Hello,
I am coming up against a road
block in porting an application from a win32 platform to FreeBSD. The
problem I am having is due to the fact that FreeBSD protects it's memory more
that NT for example.
Is there a way to give a client
app access to another apps memory? the way it is
In message 007301bfd9b4$8018c1b0$b2a612d8@hayden "Shawn Workman" writes:
: Is there a way to give a client app access to another apps memory? =
Yes. It is called system V shared memory. mmap will also be able to
do that as well, if you use a backing file (is that still required?)
: I
+[ Shawn Workman ]-
|
| Hello,
| I am coming up against a road block in porting an application from
| a win32 platform to FreeBSD. The problem I am having is due to the
| fact that FreeBSD protects it's memory more that NT for
On Thu 2000-06-15 (15:25), Ronald G Minnich wrote:
well linuxbios is what I started here, and I pinged some folks on this
list about supporting freebsd as well as linux, and got a 'no interest'
back from some folks.
I'm still up for it. I think it's easy.
'linuxbios' will only support
Just a moment. You talk about doing a `Save-to-Disk' (incl.
system halt), turning power off, maybe adding some hardware or
moving the machine to another location, then switching on again,
restoring the system context, and the machine will proceed as if
nothing had happened, do you?
I
On Mon 2000-06-19 (11:45), Neil Blakey-Milner wrote:
'linuxbios' will only support booting off Linux partitions?
I doubt they're replacing a multi-purpose, occasionally
not-all-that-clever thing, with a single-purpose very-often
not-all-that-clever thing?
Ah wait, having read a bit more,
On Sun, 18 Jun 2000, Gustavo Pamplona wrote:
How can I use FBSDBOOT.EXE? When I try to use it, it give me a error of
It doesn't work with ELF kernels. Check the archives.
Vi, the editor, one dumb question, is there a way to select more text than
one line? The command 'yy' only select one
On 2000-06-19 11:05 +0200, Graham Wheeler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I was under time pressure, I pulled the card out and put it in a
different machine, this one a P166 which works fine (with the same IRQ).
Anyway, when I get a chance I would like to try it again in the 486. The
486 has
Stefan Esser wrote:
On 2000-06-19 11:05 +0200, Graham Wheeler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I was under time pressure, I pulled the card out and put it in a
different machine, this one a P166 which works fine (with the same IRQ).
These are the settings:
Slot n IRQ Line (this is the
On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, Neil Blakey-Milner wrote:
On Thu 2000-06-15 (15:25), Ronald G Minnich wrote:
'linuxbios' will only support booting off Linux partitions?
linuxbios is getting to be a misnomer, but ...
linuxbios is a simple chunk of FLASH-based code that gunzips a kernel
image to RAM.
What is the current status of using an LDAP server together with
PAM for authentication in FreeBSD? Has anybody got around to
implement a working solution for configuring the name service
information routines in libc (e.g. nsswitch.conf or something
similar)?
Search in the mailing list archives
Hi,
From: Bjoern Fischer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ACPI project progress report
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 07:01:44 +0200
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just a moment. You talk about doing a `Save-to-Disk' (incl. system halt),
turning power off, maybe adding some hardware or moving the
imp In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mitsuru IWASAKI writes:
imp : Hi, here is the latest report on our ACPI project's progress.
imp
imp As I told you on the Train in Tokyo: Cool! Way Cool! ACPI should
imp enable us to properly put the chipsets in laptops to sleep and then
imp wake them up again.
Does anyone know of any commits to 4-stable in the past three weeks
that would have broken procmail (probably related the locking)?
I just synched Sunday, and it broke procmail. I've recompiled from the
ports directory, and that didn't help.
Interestingly (and strangely), it works when I turn
On 2000-06-19 15:32 +0200, Graham Wheeler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stefan Esser wrote:
Is the PS/2 mouse interface enabled ? It will try to grab IRQ 12,
and may do so in a way that the IRQ can't be delivered from ISA
or PCI slots ...
The may be a psm driver in the kernel, but there is
Hi all,
this message is especially for the developers or other people who
contribute FreeBSD.
I just thought today, that I could write a little bit documentation for
the PCMCIA stuff... (That's what on the TODO List). But if I start now,
how can I verify that there's nobody else who writes this?
So if one of the "high" people agree with this idea, I could set up such a
system (well I have to look for a constant internet connection, but I
suppose my ISP will give me one for free when his name is listed on the
contribution list :-)).
We don't need any "high" people to agree with this:
* Frederik Meerwaldt [EMAIL PROTECTED] [000619 11:34] wrote:
Hi all,
this message is especially for the developers or other people who
contribute FreeBSD.
