At 22:20 28/02/01 -0600, Dan Nelson wrote:
In the last episode (Mar 01), jett tayer said:
can ipchains / iptables be ported to FreeBSD... this is a suggestion
if u dont mind.
We've already got ipfw and ipfilter; why in the world would we need a
third packet-filtering systam? :)
add to this
Hello all,
This is an example of how I would try to drop RTS, I am porting a win32
seismometer
program to FreeBSD / X11. However this does not seem to work on FreeBSD,
my cheap
breakout box reports no change.
#include unistd.h
#include termios.h
int fd;
int status;
ioctl(fd, TIOCMGET,
On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Ken Bolingbroke wrote:
Long shot, probably, but I've got a bunch of virtual machines on an IBM
S/390 mainframe, and while we're running SuSE Linux on most of them, on
a whim I tossed out the idea of running FreeBSD on one of them, and to
my surprise, it was taken
On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, Robert Watson wrote:
Part of the "real answer" is probably that IBM or a large consumer of
S/390 machines has to shepherd the whole process to make it happen, and
that probably involves a moderate amount of money, and moderate levels of
frustration. If you can provide
Hi all.
Please forgive me if this post is altogether in the wrong place, but I need
help finding a certain piece of hardware.
I have a number of firewalls running (very happily) on FreeBSD. Each one is
connected on the outside NIC to a Cisco 1601 Router, which is connected in
turn to an NTU
So - is there such a WAN serial card available? And (most important) one
which is supported by the necessary BSD drivers?
I've been very pleased with the Sangoma WanPipe card.
http://www.sangoma.com/
The people are nice, the product works (although not with netgraph at the
moment). It
At 10:05 AM 03/01/2001, you wrote:
Hi all.
Please forgive me if this post is altogether in the wrong place, but I need
help finding a certain piece of hardware.
I have a number of firewalls running (very happily) on FreeBSD. Each one is
connected on the outside NIC to a Cisco 1601 Router,
On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, Robert Watson wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Ken Bolingbroke wrote:
Long shot, probably, but I've got a bunch of virtual machines on an IBM
S/390 mainframe, and while we're running SuSE Linux on most of them, on
a whim I tossed out the idea of running FreeBSD on one of
This is a stupid question, basically it's how to debug something.
I have four cooperating p-threaded processes. One of them keeps getting
a SIGSEGV with the address 0x752f422f. I'm not sure if that address is
always the same, but with a given compile it is. The thing that's a pain
is it is
I work mainly for Enitel, a medium sized ISP in Norway. We use FreeBSD
a lot (eivind and des can tell you more about this). Today I got an
interesting question from IBM Norway: What would be needed for IBM to
support FreeBSD for Enitel? Basically: What FreeBSD version, what kind
of hardware do we
On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 12:44:39PM -0500, Peter Dufault wrote:
This is a stupid question, basically it's how to debug something.
I have four cooperating p-threaded processes. One of them keeps getting
a SIGSEGV with the address 0x752f422f. I'm not sure if that address is
always the same,
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 12:44:39 -0500 (EST)
From: Peter Dufault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is a stupid question, basically it's how to debug something.
I have four cooperating p-threaded processes. One of them keeps getting
a SIGSEGV with the address 0x752f422f. I'm not sure if that address
At 6:57 PM +0100 3/1/01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyway, I just wanted to mention on -hackers that it's
possible FreeBSD is starting to show up on IBM's radar
screen. I think it's way too early to conclude anything
yet, but it's interesting nevertheless.
I think the recent debacle with the T20
Robert Watson writes:
| On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Ken Bolingbroke wrote:
| Long shot, probably, but I've got a bunch of virtual machines on an IBM
| S/390 mainframe, and while we're running SuSE Linux on most of them, on
| a whim I tossed out the idea of running FreeBSD on one of them, and to
| my
Hi.
