Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/procfs procfs.c procfs.h ...

Jun Kuriyama [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On my environment, I cannot build GENERIC kernel after this. Umm, sorry, I forgot the other HEADS UP: PROCFS requires PSEUDOFS. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe

weird NTFS and FTPD performance

I reinstalled my laptop with quite current current (20011126-JPSNAP) because I need to access NTFS partition and have 32bit PCCARD NIC (NTFS was just unbroken on current AFAIK). When I connect with ftp to 4.3-RELEASE using 100Mbps-FDX I can upload from NTFS partition with about 6MB/s (limited by

Re: parallel port i/o hogs cpu badly; is this normal?

On Sun, Dec 02, 2001 at 02:10:58PM -0500, Kenneth Culver wrote: I don't know if there's a way to stop this, but it's normal, whenever I use my Parallel port zip drive, I have similar problems. For extended mode, currently FIFO+DMA, you may try : lptcontrol -e By this is experimental. It

Re: HEADS UP: truss(1) out of commission

On 4 Dec 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: Bruce Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please only commit working code. Tell that to the author of truss(1) (who also wrote procfs(5) in the first place). It used to work. Did it not work when it was first committed? Anyway, there are many more

Re: HEADS UP: truss(1) out of commission

* Bruce Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011204 13:43] wrote: On 4 Dec 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: Bruce Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please only commit working code. Tell that to the author of truss(1) (who also wrote procfs(5) in the first place). It used to work. Did it not

Re: HEADSUP ATA support for newer SiS chipsets added

--On Monday, December 03, 2001 11:10:47 +0100 SXren Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seems Miklos Niedermayer wrote: I think they are idle (looking at vmstat -i), but i can't be sure. However i have 2 machines here with VIA 82C596 chipset... atapci0: VIA 82C596 ATA66 controller port

HEADSUP!! kernel burncd must be in sync again.

I've just added VCD/SVCD support and that needs the kernel and burncd to be in sync. -Søren To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message

make release breakage: src/sbin/ifconfig

With 5-current as of Dec/04/2001 15:00:00 GMT. It seems that this is because 'WARNS=0' line is inside of !defined(RELEASE_CRUNCH) clause. IMO, if an application's code requires to set 'WARNS=0 for build, it should also be set when building as a part of a crunched binary. -- - Makoto `MAR'

Re: make release breakage: src/sbin/ifconfig

Makoto Matsushita [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: With 5-current as of Dec/04/2001 15:00:00 GMT. It seems that this is because 'WARNS=0' line is inside of !defined(RELEASE_CRUNCH) clause. IMO, if an application's code requires to set 'WARNS=0 for build, it should also be set when building as a

$B$*@$OC$K$J$j$^$9(B

$BLLGr$$$h!"C/$K$bCN$i$l$:0B?4!"=w@-$O40A4(B $BL5NA%-%c%C%7%e%P%C%/$,$"$k$h!*CK@-$*;n$7(B $BIU$-0lEY;n$7$F$_$F$M!*!*(B To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

HEADS UP: procfs requires pseudofs

I forgot to mention that procfs now requires pseudofs, so those of you who have 'options PROCFS' in your kernel config will have to add 'options PSEUDOFS' if it's not there already. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe

Re: Possible libc_r pthread bug

Alfred Perlstein wrote: * Daniel Eischen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011130 16:17] wrote: On Fri, 30 Nov 2001, Louis-Philippe Gagnon wrote: If at first you don't succeed... I've encountered a problem using pthread_cancel, pthread_join and pthread_setcanceltype, I'm hoping someone can shed

Re: Possible libc_r pthread bug

* Dan Eischen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011204 06:26] wrote: There are already cancellation tests when resuming threads whose contexts are not saved as a result of a signal interrupt (ctxtype != CTX_UC). You shouldn't test for cancellation when ctxtype == CTX_UC because you are running on the

Re: Possible libc_r pthread bug

* Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011204 11:45] wrote: * Dan Eischen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011204 06:26] wrote: There are already cancellation tests when resuming threads whose contexts are not saved as a result of a signal interrupt (ctxtype != CTX_UC). You shouldn't test for

Re: Possible libc_r pthread bug

Alfred Perlstein wrote: * Dan Eischen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011204 06:26] wrote: There are already cancellation tests when resuming threads whose contexts are not saved as a result of a signal interrupt (ctxtype != CTX_UC). You shouldn't test for cancellation when ctxtype == CTX_UC

Re: Possible libc_r pthread bug

* Daniel Eischen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011204 12:32] wrote: Alfred Perlstein wrote: * Dan Eischen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011204 06:26] wrote: There are already cancellation tests when resuming threads whose contexts are not saved as a result of a signal interrupt (ctxtype != CTX_UC).

Re: Possible libc_r pthread bug

Alfred Perlstein wrote: * Daniel Eischen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011204 12:32] wrote: Alfred Perlstein wrote: * Dan Eischen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011204 06:26] wrote: There are already cancellation tests when resuming threads whose contexts are not saved as a result of a signal

Re: HEADS UP: truss(1) out of commission

Bruce Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please only commit working code. Tell that to the author of truss(1) (who also wrote procfs(5) in the first place). DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body

Re: Possible libc_r pthread bug

* Daniel Eischen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011130 16:17] wrote: On Fri, 30 Nov 2001, Louis-Philippe Gagnon wrote: If at first you don't succeed... I've encountered a problem using pthread_cancel, pthread_join and pthread_setcanceltype, I'm hoping someone can shed some light. (in a