I just thought today, that I could write a little bit documentation for
the PCMCIA stuff... (That's what on the TODO List). But if I
On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, Ronald G Minnich wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, Neil Blakey-Milner wrote:
On Thu 2000-06-15 (15:25), Ronald G Minnich wrote:
'linuxbios' will only support booting off Linux partitions?
linuxbios is getting to be a misnomer, but ...
linuxbios is a simple chunk of
Hi!
You can make an announcement that you're working on it, and what
you hope to acoomplish.
[..]
What about this idea?
The FreeBSD project has well over 150 people working on it, you
can't mark off large parts of the system as your own. The idea is
to work together concurrantly,
Hi!
So if one of the "high" people agree with this idea, I could set up such a
system (well I have to look for a constant internet connection, but I
suppose my ISP will give me one for free when his name is listed on the
contribution list :-)).
We don't need any "high" people to agree
Ok, I've got a system that seems to spuriously "panic: unknown/reserved
trap". In trying to figure out which exception got triggered, I did a
backtrace...
(kgdb) bt
#0 boot (howto=256) at ../../kern/kern_shutdown.c:303
#1 0xc016a355 in panic (fmt=0xc02c58d9 "unknown/reserved trap") at
Parag Patel wrote:
It can't, without shitloads of drivers. :)
("I asked you not to tell me that, Ninety-Nine!")
A new loader would need to be written that would have a way to talk to
whatever firmware is in the box, Open Firmware, LinuxBIOS, etc.
(Assuming that the firmware has a
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 07:06:36 +0900, "Daniel C. Sobral" wrote:
And, in the process, they are teaching the firmware about Ext2FS,
Ext3FS, RheiserFS, (in our case) ffs, vinum, etc, so it can find the
kernel in whatever place it is, or resorting to some sort of bootfs
(though any software RAID would
At 11:05 19.06.00 +0200, Graham Wheeler wrote:
Hi all
I have a Genius Hub Card (basically an Ethernet NIC that also acts as a
four port hub). I would ideally like to use this card in an old 486DX4
machine which acts as a ppp router. The card is detected (under both
Windoze and FreeBSD) as a
On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, Parag Patel wrote:
It's fairly simple, other than dealing with the
various motherboard/chipset vagaries.
So far those vagaries are not much code, something like 200 lines tops.
It's possible to make a complete BIOS based on Linux that in turn loads
and boots another
Parag Patel wrote:
Well, it's more of a matter of putting the kernel itself into the boot
ROM with some small assembly/C code to turn on DRAM and an ungzipper to
load and run it. It's fairly simple, other than dealing with the
various motherboard/chipset vagaries.
Ah, yes, I forgot about
"Jordan K. Hubbard" wrote:
Seeing as how it has been a link on Daemon News' front page for several
months, I find that hard to believe. :-P
Not all of us read daemon news, either. As far as I'm concerned, if
it's not part of www.freebsd.org, it doesn't exist. :-)
/me removes all
Perhaps all I need to do is toggle the PnP BIOS setting, but before I
pull out the screwdrivers and tear the two machines apart again, I'm
hoping to draw on someone else's experience here.
BTW will setting the PnP BIOS to `enabled' have any effect?
It shouldn't in your case, as
[[ cc trimmed ]]
S4 state is the lowest power, longest wakeup latency state supported
by acpi. In this state all devices are powered down. The OS context
is preserved. That's how it is different from the G3 state
(shutdown/power off). It is not safe to take the computer apart when
in S4
On 18-Jun-00 Parag Patel wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 07:35:51 +0900, "Daniel C. Sobral" wrote:
Loader(8) runs using BIOS services, and loads the kernel from any drive
that BIOS recognizes. It has also been enhanced with PXE knowledge, so
he can load from that to.
My mistake, as Ron pointed
On 19-Jun-00 Coleman Kane wrote:
If you start out with a board based on a reference design, say the Intel
SE440BX, you already have access to all this info. Most chipset vendors have
info on this sort of thing up on their webpage, I know intel is really good
about this sort of thing (though
On 19-Jun-00 Jeff Kreska wrote:
I think there is something wrong with the install prog.
Well, our geometry stuff isn't perfect, but part of that is do to the
poor design of PC hardware.
2 things to note:
The partition table is corrupt after a install. (even if I don't install
[[ cc trimmed ]]
S4 state is the lowest power, longest wakeup latency state supported
by acpi. In this state all devices are powered down. The OS context
is preserved. That's how it is different from the G3 state
(shutdown/power off). It is not safe to take the computer apart when
in
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mike Smith writes:
: Can we guarantee that we can find this area? On eg. the Dell i7500 that
: I've been playing most with, it's a file on a FAT filesystem, and the
: BIOS will only "find" it if the filesystem is in the 'active' partition
: at boot time.
I never said it would be easy, I simply was stating that the reference
designs tend to stick to documented specifications, typically. Of
course, writing a BIOS is hard enough.