I am running FreeBSD 3.5-STABLE on a i386 arch. When I boot, it tells
me that:
---
sb0 at 0x220 on isa
NOTE! SB Pro support required with your soundcard!
snd0: SoundBlaster 16 4.13
---
So I added:
---
device sbxvi0 at isa? drq ?
---
to my kernel. Then, I recompiled and I got an
Has anyone tried using Sun's optimizing cc compiler (for Solaris x86) to
compile the kernel to x86 assembly, assemble it with gas, and link with GNU
ld?
It seems possible for a user-level application that is source-compatible
with Solaris (because cc will output assembly with system call names
Subject: Re:Compiling FreeBSD kernel with Sun's cc
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Mailer: Kiltdown 0.7
i may be wrong on this, but i believe that the reason that freebsd
has its 'own' version of gcc is to support some things in the kernel.
John Wilson writes:
Has anyone tried using Sun's optimizing cc compiler (for Solaris x86) to
compile the kernel to x86 assembly, assemble it with gas, and link with GNU
ld?
It seems possible for a user-level application that is source-compatible
with Solaris (because cc will output
On Mon, Feb 26, 2001 at 02:10:47PM -0800, Mike Smith wrote:
Well, imagine a hypothetical broken system in which two simultaneous calls
to mkdir, on some hypothetical broken filesystem, can each think that it
"succeeded". After all, at the end of the operation, the directory has
been
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I work mainly for Enitel, a medium sized ISP in Norway. We use FreeBSD
a lot (eivind and des can tell you more about this). Today I got an
interesting question from IBM Norway: What would be needed for IBM to
support FreeBSD for Enitel? Basically: What FreeBSD
On 02-Mar-01 Julian Elischer wrote:
remember that IBM owns whistle (until they finish
integrating it into different parts of IBM
and it dissappears) (burp)
and have some FreeBSD experience there.
The problem is that 93.7% of IBM probably has no idea that IBM owns whistle.
I remember a
On 02-Mar-01 Marc W wrote:
Subject: Re:Compiling FreeBSD kernel with Sun's cc
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Mailer: Kiltdown 0.7
i may be wrong on this, but i believe that the reason that freebsd
has its 'own' version of gcc is to support
On 02-Mar-01 Felix-Antoine Paradis wrote:
Hi.
I am running FreeBSD 3.5-STABLE on a i386 arch. When I boot, it tells
me that:
---
sb0 at 0x220 on isa
NOTE! SB Pro support required with your soundcard!
snd0: SoundBlaster 16 4.13
---
So I added:
---
device sbxvi0 at isa?
The problem is that 93.7% of IBM probably has no idea that IBM owns whistle.
I remember a discussion I had with an IBM sales rep working at the NCC
conference in the early 1980's. He had no idea that IBM was selling systems
that ran UNIX. At the time they were selling a 68K based lab system (
--- Matthew Emmerton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, Robert Watson wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Ken Bolingbroke wrote:
Long shot, probably, but I've got a bunch of
virtual machines on an IBM
S/390 mainframe, and while we're running SuSE
Linux on most of them, on
a
On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 09:47:46PM -0800, Jaime Fournier scribbled:
| Well, I work for IBM for 4 years, and at one time they
| did not know what Linux was. I run freebsd at work on
| my workstation, and have to pass it off as a "linux
| distribution" in order for people to understand what
| it
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Patrick O'Reilly"
writes:
Hi all.
Please forgive me if this post is altogether in the wrong place, but I need
help finding a certain piece of hardware.
I have a number of firewalls running (very happily) on FreeBSD. Each one is
connected on the outside NIC to a
"Kenneth P. Stox" wrote:
On 02-Mar-01 Julian Elischer wrote:
remember that IBM owns whistle (until they finish
integrating it into different parts of IBM
and it dissappears) (burp)
and have some FreeBSD experience there.
The problem is that 93.7% of IBM probably has no idea that IBM
Hi again.
Thanks to all for your responses to my question, I will investigate the
options.
Patrick.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Patrick O'Reilly
Sent: 01 March 2001 17:05
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Hardware question - WAN port
29 matches
Mail list logo
