrote: Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 02:43:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Brandon D. Valentine [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sat, 25 Aug 2001, Jim Bryant wrote: Wow. Why not use xdm? 8) Too lazy? Heh. You just uncomment one line in /etc/ttys and HUP init. It's not compilicated. Indeed.

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Warner Losh
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Terry Lambert writes: : Warner Losh wrote: : Since that's not how it works, the solution is a non-starter. : : We just need to carefully order the ISA code probing sections to get : the desired effects. We haven't done that yet. All PnP devices are : probed

Re: exec issue in tcsh?

2001-08-26 Thread Jim Bryant
Nate Williams wrote: Wow. Why not use xdm? 8) Too lazy? Heh. You just uncomment one line in /etc/ttys and HUP init. It's not compilicated. Indeed. However, there are some differences in startup of which to be aware (.xinitrc vs. .xsession). I just hard-link the two files together.

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Mike Smith
I think the reason the hints are not just ignored is to allow people to fix rogue hardware. I'm willing to be corrected, Good. It's like it is right now because the PnP stuff was bolted on as an afterthought. since this looks like about 12 lines of code would make it ignore device.hints

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 03:01:33PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: Kris Kennaway wrote: On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 01:20:23PM +0200, Oliver Fromme wrote: Our csh still behaves differently like any /bin/csh on any other system that I know, and can't be easily made to behave like them.

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread Terry Lambert
Kris Kennaway wrote: On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 03:01:33PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: Kris Kennaway wrote: On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 01:20:23PM +0200, Oliver Fromme wrote: Our csh still behaves differently like any /bin/csh on any other system that I know, and can't be easily made to

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Brad Huntting
Then go look them up. I'm not about to stuff the entire PnP device database into the kernel just to satisfy your curiosity. 8( I was going to ask where, but I see they are in /usr/src/sys/boot/common/pnpdata. thanx, brad To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe

Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing...

2001-08-26 Thread Jim Bryant
Terry Lambert wrote: I was still grumpy about the change, but that at least was enough to mollify me into not objecting loudly and persitantly up to the import. Let me get this straight, though: _now_ you are saying that the system wide defaults and account template defaults will be

Re: unknown PNP hardware

2001-08-26 Thread Kazutaka YOKOTA
: Whether it's perfect or not, making the device.hints go away : in the presents of PnP BIOS on the machine would seem to be : able to address the issue of doubled entries... right? Not entirely. There are ISA devices in devices.hints that aren't plug and play and aren't in the PnP BIOS list.