John Baldwin had the audacity to say:
On 19-Jun-00 Coleman Kane wrote:
If you start out with a board based on a
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mitsuru IWASAKI writes:
: Maybe I'm wrong because of lack of my understanding on crush dump and
: loader. Please help us :-)
I think that you might be able to do this. The real tricky part maybe
saving hardware RAM that the drivers expect to be there when you
Andrew Reilly wrote:
On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 05:01:46PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Andrew Reilly" writes:
: That sounds way too hard. Why not restrict suspend activity to
: user-level processes and bring the kernel/drivers back up through
: a regular boot
S4 requires the OS to reinitialise peripherals. Some comments I've seen
from the Linux folks suggest that we'll have to save and restore the PCI
configuration space as well.
Basically, resume from S4 is not something that is going to be very easy
for us to implement. It'll require
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mike Smith writes:
: Hmm, this has me thinking again about suspend/resume. In the current
: context, can we expect a suspend veto from some function to actually
: DTRT? (ie. drivers that have been suspended get a resume call).
If the BIOS allows us to do that,
On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 10:07:26 -0700, Mike Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hmm, this has me thinking again about suspend/resume. In the current
context, can we expect a suspend veto from some function to actually
DTRT? (ie. drivers that have been suspended get a resume call).
That's how I
On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 06:36:14PM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Warner Losh writes:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mitsuru IWASAKI writes:
: Maybe I'm wrong because of lack of my understanding on crush dump and
: loader. Please help us :-)
I think that you
On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, Brooks Davis wrote:
:On Tue, Jun 20, 2000 at 10:49:24AM +1000, Andrew Reilly wrote:
:
: Processes do still wind up in "sleep" state, completely paged
: out, don't they?
:
:Observationaly, no. Unless I actually manage to run my system low on
:RAM, none of my swap is used
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Andrew Reilly" writes:
: That sounds way too hard. Why not restrict suspend activity to
: user-level processes and bring the kernel/drivers back up through
: a regular boot process? At least that way the hardware and drivers
: will know what they are all up to,
Warner Losh wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mitsuru IWASAKI writes:
: Maybe I'm wrong because of lack of my understanding on crush dump and
: loader. Please help us :-)
I think that you might be able to do this. The real tricky part maybe
saving hardware RAM that the drivers expect
On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 05:01:46PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Andrew Reilly" writes:
: That sounds way too hard. Why not restrict suspend activity to
: user-level processes and bring the kernel/drivers back up through
: a regular boot process? At least that way
Bjoern Fischer wrote:
Just a moment. You talk about doing a `Save-to-Disk' (incl. system halt),
turning power off, maybe adding some hardware or moving the machine
to another location, then switching on again, restoring the system context,
and the machine will proceed as if nothing had
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mitsuru IWASAKI writes:
: Maybe I'm wrong because of lack of my understanding on crush dump and
: loader. Please help us :-)
I think that you might be able to do this. The real tricky part maybe
saving hardware RAM that the drivers expect to be there when you
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Warner Losh writes:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mitsuru IWASAKI writes:
: Maybe I'm wrong because of lack of my understanding on crush dump and
: loader. Please help us :-)
I think that you might be able to do this. The real tricky part maybe
saving hardware RAM
On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 05:01:46PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Andrew Reilly" writes:
: That sounds way too hard. Why not restrict suspend activity to
: user-level processes and bring the kernel/drivers back up through
: a regular boot process? At least that
On Tue, Jun 20, 2000 at 10:16:08AM +1000, Andrew Reilly wrote:
(*) Speaking of which: why are we considering doing process
dumps into a _different_ swap-ish partition, instead of just
ensuring that all processes are sleeping in the normal swap
partition? If that was done, then they would
On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 05:30:55PM -0700, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Tue, Jun 20, 2000 at 10:16:08AM +1000, Andrew Reilly wrote:
(*) Speaking of which: why are we considering doing process
dumps into a _different_ swap-ish partition, instead of just
ensuring that all processes are sleeping in
On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 05:40:30PM -0700, Mike Smith wrote:
The real issue here is persistent system state across the S4 suspend;
ie.
leaving applications open, etc. IMO this isn't really something worth a
lot of effort to us, and it has a lot of additional complications for a
On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 05:40:30PM -0700, Mike Smith wrote:
The real issue here is persistent system state across the S4 suspend; ie.
leaving applications open, etc. IMO this isn't really something worth a
lot of effort to us, and it has a lot of additional complications for a
On Tue, Jun 20, 2000 at 10:49:24AM +1000, Andrew Reilly wrote:
The issue isn't with the size of the disk storage required, but
with the mechanism. Why dedicate 256M to a suspend partition, and
invent a new process saving mechanism, instead of making your
existing swap partition 256M larger
55 matches
Mail list logo
